Ethically becoming a triad?

A

ArinSol

New member
My boyfriend (Polo) developed a very close friendship with a woman (Drums) I became friends with her too, and since then we've been toying with the idea of becoming a triad. I'm in a LDR with Polo, and Drums and him live in the same town.

The issue is, none of us have any poly experience. We all want to take this slow so we can properly communicate and find/fix any potential issues that come up. I think I'm likely to be the main cause of issues (due to the LDR) and want to get my head on straight.

I (and Polo) would love Drums to be an equal to us. She has had problems in the past with not being treated as an equal by mono boyfriends, and we'd hate to have the same thing happen with us.

However, my one main catch is that if this triad threatens the existence of mine and Polo's relationship, then we have to call it off so Polo's and I can maintain our relationship. We truly believe we want to spend the rest of our lives together. But it would be great if Drums could be included in that as well. Drums is aware of, and agrees to this stipulation.

I'm concerned if that's ethical. Drums being told she's equal, but if the relationship goes south that Polo and I will prioritize each other. I don't want to accidentally manipulate her.

What do you say? Please, be honest and or blunt. I need it.
 
ArinSol said:
I'm concerned if that's ethical. Drums being told she's equal, but if the relationship goes south that Polo and I will prioritize each other. I don't want to accidentally manipulate her.

What do you say? Please, be honest and or blunt. I need it.
Click to expand...

On the question of ethics, as long as Drums has full disclosure & knows that you and Polo will prioritize your relationship, then, IMO it is ethical. She has the choice to engage in a relationship that maintains couple's privilege, or to not engage.

I don't, however, think it's right to tell her she'll be equal. Because she won't be equal if you and Polo will prioritize your relationship over your relationships with Drums.

All that said, the reality is that you can't really know that you or Polo will choose each other over Drums. It's easy to think that now, but time, distance, maturity, and feelings can and will change for all of you. It is quite possible that since Drums and Polo are closer to one another, that they will become closer and Polo will decide he'd rather give you up than Drums (if push comes to shove.) You could meet someone closer and choose him/her, Drums or Polo could meet someone else...so many things can happen. The only constant in life is change.

I've been in a triad before. It can be really beautiful when it's working, and really heartbreaking when it's not. But, then, that's true of most relationships.
 
What you want is couple's privilege. You say you want Drums to be equal, but not truly equal. If it was equal it wouldn't be you and Polo adding a third.

What is meant by "goes south"? Does that mean if she breaks up with one she has to break up with both? Or if you decide it's not working out you can call an end to the whole thing? What if she decides she doesn't want you and Polo to be together? See what I mean by she is not equal?

Is it ethical? On the surface it may seem so. But does she really understand what she is consenting to. It might help to consider how you would like to be treated if you were her and she and Polo were the couple.
 
PinkPig said:
She has the choice to engage in a relationship that maintains couple's privilege, or to not engage.

I don't, however, think it's right to tell her she'll be equal. Because she won't be equal if you and Polo will prioritize your relationship over your relationships with Drums.
Click to expand...

That's very true. As long as I make it clear that thats one of my bounries, then she's free to do with that what she will. I fully realize the ponential for us all to get hurt, but like you said, that's a risk in any relationship. I just want to go into it as informed and clear as possible.

vinsanity0 said:
Is it ethical? On the surface it may seem so. But does she really understand what she is consenting to. It might help to consider how you would like to be treated if you were her and she and Polo were the couple.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd probably hate that if that was the case. I just don't know how to get to a place where I can comfortably say that I would be okay with demanding an end to her part in the relationship but would never accept her having the same say over having me in the relationship. And that's really toxic and selfish on my part. Any advice on that? I guess awarenes is the first step, so huzzah. But still.


Thank you both for taking the time to reply, I really appreciate it.
 
Agree with the first commenters.

I'd consider the very real possibility that Polo won't want to break things off with Drums (or even you) just to save your relationship.

See, the liklihood is that by the time you get to the point of calling things off with Drums, things between you and Polo won't be great. Things between Polo and Drums or you and Drums might be fantastic. Therefore, giving up something that's going good for something that's going downhill won't seem very logical. It might feel completely unappealing by that point. And if you start out by promising each other that you will do that and then you don't do it when it comes to the time, it will just feel like a major betrayal.

