advice on changing relationship structure

[spit]

a few context things: my partner and i have been together for a 1.5 years. we met while they were living in the same state as me for a year. i knew they weren't going to be permanently living in the state shortly after we met. i'm solo polyam and they're a KTP type. We both happen to not be in any other relationships right now.

--

I'm currently in the process of figuring out how to redefine my relationship with my long-distance partner. we both came to the conclusion that the connection that we have isn't there in the way it is when we see each other in person. we saw each other 2 months ago and nothing had changed during the 7 months we'd been apart. we're both very busy people in different time zones so having the time/energy to text frequently isn't always there. we do schedule time for phone calls + video chats, but lately our conversations have been getting drier and less exciting. during our last phone call, we both expressed feeling frustrated that our needs weren't getting met. i struggle with words of affirmation, which they need, but can't do acts of service to show my affection because of the distance.

at the end of the call, both of us did admit to feeling better. we both felt the same.

today i brought up the prospect of us changing our relationship structure. i feel like being something like comets would actually work out, but its hard to not just feel like we're splitting up if we just drop off each others radar. i've been in polyam relationships before, both local and long-distance, but comets are something entirely new to me. does anyone have experiences similar to this, or just any advice on changing relationship structures within a polyam framework?

 

[Albert Ross]

I don't have lived experience here, so let's call this an observation, rather than "advice".

I have observed that the world doesn't really give us any good scripts or models for de-escalating a relationship, and it sounds like that's what you're doing.

In Standard Monogamy World, as portrayed in media and broadly approved of and reinforced by society, we tend to look for markers that a relationship is "going somewhere". It's supposed to climb the relationship escalator, the parties experiencing greater and greater entanglement: dating, exclusivity, marriage... and then sustain that until death (yes, I'm simplifying a bit here ).

It is very rare to go backwards in that progression (which is why "escalator" is such a good metaphor); once you've moved in with someone, it's really hard to move out without feeling, and being treated like, the entire relationship is over.

With all of that in our brains, it's quite natural to feel like

we're splitting up if we just drop off each others radar.

But that doesn't have to be true.

I saw a great description of what "commitment" looks like when you're not on the relationship escalator. It went something like this:

"Commitment can be having one date a week, every week for a month. Then, one date a week, every week for a year. Then, one date a week, every week for five years."

In other words, being in a committed relationship means continuing to show up for whatever you've agreed to—that matters more than what the agreement actually is, or if the agreement changes over time to involve more entanglement.

If you make and hold a commitment to each other, then you're not splitting up. Even if the commitment is "we get together once a year".

I hope that's helpful food for thought.

 

[kdt26417]

Hello spit,

It sounds like a comet relationship would be the right thing for you, in this situation. I know it feels like breaking up, but try not to look at it that way. Long-distance relationships are always hard. Sometimes you have to redefine the relationship; it can't always function like it did when the two of you lived in close proximity to each other. The thing to figure out now is whether the two of you will get together on a regular timetable, and if so, what that timetable will be. Or, maybe you'll just contact/see each other when the opportunity arises. Either model is totally fine.

Just some thoughts,
Kevin T.