I think he might have been referring to BDSM as deviant, not polyamory.
Restless heart syndrome: cause or effect?
- Thread starter dingedheart
- Start date
I think he might have been referring to BDSM as deviant, not polyamory.
No; I doubt it:
The things in bold have nothing to do with (healthy) BDSM. If ypou read it in context with the post it was first said in, it is obvious that DH is referring to polyamorous relationships and not BDSM.
The entire point of this thread is to portray polyamorous relationships as something that does more harm than good when one partner is not into it as much as the other.
To the OP - your wife is not your property just because you "gave her a fairy-tale wedding" and spent tens of thousands of dollars on your honeymoon. You did not "buy" your wife when you married her. Your attitude that you wish you could get a refund for your wedding and honeymoon speaks volumes, also the way you refer to your wife in your other threads as some sort of accessory or investment. Your very first post here was about how much more concerned you were about your sporty sports car and whether her boyfriend was seen driving it or not. It is NO WONDER TO ME that she found this other guy to treat her as a sex slave, since you've thought of her as your possession just because you married her. You really need to look within yourself and figure out why people get a dollar sign attached to them by you. You seem very pre-occupied with money and material possessions, and your superficial image as relates to those things. Maybe it's time for you to do something about that.
MorningTwilight
New member
As far as it goes, that statement on its own, without the rest of this thread's baggage, from the point of view of the mono partner, might well be correct. In that case, I think it would be better for all concerned for the couple to separate before the poly partner starts practicing poly: "I want to be happy, but I don't want you to be miserable." This statement works in both directions.
Indeed, it very well may be. That remark I made was intended toward Mags' comment that DH was talking about BDSM and not about poly.
redpepper
Active member
Just a quick note that might help. While I like what you have to say here, the word "lifestyle" can sometimes indicate a "choice" for those who are in it. I identify as polyamorous as much as someone who is gay identifies with gay. That means it's in my genes. I didn't choose to live this way. I am this way. Normally I wouldn't argue this point, but as dinged seems to think that it is a choice to be poly, I thought I would mention it.
We have seen lots of monogamous people here, whose partners came out as polyamorous, finding that the new arrangement forces them to look at themselves, and actually, after the initial adjustment period, begin living fuller lives, less codependent, more social.
MonoVCPHG
New member
Agreed. I think this concept is a no brainer, actually.
I completely disagree. If every formerly mono couple broke up because one came out as poly, we'd see a lot of divorce and a lot less love. It's like saying, if one partner got cancer, they should break up. If one partner lost a leg, or came out as bi, or trans, or whatever other life change or realization, the couple should just immediately break up. Where do you draw the line? Where do you practice patience and selflessness?
People change all the time. Do you break up just because you change along the way?
My ex-husband and I had to grow apart in many many different ways before I considered breaking up with him.
Hannahfluke
Member
I was just referring it to by the same term dinged used. I didn't purposefully choose the term lifestyle. You make a very good point here RP, so I'm glad you added it. Thank you!
MonoVCPHG
New member
I think a lot of people have certain things that are dealbreakers. The nature of relationships is probably one of the most influential. I'm no expert on statistics, but I can almost guarantee that everyone in my office would consider their partner wanting to have another lover as a dealbreaker that would lead to separation or divorce. That would make a great Facebook poll, actually. Of course, to post that would draw way too much attention for me. Maybe someone else is brave enough.
vixtresses
New member
I think that it's a dealbreaker for most people because it's supposed to be a dealbreaker. It's expected in our society that you pair off with someone, and live happily (or relatively contented, or at least hopefully not miserable, or not TOO miserable...) ever after. I think that for a lot of people, saying it's a dealbreaker for them would be a knee-jerk reaction.
I also don't think that it's always possible to know if one partner is polyamorous and one is monoamorous. If you've never thought about things in those terms, if you've never had to stop and think about whether you truly believe monoamory is for you, how are you supposed to know? I would have imagined that my boyfriend was mono, but when I brought up the concept of poly, he was interested in the possibility of seeing other people, and lo and behold, a month or so later he's got a crush of his own.
I still think it may turn out that he's truly mono and will end up moving on from me if his crush develops into a relationship. That's a fear I have. I've discussed it with him. We really have no way of knowing how it's going to pan out.
I guess some people might feel that they were born poly or born mono, but others just haven't ever even thought it through, and have no experience to tell them one way or another whether they're one or the other.