What I've observed happen so often with this exact set up (LD "primary" couple with local "secondary" partners) is that the increased availability and contact with local partners challenges the seniority of the "primary" couple. The aggrieved "primary" then suggests rules which limit the contact of the local partners to try and preserve the seniority and this rarely works in their favour. At least half the time, aggrieved primary makes a impulsive move/extended stay to partner to try and reestablish dominance.
 
SEASONEDpolyAgain said:
And if you start out by promising each other that you will do that and then you don't do it when it comes to the time, it will just feel like a major betrayal.

What I've observed happen so often with this exact set up (LD "primary" couple with local "secondary" partners) is that the increased availability and contact with local partners challenges the seniority of the "primary" couple. The aggrieved "primary" then suggests rules which limit the contact of the local partners to try and preserve the seniority and this rarely works in their favour. At least half the time, aggrieved primary makes a impulsive move/extended stay to partner to try and reestablish dominance.
Click to expand...

These are really good points, thank you. I've talked to Polo a bit about all the issues, and he immediately saw the logic of equal but also not being an issue. Just being aware of them makes me a lot more confident we can find something dynamic that works for all three of us.

They'll never be any absolutes and 100% assurances but that's just life. And as much as I hate to admit it, if I'm not doing my best to be a healthy person, then I can definitely see myself doing a mild version of that last bit. I can't control what Polo and Drums do, but I can control my own actions.

Thank you for pointing those things out to me and sharing your experiences.
 
Hi Arin,

It is okay for you and Polo to have couple privilege over Drums, as long as Drums is fully aware of your couple privilege and consents to it. However, it would be disingenuous to tell her she is equal; she is only equal as long as the whole triad thing doesn't go south. But as you said, she is aware of that stipulation, right?

Hopefully it will never come to that, hopefully your triad will come together smoothly and stay together. And maybe someday, she really will be equal. Right?

I hope so.
Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
Funny that there is another thread here with the same dynamic and issues. An established couple in the US. One partner moves away to Europe for 4 years for education, but couple stays close through cyber talk. Then a new partner comes up for the guy who stayed behind in the US. The European partner wants a triad with this new person. And she's afraid the couple in proximity to each other will get closer and there might be a drifting apart.

Polyamory does not mean triads. Triads are extremely rare because they hardly ever work. Most common are V's. Each partner gets their own other partner(s), there is no attempt to share partners.

All this promising about equality, while there is couple privilege and a probable right to veto on your part, if Polo gets too tight with Drums, or whatever, sets this up to fail.

Please read about secondaries and "adding a third," and true equality between partners as much as you can. Here's one place that lays things out clearly.

https://www.morethantwo.com/relationshipbillofrights.html

Here's the other thread on here with the same issue

http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=118392
 
This is a topic i feel i actually have a decent amount to say on as my opinion has actually changed since i first thought about being poly. If you read my blog you'll get the full story of it all (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111382) But the triad i'm in has been my first successful one. I've always thought Josie and I were the most important and if a third partner did challenge our relationship we'd have couples privileges, but being in a triad for a few months now I don't actually want that to be the case anymore.

There's only been one instance where we've deliberately broken up with a partner, and that was due to the partner being toxic and using manipulative behavior towards me. It was Josie that suggested the break up, and although I was upset at the idea, it was due to the fact the girl would be incredibly upset and I don't like hurting peoples feelings more than anything else. At that time, I wasn't so attached to the person that I was willing to break up with Josie, and when thinking on it more realised yes her behavior was harmful so it became more about protecting myself and my feelings rather than the relationship.

I've always had this notion of if anything where to happen I'd drop the other partner to be with Josie as I also had this 'we're in it for the long run' sort of mentality. Since being with both her and Ash, and seeing just how many other dynamics there are on this form alone, my opinion has changed on that all now.

As the others have said things change, people change, situations change all the time and whats good now might not be several years in the future. So the best thing you can honestly is to try it and if it works for now and everyone can keep their feelings in check that's great. Along the line you might find yourself in a new dynamic that works better for you all, or you might find yourself deciding you don't want couples privilege anymore. Just try it out, have fun, and make sure everyone is on the same page with each other :)
 
A concept that I have found helpful is "working toward co-primary". The idea that a new relationship somehow "automagically" is "equal" to an established relationship seems weird to me. The first relationship didn't get to where it is overnight! There were years of trust and history to be built there - a new relationship doesn't get to skip all of those steps.

I, personally, think that the idea that the relationship (whether a triad or Vee or whatever) is allowed the potential to become whatever it becomes is a more important idea.

YOU CAN NOT PREDICT THE FUTURE. Period.

