Exploring Poly? Or Being Yourself?

P

PolyinPractice

New member
This is in response to many, many posts I have seen lately, here and other places. I dislike the idea of "exploring poly." To me, that makes one's "polyness" a distant entity, like those people who talk about "protecting their marriage," not "protecting the woman I care about." It's not the structure of the relationship that is most important to me; it's the people.

So, is poly "worth losing a marriage for?" Is it "something that you need to do now?" I'm lucky, in that I found the concept of poly before getting involved in a relationship. But if I were married? Yes, absolutely, being true to myself would be worth "losing" the relationship, because what am I really losing? An empty structure? A person who claims to love me, but can't really handle who I am?

I understand that those who come into the awareness of their poly side after committing to a person, especially when kids are involved, can have a very hard time. And they might have to suck it up and settle for someone who doesn't really understand them, at least for a while.

But that doesn't mean that polyamory is something that is somehow separate from the person. It's not about being poly, or, more specifically, living poly that is important to me. It's being with someone gets me, and whom I get. It's about being free to love and spend time with those that matter to me, without feeling guilty. I can't stop that, even though I could date less, or focus more time on one person.

/end rant.
 
OTOH, you ask people to sacrifice their wants for who you are. But would you sacrifice something for them, too?

You can't shove poly down someone's throat, and expect them to be ok with it if it goes again their moral compass. That is not fair. It is not what they signed up for in their relationship, especially post-marriage.

Life is full of sacrifice. I sacrifice things every day. Bills have to be paid. I sacrifice time with my children, my partners, my friends to work in order to make sure we have a roof over our heads, as do my husbands. We would all rather do what we want all day, but life doesn't allow for that right now.

If living poly is more important than someone in your life who is not ok with having their partner practicing polyamory, then you need to do the right thing and end the relationship to pursue poly. No one is saying they have to give it up. But don't hurt others in order to have your happiness at the expense of someone else's. A lot of folks want to have their cake and eat it too. Sometimes that is not possible.

You have to weigh your wants against your needs. Your partner has to do the same.
 
Dagferi,

Hmm... I can't speak for people in general, but I would hope that one would give their partner the same consideration they want for themselves. And I get that sacrifice is usual.

In my case, I don't actually sacrifice anything I consider core to myself, which includes the freedom to love and commit to whomever I feel that connection with. I'd give the same freedom to any of my partners. And I'd never ask them to sacrifice, either. I'd rather end, or change, the relationship.

I've had people accuse me, not here, but in person, of not "really committing" because I'm okay with leaving at any time, or being left at any time, if I or the other person isn't happy. Kids need to be considered, but I know plenty of children from divorced families who were glad their parents separated, rather than having forced them to live in a tense, unhappy household where the parents were constantly fighting. So, as long as you realize you still need to both care for the kids, I don't see an issue with ending the romantic relationship.
 
PolyinPractice said:
I've had people accuse me, not here, but in person, of not "really committing" because I'm okay with leaving at any time, or being left at any time, if I or the other person aren't happy.
Click to expand...

The topic of commitment is interesting to me. I have had similar conversations to the one you are describing. People like the comfort gained from a guarantee that the way things are is the way they are going to stay. I can understand that-- I like a bit of consistency in my life, and I'm certainly in favor of good things sticking around as long as possible. However, this idea that all one needs is a good "commitment," and suddenly everything will stay the way it is forever, is just wishful thinking. Even worse is the idea that this previous commitment should be motivation for staying in a relationship that is no longer any good for the members involved.

Who is the person who gets to decide what is a good enough reason to end or change an association? The concept of "really committed" presumes that there is some kind of objective measure, which there is not.
 
PolyinPractice said:
In my case, I don't actually sacrifice anything I consider core to myself.
Click to expand...

That's an important distinction. When talking about sacrifice within the context of voluntary interpersonal relationships (not related to having a job to avoid starving to death ;) ) I would only consider sacrifice to be giving up something that is important to me in service of someone else. I don't care to live in an association which can only exist if I stop gaming, or pull down my OKCupid profile, or stop going out with my friends, etc. The world is jampacked with people who seem in love with the idea of injuring their way of life or well-being just to make up for someone else's shortcomings. May they all find each other and be happy.
 
PiP, there is nothing wrong with your stance. As I have said many times before, I was going to divorce Butch due to my need to pursue poly. I have no problems ending relationships like ripping off a band-aid, if needed.

Butch is heavy into BDSM. BDSM grosses me out on all levels. When we first started dating way back when, I told him flat-out I couldn't be involved in BDSM in any way, shape or form. I was actually prepared to break up the relationship over it. BDSM goes against my personal moral compass. He came back saying he didn't need that from me, he could live without it, etc. Over the years, the issue has come up over and over. My stance has not changed and will not. I require a vanilla relationship to be happy. We have come to a compromise that works for us. If we were unable to, then the right thing to do would be to go our separate ways.

