Guru falls

SEASONEDpolyAgain said:
If I'm so desperate to be a pleasing partner that I compromise my core values and break my own hard limits, I'm the problem. That's not to say someone who exploits that problem is a nice person, but it takes a fair amount of exploitation of my problem to constitute abuse when I'm volunteering these actions.

So if I am the type who tries to buy friendship by paying for meals and drinks when I'm out because I love how my friends respond when I do it, they'd have to be literally begging me to buy them stuff and overtly threatening to abandon our friendship for it to constitute abuse.
Click to expand...

I'm more with you than against you on this - I think some of the tactics used (as alleged) were emotionally abusive. Again, the guilt, the love-bombing/blowing-up cycle. I don't remember evidence of gaslighting in the stories - I think there's more triangulation than gaslighting, but triangulation is still a tactic as well.

The financial actions (or inaction?) don't seem to me to be abusive by themselves. He wasn't controlling the finances, he seemed to be more manipulative with respect to the stuff I mentioned above. And probably taking advantage of his partners' people-pleasing natures by being manipulative.

The whole, "hey, work out your issues with my other partners and leave me out of it, or you're not ready for poly" thing? Manipulative. Childish (not wanting to take any responsibility or do the legwork). Abusive? I don't think so.

What's the line between being a manipulative jerk and an abuser? Not sure.
 
Maur said:
Interesting thing that FV does not give that vibe in his writings at all. But i can understand that quite easily. It could happen.
Click to expand...

It's funny to me that I really *get* his tone in his writing - he writes like an engineer. So many other people find his voice arrogant or brusque, but you're taught to convey the facts and your purpose concisely and cleanly, maybe with a bit of flavor so it's not horribly dry (although "flavor" can come across as snark, which isn't good). It comes across as know-it-all-y if you're looking for something more emotionally friendly.

As someone in an engineering discipline, I see this and probably DO it every day, when I have to actually write words, that is. ;)
 
YouAreHere said:
The whole, "hey, work out your issues with my other partners and leave me out of it, or you're not ready for poly" thing? Manipulative. Childish (not wanting to take any responsibility or do the legwork). Abusive? I don't think so.

What's the line between being a manipulative jerk and an abuser? Not sure.
Click to expand...
TBH, again... mentioned upthread that i became corposlave recently. And, frankly, two weeks ago, beign under pressure, i snapped and told my two partners: okay, so i promised both of you to meet on saturday. My fault. But i forgot, i forget everything lately, i don't have time, i have two free days during the week and i don't have enough time for myself, just talk to each other and tell me when i'm meeting who. I'm going to sleep now.

So, it all depends on the context and the whole thing is sorely lacking details since the beginning (the financial stuff beign the most concrete, dunno why).
 
So this is from someone who is in FV's pod.

https://elisabethsheff.com/2019/05/...N3TQkrAk4FWHfcIK2LrPe4Kb3vm2rkqrunfjihyh_Yyxg

Some excerpts -

"Franklin should acknowledge his part in creating emotional pain for his partners, apologize, and identify specific ways in which he will treat people, and especially the women with whom he partners, differently in the future."

"My critiques are threefold. First, the Louisa sought only one track of evidence. The call for narratives specified only people who had negative experiences with Franklin should respond, and the Louisa made no attempt to attain the kind of more balanced view that is characteristic of both academic research and investigative journalism. Second, the Louisa asks leading questions (see examples below). Third, the Louisa fails to ask critical follow-up questions in two areas: a) how respondents know the information they are reporting about other people’s experiences, and b) what the women’s motivations were making the choices they did.

The lack of follow-up questions is problematic because failing to ask where information comes from leaves third-hand allegations as seemingly factual information (not allowed in journalism or academia). Furthermore, without knowing the women’s specific motivations or what they saw as their active choices, it is hard to know the source of power Franklin used over them. Using inferences, I hope to have identified the source of Franklin’s power correctly –emotional manipulation and with-holding – but I am not sure because none of the women talked about why they made their choices or what they feared would happen if they did not obey what Franklin wanted."
 
Wow. Fantastic writeup, and I hope this is much better received than the Quora answer that was given by another member of Franklin's pod.

Her academic critique hits some of the points that bothered me: the leading questions and "non-journalism" of it. I hadn't even considered the lack of follow-up questions or open-ended ones.

Overall, I think this was very balanced, very well written and broken down. Her recommendations to Franklin seem spot on. Honestly, I've respected Eli Sheff for a while and have enjoyed reading her articles and about her research. I really should get her book.
 
Sheff is one of the first poly researchers. She wrote more books. Suprised you haven't heard of her. How did you find that link? Would like to know that really much!
 
Tinwen said:
Wow, that's just perfect.
Click to expand...
Actually, i'm kind of disappointed.