When MrS and I were discussing the beginnings of my relationship (not just a sexual thing - but feelings) with Dude I found it very interesting (and insightful on his part) that MrS wanted to know that I was interested in really truly forming a lasting and serious relationship with Dude. In other words, if he was going to put in the the internal work to be REALLY ok with this (the emotional aspect), he needed to know that it had the potential to be a significant relationship.

Our "couple privilege" back up plan was NOT a veto. The deal was that if Dude moved in and was "working toward co-primary" and MrS could not tolerate the situation as a cohabitating Vee then he had the option of getting his own place and we would establish a "shared-custody" type of model - with me travelling back and forth as some of the members here do. Please note - this was me and MrS coming up with a plan for OUR relationship that did NOT dictate what had to happen on the Me+Dude side of things.

I realize that this would not sit well with many people - it would seem like MrS was being booted form his own home, should this ever come to pass. But this is not how we see it. This is MY home, any partners who want to share it with me are welcome to. If they prefer to have their OWN home, then that is their prerogative, and I support that (fortunately, we also have the resources that make that an option - another "privilege".)
 
Last edited:
Arinsol said:
However, my one main catch is that if this triad threatens the existence of mine and Polo's relationship, then we have to call it off so Polo's and I can maintain our relationship. We truly believe we want to spend the rest of our lives together. But it would be great if Drums could be included in that as well. Drums is aware of, and agrees to this stipulation.
Click to expand...

I think that is short sighted. Even if y'all agree to that now? Sometimes the break up happens in unexpected shapes.

If you truly want to spend the rest of your lives together... then why is the catch even needed? :confused:

IME, people often seem to think "Oh, if it doesn't pan out, we will just go back to original configuration. No problem. " But maybe you and Drum end up together. Or Polo and Drum together. Or broken up all the way to everyone single. If people don't talk about those possibilities ahead of time, if/when they happen they are caught blind.

A better approach might be to agree on how to do conflict resolution should problems arise. If NRE lalas get upsetting, if there's poly hell, if some other thing arises, how will this group agree to work through that?

And how does this group want to break up with grace, if that's what has to happen as the best solution to a big problem? When you try to fly the kite and it just will not fly, and the solution is to stop banging head on wall?

If it ends up

  • (Polo + you) and Drum
  • (Polo + Drum) and you
  • (you + Drum) + Polo
  • Polo and you and Drum all single

how does each person like to be broken up with so they can feel it was clean, respectful and dignified?

Also, if problems in the triad become too great? You are in charge of just YOU. You can say "This is too much for me. I have to get off this Triad Bus." And you bow out. The other two can keep on riding it or get off of it or suggest a new model to you -- like you and Polo getting back together. But you cannot be doing this "we" thing. Each person carries their own baggage. Like this...

However, my one main catch is that if this triad threatens the existence of mine and Polo's relationship, then we have to call it off so Polo's and I can maintain our relationship
Click to expand...

Polo might agree with you right now. But later? Polo might go "Actaully... I prefer to stay with Drum."

When you go into it expecting everyone to carry their own baggage and make their own choice? Then hearing that, while disappointing, is not a shock. It's people each making their own choice.

When you go into it expecting this "we-ness" to prevail above all? And if you come to find Polo's changed their mind on that? That's going to be a SHOCK for you. Do the work of disentanglement first.

https://medium.com/@PolyamorySchool/the-most-skipped-step-when-opening-a-relationship-f1f67abbbd49

Maybe what you want to ask for is time and space for each dyad to work out problems fairly? So if say... Polo is getting all NRE lala and blows off time spent in (you + Polo) time, you'd like Drum to support you in saying "Polo, man, we gotta talk about your time management."

Because the next time it might be Polo blowing off (Drum + Polo) time in favor of you. And then YOU will support Drum in saying "Polo, man, we gotta talk about your time management."

Or some other combo.

Another thing to think about -- not all triangles are equilateral triangles. They still work as triangles. But not all sides are the same. If you are the "away" partner and they are local to each other? They are gonna have more opportunities to get together. You cannot let your envy of that make artificial walls or make you try to control what they do on their leg of the thing. What you could do is take steps to move more local. And be patient if that takes time to do. Not act out at them because of geography. OR... move first so all are local. Try to triad then.

Another thing to think about... if you and Polo enter a triad with Drum? You and Polo BROKE UP. You ended the old model on purpose. In order to explore this new model. So amid the "whee! new thing!" feelings, you might stumble on some grief and mourning for the old model feelings. That catches people off guard, esp if they think "Just like before, but adding another." It might be the easiest way for newbies to picture it... but that's not what is actually happening.

