Reductionistic thinking is sooooo pointless...
Look, there's JOBS, & then there's JOBS. I once worked for a very large insurance company, that at its peak had 600+ employees spread throughout a very large four-storey building. We were always running off to some meeting or training session, or heading down to the paper archives. Though it was an "open floor" cubicle setup, I could go a day or three without even
seeing a friend who worked 40 feet away.
The corporate heirarchy was quite flat, so big bunches of us had very similar seniority & authority.
A failed affair would have had minimal opportunity for awkwardness. Sure, if one of the participants had ranted to co-workers about what a jerk the former co-participant was, there could have been repercussions for distracting people from their (well-paid) work. If the company decided to keep everyone employed, the ex-lovers could have been separated by about an eighth of a mile (& a few floors), under one roof. Other companies might give a troublemaker the option of going to a different facility or taking another shift.
But things would be a whole lot different in a small office. Where do you go? How do you deal with the potentially vast mix of desire, regret, anger, chagrin...? And considering the rising number of businesses claiming to be an expression of "Christian" values, how will it go for you when your ex-FWB outs you to the boss?
________________
I have always been bothered by demonstrations of
propinquity. Basically, if two random people see each other on a regular basis -- like same apartment floor, classes, workplace -- they are vastly more likely to talk themselves into believing this is some sort of Fate.
Me, I'm more of a
Westermarck effect guy, & I don't have too much difficulty distinguishing proximity warmth from desire (sexual, emotional, whatever). Because I have to live with, work near, or see someone on a regular basis, I am
lesslikely to let any interest grow past vague interest -- I don't want those transient little feelings to damage a good working relationship. At work, I'm not one to regularly join a group for lunch or for a beer after work.
IMO, propinquity leads many peple to talk themselves into intimacy that would have been very ill-advised if any degree of objectivity (as opposed to Romantic blindness) had been allowed to shine.
________________
And it's pretty much the same for "wife's best friend."
Firstly, with no personal experience at maintaining nonmonogamous relating -- & (apparently) blessed little such experience in the vicinity! -- I'd say
BleedingLove is fighting a steep learning curve. That is to say, there's GONNA be mistakes.
My guess is that exactly NONE of these people is particularly good at communicating openly & deeply -- not from lack of good intentions, but because Monogamist society doesn't require it, & in fact often discourages it.
Breaking free of those strictures can be messy. Learning how to communicate takes LOTS of practice & involves many dead ends, & therefore requires that everyone in the exercise be committed to working past the problems & learning to understand each other (& thus better understand yet others in future).
Nailing the nearest available chick is NOT consonant with that.
________________
Let's not overlook a common noob problem. I'm often seen (at close hand) how one part of The Sacred Couple drops the "poly or else" bomb then magically hooks up with a
life partner soon thereafter...
...but when the OTHER half starts dating, the first partner gets all SORTS of bent outta shape, imposes rules, makes demands, expects to have more freedom to act AND more control over the home, & so on.
What happens if (when?)
BleedingLove does actually make things work out with his spouse's BFF, & the wife starts getting underfoot?
Moreso, what happens if
BleedingLove relationship goes clicking right along but his SO's blows up, & she demands they BOTH return to monogamy?
I've seen it happen. And I've seen it mentioned in these forums.
