Search results

Yeah, it sounds like they made their agreements around insecurities instead of love. If it works, good luck to them. I think it's a maladaptive way to go about relationships.

That's the puzzle. Jerome called himself an "alpha male", but he also said he would feel "insecure" if he allowed his "submissive women" to date other men. It appears that neither the alpha male nor the submissive women have much self-confidence. Maybe that's it. Alpha males and submissive...

"Alpha males" piss me off to no end. I strive for equality in my friendships. Jerome, the self-identified insecure alpha male, is exactly the kind of person I would not want anything to do with in any context. I'm puzzled as to why so many women find such men attractive.

Sort of my point. I'm not sure if there are many poly-specific tips that wouldn't also apply to any relationship. For example, dating is important whether your relationship is monogamous or not. A lot of couples become so comfortable that they forget to date each other once in a while, and then...

How about this? No unilateral decision making when there are consequences for another person. Suppose you drive the family car to work everyday, and are in the habit of returning home by 6pm. One day, you have a crappy time at work and decide to go for a few drinks before taking a taxi home...

From what I've experienced and read elsewhere, it seems that a lot of people don the 'poly' label and ideologies to avoid doing the most basic work of relating like communication. "You own your feelings", etc. Pretty insane considering the unsafe behaviors that accompany such attitudes. I find...

Well said. Learning and moving on. :D

Thank you. The hardest part was being treated as if I was sub-human. I should have walked away sooner.

Good point! I came to the same conclusion in the area of sexuality. Many are still stuck on homo/heterosexual as the categories. I say that sexual humans are mostly trysexuals. :p

What you just mentioned sounds more like isolationism than protectionism. Perhaps 'weak'ness is not as good a word as 'fearful' in isolationist relationships, but I covered that already. Bullies act out not due to weakness, but due to fear (which is the absence of confidence). So we're back to...

Pretty much, LR. I'll add that survival includes the survival of individuals as well as survival of relationships. That would be my rationale for relationship ethics. Some so-called 'poly' folk think of relationships as casual/serious, and that casual relationships allow for cheating. I would...

Since we're back off-topic, what we have here is a difference not of opinions but rather a difference between relativism and strategy. Protectionism is a strategy of the weak, but it works well for the weak. Weaker relationships need protection while stronger ones do not because they can compete...

Not totally. I think there's something useful here. Remember the connection between the lack of emotional fulfillment and cheating. The point is not whether one uses a veto or a schedule, but whether one is having choices made for them or a responsible adult making relationship choices. A person...

The difference between a veto and a schedule is the difference between obedience and (self-)discipline.

This is where a realistic perspective comes in handy. The likelihood of having a long-term relationship with a psychopath is extremely rare for two reasons. Psychopaths are rare, and psychopaths lack the commitment necessary for long-term relationships. Instead of a veto, a more surgical device...

'Protection' of one's family implies anticipation of an actual or imagined threat. Such a fearful attitude in life makes the choices and the assessments of new connections troublesome, because it diminishes one's tendency to make wise and loving connections. It also makes one question the...

I'd say that vetos are clumsy. It's too easy to abuse them instead of communicating. Some established couples get into this habit of vetoing each other's other significant others, causing a lot of unnecessary confusion and lasting resentments (in the established relationship). It's the same...

Oh, good one! Those people miss out by never having relationships or friendships, which require work.

Regardless of the intent, a retroactive veto is a clear demonstration of inequality and an unwillingness to cooperate for mutually-beneficial relations. It avoids conflict by avoiding change, and it limits opportunities for everybody. I would go further to suggest that a veto is a red flag that...

As far as I'm concerned, any behavior that can get your partner(s) killed is cheating. Life is a real-world limit. Your partner(s) needs choices on risks in a relationship with you. Unfortunately, some people are so afraid of rejection or so self-absorbed that they'll construct elaborate...