The ultimate display of commitment and/or love for someone, imo, is knowing when to walk away from them for their and your own happiness in the long run.
 
Dagferi said:
The ultimate display of commitment and or love for someone, imo, is knowing when to walk away from them for their and your own happiness, in the long run.
Click to expand...
I always have wondered about this concept. Granted, I get what you mean, and agree with it, to an extent. But how do you know when to walk away from something you want and love in the hopes of finding something better? (Rhetorical question, since it's different for everyone, I know.) It's just been a concept that's been swimming around in my head a lot lately and causing me no end of grief.
 
I view it similarly to when I have to give people advice about euthanasia and their pets.

- Pick five things you love and enjoy with your partner. When three or more are gone, it is probably time to bow out.
- When there are more bad times than good for an extended period of time.
- When a compromise cannot be met that makes all parties comfortable within a reasonable timeframe.

These are signs it may be time to go.

It is not fair to ask someone to be miserable for your happiness for any extended period of time.
 
Last edited:
Dagferi said:
The ultimate display of commitment and/or love for someone, imo, is knowing when to walk away from them for their and your own happiness in the long run.
Click to expand...

I actually loathe the last part of that statement. Walking away for my own happiness is a sign of loving myself, and respecting both myself and my partner. Saying "It's for you!" is disingenuous, and, IMHO, insulting. If I leave, it's because I feel bad about how I am treating them or how they feel or whatever, which is still about me, not some selfless act of emotional generosity and self-sacrifice. To me, walking away because of some noble "I'm doing this for you!" thing smacks of condescension and paternal conceit. I date adults; they get to decide what they do and do not want, what level of compromise works for them, etc., just as I do. I would never presume to tell my partner I know them better than they do, or that I am the steward and custodian of their feelings.

Yes, this touched a nerve. I've had this said to me twice in my life, and both times it was total bullshit, because they felt too guilty to say, "I want to take a different path," or "I am unhappy, and this isn't working for me." What one meant was, "I knocked up another woman I didn't bother to tell you I was fucking," and the other meant, "Thanks for putting me through pre-med and into the best med school in the country, because I didn't have to work, and got to do all kinds of cool stuff on your dime. Now, off to make a pile of cash and marry someone ASAP!" It's much more socially "noble" to blame it on doing, "What's best for your partner," instead of just being honest that it's because you feel bad about how things are going. :mad:

/end rant
 
GreenAcres said:
Yes, this touched a nerve. I've had this said to me twice in my life, and both times it was total bullshit, because they felt too guilty to say, "I want to take a different path," or "I am unhappy, and this isn't working for me." What one meant was, "I knocked up another woman I didn't bother to tell you I was fucking," and the other meant, "Thanks for putting me through pre-med and into the best med school in the country, because I didn't have to work, and got to do all kinds of cool stuff on your dime. Now, off to make a pile of cash and marry someone ASAP!" It's much more socially "noble" to blame it on doing "What's best for your partner" instead of just being honest that it's because you feel bad about how things are going.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you experienced this. But I totally meant this in a "selfish, walk away for your own good, and don't feel guilty about leaving someone who isn't good for you," kind of way, not in a, "I'm doing this for you!" kind of way.
 
BDaemon said:
I always have wondered about this concept. Granted, I get what you mean and agree with it to an extent. But how do you know when to walk away from something you want and love in the hopes of finding something better? (Rhetorical question, since it's different for everyone, I know.) It's a concept that's been swimming around in my head a lot lately and causing me no end of grief.
Click to expand...

Not to take away from Dag's comment, but, for my sake, I walk away, not for someone better, but for my own sake, if the person I'm with is, in my assessment, fundamentally not aligned with who I am and what I want. I want us both to be working toward common goals, not struggling to tolerate each other.
 
I have no time for drama. As the old saying goes, shit rolls downhill. If my partner is miserable and unhappy it affects me. I wouldn't end things over just anything. But if it was apparent that there was no solutions fair for all parties, you better believe I would end things.

Some people cannot be alone/are scared/are gluttons for punishment, or what have you, and will stay in a negative relationship for the sake of being in a relationship.
 
PolyinPractice said:
I walk away, not for someone better, but for my own sake, if the person I'm with is, in my assessment, fundamentally not aligned with who I am and what I want. I want us both to be working toward common goals, not struggling to tolerate each other.
Click to expand...

Ahh, yeah. I guess the previous message left it a bit more vague to me. Obviously if things aren't working, or you're not compatible enough to see it through, then yeah, walk away for your own good. I've had to walk away from friendships due to drama and too much butting of heads and growing apart as people. The same completely applies to relationships, open or otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top