I wouldn't want to ditch the relationship I have just because my boyfriend was less enthusiastic about poly than me, and therefore might be mono. I also think that if the situation were reversed, and he were the one who brought it up to me, due to an attraction of his own, I would have been the one who was unsure and hesitant, and questioning whether I could really do this.
I also don't think that it's always possible to know if one partner is polyamorous and one is monoamorous. If you've never thought about things in those terms, if you've never had to stop and think about whether you truly believe monoamory is for you, how are you supposed to know? I would have imagined that my boyfriend was mono, but when I brought up the concept of poly, he was interested in the possibility of seeing other people, and lo and behold, a month or so later he's got a crush of his own.
I still think it may turn out that he's truly mono and will end up moving on from me if his crush develops into a relationship. That's a fear I have. I've discussed it with him. We really have no way of knowing how it's going to pan out.
I guess some people might feel that they were born poly or born mono, but others just haven't ever even thought it through, and have no experience to tell them one way or another whether they're one or the other.
I wouldn't want to ditch the relationship I have just because my boyfriend was less enthusiastic about poly than me, and therefore might be mono. I also think that if the situation were reversed, and he were the one who brought it up to me, due to an attraction of his own, I would have been the one who was unsure and hesitant, and questioning whether I could really do this.
MorningTwilight
New member
I didn't say every. If the mono partner in a poly/mono couple that was originally monogamous decides that they just can't deal with poly (and that does happen), I think it's better to split up than to ask the suffering mono to "suck it up and deal." Life is too short to be miserable.
Many poly/mono relationships succeed. Not all do. Some do not survive, and if there is more pain inflicted by clinging, by the mono thinking that there is something wrong with her because she isn't getting the whole compersion thing, parting ways may be best.
dingedheart
Well-known member
Another quick note... really busy... sorry if I have to go back later.
Does anyone see the pattern? I write a couple hundred words, maybe a thousand. I don't know. And someone finds one sentence and... off to the races. The debate became me defending a word or phrase. I used deviant correctly, yet I'm still wrong. I relay conversations between me and my wife at the beginning of our journey, what I was thinking leading up to and in the early stages, and that's viewed as an attack.
Chimera, no dig. I just think you're flat wrong. You said you thought I was wrong and the reasons why. I just did the same. A long time ago, I used to race cars. It would be easier to go out on the track with people who went to driving school, who've raced before, as apposed to an Amish person who has never driven a car before. Let's make the Amish person someone who was deeply loved and cherished and you didn't want to see injured. The regular drivers know that there's going to be some bumping, rubbing, even crashes, problems, work, if you will. Do you see the advantage now?
As for the inside joke, maybe as much as you can have one on a public forum. Someone uses this as a tag line when they post. I
Neon, I'm baffled as to how you see me paying for 75- 80% percent of our wedding equating to viewing someone as property. I didn't plan any of it. He father, a well-off man in his own right, decided to start 3 families with a high percentage of girls. So he put a cap on what he was willing to contribute. That didn't fit with what my wife wanted for her vision of a wedding, so I agree to provide the difference. My dad, knowing what he spent on my sister's wedding, either felt guilty, generous, or wanted input on the guest list, ponied up a sum similar to my father-in-law. How you see this as an ugly self-centered act, I don't know. I'm making a note to ask my wife if this is how she saw it. Or we could look at it as her taking the schmuck for his first good ride. That's an ugly thought too.
Recently I've been hit with some rather large expenses, medical, legal, child care, etc. So as we go down memory lane, I was just thinking, are you sure you wouldn't feel the same way?
I'm glad you brought up the car. I say in a post that upon starting down this road I had only 3 rules. First I get ripped for the use of the word rules, then I get ripped because rule 3 is centered around an antique Mustang that I restored.
I acquired that car for the sole purpose of having a project with my father, who was in poor health, had suffered open-heart surgery. In a subsequent follow-up to that, they discovered lung cancer and removed half of one lung. So, for 2 summers, he and I worked on this old car. He actually sat in a lawn chair most of time, but on his good days, he did some welding and whatever he could do physically to help the project .
She was never bothered by that "rule." Why in the FUCK should it bother any of you? I stated all the reasons why I didn't want that car being used-- the kids, and others seeing it being driven by a strange person. Questions I didn't want to have to answer. She was always free to use the other 3 vehicles. Now if a mono were to say that one of his "rules" was nobody touches or rides his bike, nobody going to say a fucking word. It just seems reasonable, or a different standard? Go right ahead and give me shit. I don't care. Anything I say about my life can be used against me, right? Have a nice day.