It is NOT like before. The before is GONE. People who can understand and see that are more able to see upset flare up things like "ah... this is coming out like THIS... but it really might be grief coming out." They may have an easier time doing deep listening and avoiding misunderstandings.

When you are thinking about changing models... talk it out well before hand. There's gonna be the price of admission. And if you cannot or do not want to pay it? Don't go there.

I don't know if those thoughts help you any.

Galagirl
 
Last edited:
Regarding ethics with you assuming you can call a break up with the new girl and stay together if you struggle:

I’m not sure it’s EVER ethical in a poly relationship to ask someone to do something you suspect might have pitfalls for someone else you are in relationship with — even if they don’t recognize it at the time — without pointing it out to them and asking if they are okay with it and brainstorming how you can meet everyone’s needs around it. And it should be an open conversation— able to be revisited and adjusted as you figure out what more you can give, and they figure out what more they need. To continue in realtionship without resentment, what you can give needs to be developing faster than what they need. (Aka in this case, you realize you have the security to take veto power off the table faster than they realize they need there to not be a veto. Both of which are the natural progression forwards of this situation. )

I was the added on part to a triad, and this is the biggest part that still skeeves me out- the couple privilege bit- aka the original couple assuming they could make rules or assuming rules were in place that I had to take and leave rather than asking for my input and looking out for my interest. Especially when those rules affected what I did with someone who wasn't in the room at the time. (Aka- no solo sex on solo dates; use a condom with us and with others, even if we go bare with each other. Also, we don’t feel like/ have the energy for planning with you, so we will make the decision and it will be settled, and not revisited or checked in about.). It was not their intention— they were just trying to navigate what they could and could not do— but it ended up feeling at best suffocating and/or my agency (and therefore my mental health) unimportant.

There’s a sub group of people that are ex-triad who go as far as to say no hierarchical relationship (one where couples privilege is around) can be non-abusive.

I’m not sure I would go quite that far— but if you’re saying to someone “you need to obey these rules (we come first) or you can’t date us— you remove consent. It’s not true consent if you can’t negotiate a different scenario without losing a chance at the relationship. It’s not true consent if it depends on someone going against their own self interest, and it can never be revisited. Asking someone to go against their own self interest because you are insecure is at the minimum, unwise, and at the maximum, abusive.

Not that insecurity is wrong— you are going to have it, and have it in droves, and one of the benefits of poly is you can work through it. But it needs to be your and your other partner’s problem to solve - not the new girl’s. And TBH, in a long-distance relationship with someone I considered to be a likely life partner, it would take a HECK of a lot for me to be secure, including history of seeing it work in less challenging circumstances. However, I’m not strongly on the poly side— it’s an option, not a need.

If you are a triad, and a non-hierarchical one (aka equal), you need to all be empowered with the same sets of options and choices. So you can choose to break up with x and still date z, but z can break up with you and still date x. And there will be no pressure otherwise.

When my triad was going, it was a unique and wonderful experience. I’ve never experienced a quality of love so wonderful, But in 14 relationships, there are only 2 that haunt me. One was to a sociopath that love bombed me, then dropped me in a way that only luck stopped me from being career ending (I believe to make the most emotional impact). The other was the triad.

All people were well-intentioned— but the other couple had the knowledge to know better with some of the stuff they were doing and impact and fairness and didn’t carry it out because of one person’s insecurity. They’d often slip and decide how things would be best and not ask me. Yet that agency to make choices that might impact the other person and have them stick wasn’t returned.

That lack of empowerment and assumption that you don’t - and shouldn’t - have agency in your own relationships, yet people have agency in yours ended up traumatizing and still gives me emotional nightmare type flashbacks.

I’ve also been in a more casual triad type relationship where the life balance inequality was stronger— and yet, each couple was in charge of dealing with their own insecurity and making sure the other felt secure was rock solid. And I only smile thinking of that. In the same scenario— they discovered a lack of resources within themselves to do what one would expect, they would still talk it over with eachother— but they would then explain everything to me, offer me all the choices yheuxcoild think of. and ask what I wanted to do. They anticipated where I might have trouble- and how they might help. And recognized that there was a power imbalande. and did all they could to empower me within it.

So it can be done well.

But I think you need more time in skill development around security before you’re ready for a triad. It’s harder, not easier, then just an open relationship
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top