How do I even start to explain??

[MightyMax]

People do change. You're allowed to be annoyed when someone who you've committed to under one set of circumstances wants to effectively change everything you've worked towards building and maintaining for X amount of years. How would you feel now if your partner told you that they want you to agree to a monogamous relationship?

 

[Magdlyn]

People do change. You're allowed to be annoyed when someone who you've committed to under one set of circumstances wants to effectively change everything you've worked towards building and maintaining for X amount of years. How would you feel now if your partner told you that they want you to agree to a monogamous relationship?

You may not have noticed I did NOT say Journey's h is not "allowed to be annoyed." You're so het on playing devil's advocate, you're twisting my words. I suggest you stop that.

He is allowed to have any feelings he has, as we all are. He just comes across as a petulant child, or an emotionally flooded adult, when he declares, "This will be as painful in 60 years as it is right now, for me, for you, for our children!" Sure, when you are depressed, it feels like the pain will last forever. Know what? It doesn't. My counselor once told me that, and it's true. Gala Girl says feelings are like weather. They blow through. Some feelings are fun. Some hurt. Neither last. It's part of being human.

Those are the words of a fearful man, an emotionally flooded man, a man used to getting his way, even if it take bullying to get it, and a man who probably feels embarrassed in front of his fellow sheeple as well, for not controlling his wife properly.

 

[MightyMax]

I'd say that those words are the words of a man whose wife has effectively told him that he needs to accept her fucking and loving other people. Just like I'd say "sociopath" is often the word a person uses to express that they are really hurt that a relationship didn't go the way they wanted it to.

The majority of people do not get annoyed at a (now ex) partner without doing or saying things that are unfair, unreasonable or immature. It's just what humans tend to do.

I can pretty much conclusively say that a long term partner switching things up like that would probably "scar" me for life. I'd find it very hard to trust that future partners aren't about to do the same thing.

But as I can see this thread is just a venue for you to share your biased views of Christians, I'm not going to engage you in here any more. One shouldn't give others a floor to share discriminatory and offensive opinions.

 

[graviton]

People do change. You're allowed to be annoyed when someone who you've committed to under one set of circumstances wants to effectively change everything you've worked towards building and maintaining for X amount of years. How would you feel now if your partner told you that they want you to agree to a monogamous relationship?

I am monogamous. My wife did start the whole poly thing and then renigged. She pulled a classic bait and switch and it was a very painful experience which we are still struggling to heal from. So I know what this husband is going through. I also know that people change and that unfortunately partners do everything they can to prevent that change to "preserve the relationship".

 

[graviton]

But as I can see this thread is just a venue for you to share your biased views of Christians, I'm not going to engage you in here any more. One shouldn't give others a floor to share discriminatory and offensive opinions.

Sounds like you have the christian persecution complex that seems to be going around this year. My opinion of Christians is built from having been one of them and having friends who can be militant about it. I know that not all Christians are closed minded. However most are of the opinion that living outside of the norms of traditional western monogamous heterosexual roles is wrong.

 

[MightyMax]

This is certainly not a bait and switch. You think she planned this from the start? She has changed but finds herself confined in a construct (her marriage) that is unable to adapt to her change. It's simply a sad story. I do get tired of the male bashing that happens on here at times but some of it is deserved while some of it is just callous and misinformed. As far as Christian bashing, well they aren't really known for being flexible and seeing other points of view that are outside of their culture.

Sorry, I only just saw this so my other replies were not to you. I do think it's a bait and switch, but sometimes in life, you do end up doing that to people you are close to. Just last week, I invited someone out for sushi which they agreed to, but then persuaded them to come to a different restaurant which they wouldn't have left their house to go to. They were mildly annoyed.

Thing is, you have to acknowledge that you've effectively pulled a bait and switch and acknowledge the enormity of that whether it was intended or not. I don't see a whole lot of that from JOA.

I don't think many people are particular willing to be flexible or tolerant. Some people have a wider range of acceptance, sure, but anything outside their scope is usually seen as wrong anyway, so there isn't much difference. Some of the most narrow minded people I know are atheists.

 

[graviton]

Sorry, I only just saw this so my other replies were not to you. I do think it's a bait and switch, but sometimes in life, you do end up doing that to people you are close to. Just last week, I invited someone out for sushi which they agreed to, but then persuaded them to come to a different restaurant which they wouldn't have left their house to go to. They were mildly annoyed.