Morningtwilight, thank you for adding to the discussion with content and ideas. So you're saying that monogamy is a flawed concept, and the restlessness of hearts is just natural. Hearts + time = non-monogamy.
Gotta run.
Does anyone see the pattern? I write a couple hundred words, maybe a thousand. I don't know. And someone finds one sentence and... off to the races. The debate became me defending a word or phrase. I used deviant correctly, yet I'm still wrong. I relay conversations between me and my wife at the beginning of our journey, what I was thinking leading up to and in the early stages, and that's viewed as an attack.
Chimera, no dig. I just think you're flat wrong. You said you thought I was wrong and the reasons why. I just did the same. A long time ago, I used to race cars. It would be easier to go out on the track with people who went to driving school, who've raced before, as apposed to an Amish person who has never driven a car before. Let's make the Amish person someone who was deeply loved and cherished and you didn't want to see injured. The regular drivers know that there's going to be some bumping, rubbing, even crashes, problems, work, if you will. Do you see the advantage now?
As for the inside joke, maybe as much as you can have one on a public forum. Someone uses this as a tag line when they post. I
Neon, I'm baffled as to how you see me paying for 75- 80% percent of our wedding equating to viewing someone as property. I didn't plan any of it. He father, a well-off man in his own right, decided to start 3 families with a high percentage of girls. So he put a cap on what he was willing to contribute. That didn't fit with what my wife wanted for her vision of a wedding, so I agree to provide the difference. My dad, knowing what he spent on my sister's wedding, either felt guilty, generous, or wanted input on the guest list, ponied up a sum similar to my father-in-law. How you see this as an ugly self-centered act, I don't know. I'm making a note to ask my wife if this is how she saw it. Or we could look at it as her taking the schmuck for his first good ride. That's an ugly thought too.
Recently I've been hit with some rather large expenses, medical, legal, child care, etc. So as we go down memory lane, I was just thinking, are you sure you wouldn't feel the same way?
I'm glad you brought up the car. I say in a post that upon starting down this road I had only 3 rules. First I get ripped for the use of the word rules, then I get ripped because rule 3 is centered around an antique Mustang that I restored.
I acquired that car for the sole purpose of having a project with my father, who was in poor health, had suffered open-heart surgery. In a subsequent follow-up to that, they discovered lung cancer and removed half of one lung. So, for 2 summers, he and I worked on this old car. He actually sat in a lawn chair most of time, but on his good days, he did some welding and whatever he could do physically to help the project .
She was never bothered by that "rule." Why in the FUCK should it bother any of you? I stated all the reasons why I didn't want that car being used-- the kids, and others seeing it being driven by a strange person. Questions I didn't want to have to answer. She was always free to use the other 3 vehicles. Now if a mono were to say that one of his "rules" was nobody touches or rides his bike, nobody going to say a fucking word. It just seems reasonable, or a different standard? Go right ahead and give me shit. I don't care. Anything I say about my life can be used against me, right? Have a nice day.
Morningtwilight, thank you for adding to the discussion with content and ideas. So you're saying that monogamy is a flawed concept, and the restlessness of hearts is just natural. Hearts + time = non-monogamy.
Gotta run.
MorningTwilight
New member
The trouble is that the word "deviant" carries a lot of baggage with it. We have what Hayakawa called the distinction between denotation and connotation, or, as Hayakawa called it, "affective connotation." In the strictest sense, "deviant" is simply deviating from the norm. Unfortunately, it has come to be used pejoratively, as an epithet in its own right, when referring to people who deviate from the norm. "Deviant" conjures up thoughts of child molesters, rapists, and so on (e.g., "involuntary deviant sexual intercourse"). You can easily see why someone would object to being lumped in with that lot, can't you?
So, bearing that in mind, "alternative" is a gentler word, that does not carry with it all that baggage. It furthers communication, instead of raising hackles.
Generally, yes. Certainly, there are individuals who are naturally monogamous, and when two of them meet, they might be able to live out the fairytale. I would offer, however, given that divorce and infidelity rates are what they are, that naturally monogamous people are about as common in the population as left-handed people.* Given what early indications we have about success or failure in monogamy being correlated to the number of copies an individual has of the vasopressin receptor 1a gene, this falls out rather naturally: pure monogamy appears to be recessive, just as left-handedness is. That said, there may well be a monogamy-polyamory spectrum, based upon the number of copies of the gene an individual possesses.
(No, I'm not making this up. See Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene (AVPR1A) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, 2008))
*I happen to be left-handed, but polyamorous.