Well, kind of. Eli is a very smart and experienced person and sociologist and her critique is accordingly good.

Still, she doesn't follow her own statements, because her recomendations assume at many points FV was in the wrong here. I mean, the recomendations section. Eh... it's kind of fuzzy, like: "Franklin should eventually post a statement identifying what he sees as his part in this relationship pain and what he plans to do about it." can mean anything, but this: "Ideally, this statement would include an apology and some specific things he plans to change so the same thing does not happen again." sounds like Sheff says FV is to blame.

And IMO, especially after reading this, it's clear that FV has some things to take blame for (e.g. breaking promises), the women have some things that sounds like clear overentitlement (financial stuff) and 80% sounds like relationships incompatibility.
 
Maur said:
Actually, i'm kind of disappointed.

Well, kind of. Eli is a very smart and experienced person and sociologist and her critique is accordingly good.

Still, she doesn't follow her own statements, because her recomendations assume at many points FV was in the wrong here. I mean, the recomendations section. Eh... it's kind of fuzzy, like: "Franklin should eventually post a statement identifying what he sees as his part in this relationship pain and what he plans to do about it." can mean anything, but this: "Ideally, this statement would include an apology and some specific things he plans to change so the same thing does not happen again." sounds like Sheff says FV is to blame.

And IMO, especially after reading this, it's clear that FV has some things to take blame for (e.g. breaking promises), the women have some things that sounds like clear overentitlement (financial stuff) and 80% sounds like relationships incompatibility.
Click to expand...

I think it would be polite to apologize for any harm caused during what seem pretty regular relationship breakdowns.
 
SEASONEDpolyAgain said:
I think it would be polite to apologize for any harm caused during what seem pretty regular relationship breakdowns.
Click to expand...
Yes, i agree. But in some cases I think it goes much farther, and apology when there is an ongoing issue, an argument might mean conceding the argument. Which is sometimes good, but sometimes is not.

And in this context apology might mean too much, especially considering FV seems to consider himself abused, by Eve.

I mean, the whole thing is about few women not protecting their needs/boundaries because they loved FV "too much". Agreeing to stuff because of that. So apology when FV considers himself to be at least partly a victim would be a mirroring the situation.

Unless it's verbose description of the whole situation, including parts that he did wrong, which sometimes can be called an apology. but i don't think that was what was meant here.

On a side note, simply apology needs either a position of strength or a already solved issue or a safe environment. None are true at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Let me harp a bit more about the finances. So, here, Celeste:
C: He had been paid with stocks from one of his clients—his primary client who, was he was kind of on the payroll and he, that, providing medical coverage for us. And in Florida, you know, all liabilities and all assets are shared equally upon divorce. So half of those stocks were mine. So when I had to have those stock certificates when I went to my attorney. He was, turned out to be very upset about those stock certificates—that I “stole” them. They were his. I had to tell him that fifty percent of everything was ours—good and bad. And those stocks were just as much ours because they were given to him as payment.
Click to expand...

In The Game Changer, there is a fragment about Divorce Lawyer asking FV questions, and on learning FV financially supported Celeste during her studies (yeah, well, that's not mentioned in these stories but it was in TGC) said: "Magnificente! You are entitled to half (or something?) of her earnings till she kicks the bucket! We will tear her a new one! Mwahahaha!"*, which FV comments with "eeew, gross, now i understand all these lawyer jokes"

So, apparently, the perspectives can be rather... well, the point of view depends on the point of sitting as we would say in my mother tongue. No wonder neither of them mentioned the other thing.


*the quote might be a slight dramatization on my part
 
Last edited:
Maur said:
Eli is a very smart and experienced person and sociologist and her critique is accordingly good.

Still, she doesn't follow her own statements, because her recomendations assume at many points FV was in the wrong here.
Click to expand...

My interpretation is that she's assuming that the first-person accounts are accurate *as perceived*. For (a very poor and lightweight) example, if someone made a joke in good faith that offended me, I might find them to be an "x"ist asshole (depending on the kind of joke). If this was just a case of being thoughtless or dumb, and the person really did mean well, I'd expect an apology anyway (and would most likely expect that person to never tell me those kind of jokes again), even though our perspectives are much, much different. The apology still matters, regardless of whose truth is closer to the real truth.

Maur said:
Yes, i agree. But in some cases I think it goes much farther, and apology when there is an ongoing issue, an argument might mean conceding the argument. Which is sometimes good, but sometimes is not.

And in this context apology might mean too much, especially considering FV seems to consider himself abused, by Eve.
Click to expand...

I agree. Maybe the "disengag[ing] from Eve" should happen first, before the other recommendations.