MT
IndieSolo
Active member
dinged, I don't think one person here is saying anything to you just to be mean-spirited or confrontational. Any "shit" anyone gives you here is meant to be helpful. You think we all seem to miss your point, but we feel the same way! It's frustrating because no matter how any of us try to explain ourselves, what you're NOT getting is this: WE SEE YOUR PAIN AND ANGER, AND WE FEEL EMPATHY FOR WHAT YOU ARE GOING THROUGH.
When we single out words and phrases, we're merely pointing it out to you how it's been coming out. Oftentimes people who are hurting lash out and say things that they think are inconsequential, but they cannot see the impact of it through the pain and anger. We all fervently hope you resolve these issues. We are only offering our feedback as a way to help. Defensiveness is not going to allow you to really get the messages we're sending, nor for you to see all the passive-aggressive or snarky ways in which your anger is being expressed. Please spend some time reflecting on your feelings and how you wish things could be different. Blaming polyamory, a structure for relationships, ain't going to fix anything. The one very obvious thing any of us can see is that you're hurting, man, and you are super pissed about it.
Last edited:
Hannahfluke
Member
I wasn't attacking you. I was merely pointing out that using words that have more negative connotations than positive ones could be contributing to the fact that people see you as attacking polyamory instead of wanting to have a discussion about it. Whether or not you used it correctly, deviant does have negative connotations for most, and people will react strongly to something they hold dear to their hearts being associated with words like that. If you truly want people to feel that you are here for a discussion, I suggested that maybe you should stop using words that have such negativity associated with them. As someone pointed out, "alternative" would have gotten your point across just as well, if your point is that it's not something considered within the norm, rather then your point being that we're all messed up. You need to realize that, regardless of whether or not you are using it correctly in the clinical sense, people are going to react to it on a very personal level, and nothing you say is going to change that. If you really want to have a discussion about the content of what you are saying, instead of the words, try finding more neutral words.
Last edited:
Regarding Dinged Heart's use of the word "deviant", it's denotations, connotations, the responses, rebuttal, and ensuing commentary:
Of course I expected DH to fall back on the knee-jerk response which essentially amounts to:
I would have been pleasantly surprised if this had played out any other way. Fortunately, other people had the patience to explain it to the OP for me so I don't have to.
Good day to all of you, too.
Of course I expected DH to fall back on the knee-jerk response which essentially amounts to:
I would have been pleasantly surprised if this had played out any other way. Fortunately, other people had the patience to explain it to the OP for me so I don't have to.
Good day to all of you, too.
DH, I think you are a intelligent, articulate, and calculating (not in a bad way) individual. That is exactly why I find it disingenuous when you use a word like "deviant" the way you did on a forum such as this and then say "but I used it correctly!" You strike me as someone who is used to being in control of his immediate circumstances and this has forced you to use your coping skills in a way you never imagined. I understand all that.
But several people (and I thought this right away but didn't say anything until other people pointed it out) already have tried to tell you that you're coming across as adversarial to the very folks you are asking for help. I don't have the moderator hat on right now, I'm speaking as a private citizen - but if I were you, I'd take their advice to heart and try to look at what you're doing to not help yourself in that respect.
But several people (and I thought this right away but didn't say anything until other people pointed it out) already have tried to tell you that you're coming across as adversarial to the very folks you are asking for help. I don't have the moderator hat on right now, I'm speaking as a private citizen - but if I were you, I'd take their advice to heart and try to look at what you're doing to not help yourself in that respect.
Lots of things are happening. I will say a few things:
dingedheart, you mentioned at some point that your wife was using a lot of "I" sentences, and saw it as entitled. You should know that using "I" sentences is actually recommended. It means explaining where you personally stand, and waiting for the other person to do the same. Surely, it would have been much more entitled of her to decide how you felt, what you were going to do and what you wanted. Saying how she felt, what she was going to do and what she wanted, though, is absolutely normal. It's her right as a human being. When she talked to you about it, it's possible she did so to hear what you wanted, in order to then make a decision together as a result.
When I came out as poly to my husband, I was very clear about what I wanted and what I needed, and expected the same respect in return. Instead, he lied to me and I only learned two months after our eventual breakup that he was actually mono. I would have appreciated not having been lied to for over two years. While it's true we probably would have broken up over it, this would have been a good thing for both of us.
I think standing up for what you want and need is a good thing. It doesn't mean you can't adapt to other people, as well. But sometimes it's irreconcilable, and there is no reason to lie to yourself or each other about it, because you're just dragging it out, and hurting everyone in the process.
"Deviant" is a heavily-charged word, whether it's correct or not. Using the N-word just technically means people who are black, not white or anything else, but it's considered pejorative. Same thing with the F-word and gays. And of course, deviant" has been used for gay people too, and while it's also technically true for them, I doubt they appreciate it anymore than we do.
Either you knew what the word implied, or you didn't. If you did not know, when told so, the normal thing to do was to profusely apologise for using such a horrible word without realising so. Instead, you backed up that you are technically right, which leads me to believe you knew what you were saying from the start.
I'm sorry you were hurt, but taking on the community here isn't a very constructive thing to do.
As for the initial conversation, it's hard, no doubt. I've had hard conversations, this one included, but many others as well. Your circus example is indeed an example. If you realise your partner has always wanted to join the circus, it's their dream, it's their life, I think you should support it. Maybe you'll go with them, maybe you'll wait for them, maybe you'll break up, but it's not your place to decide whether they get to do it or not, just like it's not their place to decide which option (following them, waiting for them, leaving them, anything I might have forgotten) you're going to pick. You can try to find a compromise together, so your kids can stay at the same school, for instance, but telling them, "Nope, you didn't say so before we got married, so that's not going to happen" is, in my opinion, contrary to the vows of marriage, which are about committing to the person and supporting them, no matter what happens (short of criminality, of course).
It doesn't mean taking any crap. You CAN leave them over it, if that's the best way to support them and honor yourself. But you don't get to dictate their actions, unless they pose a strong risk to their health or other people's. That's not how it works.
dingedheart, you mentioned at some point that your wife was using a lot of "I" sentences, and saw it as entitled. You should know that using "I" sentences is actually recommended. It means explaining where you personally stand, and waiting for the other person to do the same. Surely, it would have been much more entitled of her to decide how you felt, what you were going to do and what you wanted. Saying how she felt, what she was going to do and what she wanted, though, is absolutely normal. It's her right as a human being. When she talked to you about it, it's possible she did so to hear what you wanted, in order to then make a decision together as a result.
When I came out as poly to my husband, I was very clear about what I wanted and what I needed, and expected the same respect in return. Instead, he lied to me and I only learned two months after our eventual breakup that he was actually mono. I would have appreciated not having been lied to for over two years. While it's true we probably would have broken up over it, this would have been a good thing for both of us.
I think standing up for what you want and need is a good thing. It doesn't mean you can't adapt to other people, as well. But sometimes it's irreconcilable, and there is no reason to lie to yourself or each other about it, because you're just dragging it out, and hurting everyone in the process.
"Deviant" is a heavily-charged word, whether it's correct or not. Using the N-word just technically means people who are black, not white or anything else, but it's considered pejorative. Same thing with the F-word and gays. And of course, deviant" has been used for gay people too, and while it's also technically true for them, I doubt they appreciate it anymore than we do.
Either you knew what the word implied, or you didn't. If you did not know, when told so, the normal thing to do was to profusely apologise for using such a horrible word without realising so. Instead, you backed up that you are technically right, which leads me to believe you knew what you were saying from the start.
I'm sorry you were hurt, but taking on the community here isn't a very constructive thing to do.
As for the initial conversation, it's hard, no doubt. I've had hard conversations, this one included, but many others as well. Your circus example is indeed an example. If you realise your partner has always wanted to join the circus, it's their dream, it's their life, I think you should support it. Maybe you'll go with them, maybe you'll wait for them, maybe you'll break up, but it's not your place to decide whether they get to do it or not, just like it's not their place to decide which option (following them, waiting for them, leaving them, anything I might have forgotten) you're going to pick. You can try to find a compromise together, so your kids can stay at the same school, for instance, but telling them, "Nope, you didn't say so before we got married, so that's not going to happen" is, in my opinion, contrary to the vows of marriage, which are about committing to the person and supporting them, no matter what happens (short of criminality, of course).
It doesn't mean taking any crap. You CAN leave them over it, if that's the best way to support them and honor yourself. But you don't get to dictate their actions, unless they pose a strong risk to their health or other people's. That's not how it works.
dingedheart
Well-known member
Obviously I'm not intelligent, articulate and calculating (in a good way), because I was just trying to continue an interesting conversation which occurred around a fire pit about a trend people see in our society, and a trend "I" see here on the forum, married 15-20 years, couple of kids, etc. How am I disingenuous?