Maur said:
I mean, the whole thing is about few women not protecting their needs/boundaries because they loved FV "too much". Agreeing to stuff because of that. So apology when FV considers himself to be at least partly a victim would be a mirroring the situation.
Click to expand...

There certainly seems to be some codependent behavior (says this armchair psychologist :rolleyes:) going on here. It starts to tread on abuse when abusive techniques are used to cajole the other person into doing something, but codependency, by definition, requires more than one person to keep it going. Maybe separate out the techniques from the situation and apologize for those? I don't know... I'm thinking at the keyboard while I eat my cookie at this point.

(White chocolate macadamia nut... mmmm...)
 
Last edited:
Maur said:
...on learning FV financially supported Celeste during her studies (yeah, well, that's not mentioned in these stories...
Click to expand...

I have not read The Game Changer - but my recollection from reading these accounts was that it was FV's parents that supported them during her studies (because they liked Celeste). IANAL, but I am pretty sure in-laws don't generally get much in divorce proceedings!:D

YouAreHere said:
... I'm thinking at the keyboard while I eat my cookie at this point.

(White chocolate macadamia nut... mmmm...)
Click to expand...

God-fucking-dammit, now I want a cookie! (Totally NOT on my Keto diet!)
 
Last edited:
Maur said:
On a completely side note, after reading a bit more of Amber it seems that all of them wanted a much more 'traditional', commited as it usually happens, relationship while Franklin was more of a dramatic and chaotic and changing person. Which is not a bad thing but these needs are very incompatible. And actually people who are that colorful, so to say, very often draw these stable people to them with their emotionality and richness, and only later both realize it's not working and it won't work, like, ever, because of that basic incompatibility.

Interesting thing that FV does not give that vibe in his writings at all. But i can understand that quite easily. It could happen.
Click to expand...
I don't think the stories can be reduced to incompatibility.
Also, one thing is being chaotic, another is being inconsistent in your (displays of) affection. The later is much more hurtful, and can indeed easily slide into a manipulation technique. It seems to me that what Franklin is doing is only showing affection when his partners has been "pleasing", where being pleasing is decided by his mood and his needs. There's little reflection of the kind of 'we may have different needs, but I still love you'.
Being inconsistent & giving attention only on your own terms sets a scenario which triggers most people's unmet childhood needs, making them to first, try harder to please, basically get addicted to the displays of affection when they come, and second making it hard for them to understand what they miss in the relationship, because they 'know' that you love them, you show it every now and then after all, right? Also, some of the 'transgressions' of the women are imaginary, the reward is random, setting an impossible and changing standard. That's why the whole relationship feels like addiction and gaslighting.
So this does set up a dynamics, which is very much part of abuse and narcissistic codependence. I'm not necessarily labelling Franklin full-fledged narcissist or abuser, but I do see way more than chaos and incompatibility.

Maur said:
Btw, Louisa Leontiades responded to Elizabeth Sheff:

http://louisaleontiades.com/respons...ffs-critique-of-voices-from-the-game-changer/
Click to expand...
Interesting, thank you!

P.S. I hate that I'm able to see the inconsistency pattern. Part of it is due to my own family and relationship experience, and a little bit I owe to this Teal Swan video.
 
Last edited:
Tinwen said:
I don't think the stories can be reduced to incompatibility.
Also, one thing is being chaotic, another is being inconsistent in your (displays of) affection. The later is much more hurtful, and can indeed easily slide into a manipulation technique. It seems to me that what Franklin is doing is only showing affection when his partners has been "pleasing", where being pleasing is decided by his mood and his needs. There's little reflection of the kind of 'we may have different needs, but I still love you'.
Being inconsistent & giving attention only on your own terms sets a scenario which triggers most people's unmet childhood needs, making them to first, try harder to please, basically get addicted to the displays of affection when they come, and second making it hard for them to understand what they miss in the relationship, because they 'know' that you love them, you show it every now and then after all, right? Also, some of the 'transgressions' of the women are imaginary, the reward is random, setting an impossible and changing standard. That's why the whole relationship feels like addiction and gaslighting.
So this does set up a dynamics, which is very much part of abuse and narcissistic codependence. I'm not necessarily labelling Franklin full-fledged narcissist or abuser, but I do see way more than chaos and incompatibility.


Interesting, thank you!

P.S. I hate that I'm able to see the inconsistency pattern. Part of it is due to my own family and relationship experience, and a little bit I owe to this Teal Swan video.
Click to expand...

I see the inconsistency as well. However, I chalk that up to FV's immaturity.

Celeste and Elaine are both monogamous. FV wanted poly. It's not surprising it didn't work out. I see a group of people who bungled their way through it. Out of that came a website and book that hopefully helps people not make those mistakes.

I think it shows how ingrained in society mono is that the poly person is the one being vilified here. I see the chaos as a result of the incompatibility, if that makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top