Thing is, you have to acknowledge that you've effectively pulled a bait and switch and acknowledge the enormity of that whether it was intended or not. I don't see a whole lot of that from JOA.

I don't think many people are particular willing to be flexible or tolerant. Some people have a wider range of acceptance, sure, but anything outside their scope is usually seen as wrong anyway, so there isn't much difference. Some of the most narrow minded people I know are atheists.

I feel a proper bait and switch has to have intent behind it. If you had promised sushi just so your friend would provide you with company knowing full well that you never intended on sushi is a bait and switch. Likewise she did not start a family with this guy with the intent to become poly at a later date.

 

[MightyMax]

I feel a proper bait and switch has to have intent behind it. If you had promised sushi just so your friend would provide you with company knowing full well that you never intended on sushi is a bait and switch. Likewise she did not start a family with this guy with the intent to become poly at a later date.

That's why I described it as "effectively" a bait and switch, because despite the lack of intention, you have got a person to agree to or plan around one thing, only to change it to another. Shit happens, but it's very annoying when a person doesn't acknowledge that they've done this.

 

[Magdlyn]

I don't know what you're suggesting, "Mighty" Max. That no partnered person should ever change, just to protect the more rigid partner? Or to change but somehow hide it, deny it, live behind a false front?

Or are you suggesting that it is OK to change, but... what?

Calling it an "effective bait and switch" is somewhat shaming, and I think her h is doing enough of that business.

Personally, I didn't change. I was always poly, but it wasn't socially acceptable, so I tried to live mono. My ex h always knew when I got a crush, but because I didn't want him hurt, I tried to hide and deny my crushes. However, he always knew. So, I would lie to placate him. And that killed our intimacy. I just don't think that Journey should lie, to protect her h's ego, or his "faith," or his male privilege, or whatever you think he needs to be protected from. What's this about women protecting men, anyway? Aren't men supposed to be the strong ones?

 

[MightyMax]

No. What I suggest is that when you do effectively pull a bait and switch on someone, you understand the enormity of what you have done. That doesn't mean you have to feel ashamed of your new feelings, or deny them, it just means that you demonstrate that you are aware of the impact of your new feelings, desires and actions on people around you. Particularly if you'd like them to stick around.

If you made plans with someone and then changed them suddenly, one of the words you would say is "sorry". You're not sorry because you have different feelings to what you had previously, or because your new desires are immoral or unjust, you apologize because you're aware that your change of heart may inconvenience others around you. This is no different to that.

I'm sure JOA has probably said sorry to her husband, however, the fact that she keeps pushing him to give in to her says that she doesn't really appreciate that this is a huge deal.

If you can't understand this premise, I really can't help you. Many people would and do.

 

[Magdlyn]

If all Journey has to do is say "sorry," and you reckon she has said it, what's your problem? I do not see her "pushing him to give in," either. She is considering the option of divorce, since it is sinking in this is not the kind of marriage he wanted then, or wants now. She is being extremely brave against the beliefs of her husband and her whole former church.

I see her well aware of the enormity of this situation. I just choose to support her since she is here talking about it all, and is not particularly confident of her choices or voice in the matter. This thread has been going on for four months. She is not being hasty, nor have I seen her be terribly disrespectful of her h's views.

If her h was here talking about it, you could support him. How do you think you are helping Journey, who has asked for support?

BTW, I thought you were going to stop giving me the floor for my offensive statements.

 

[WhatHappened]

Her h is not being "realistic" in the least. Saying the pain will continue for 60 years is ridiculous. Humans are very adaptable. .... He will be happy with his new Stepford wife, who will be like a woman of the 1950s.
....

Have we learned nothing in the last 100+ years of feminism about the value of ourselves as women, as humans in our own right, as free beings who have a right to live, love and pursue happiness, wherever it takes us?

Men are trained to not show fear, or weakness, or sadness. They are trained to show anger, or some kind of caveman joy (generally when their sports team wins). It is uncomfortable to men to be dragged into viewing their wives as complete and whole human beings.

60 years may be an exaggeration, but it certainly IS realistic to say her decision to tear apart the family...so she can sleep with other men, no less...IS going to hurt her children. My point stands that it was not a threat on his part.

So you're saying that a woman who keeps her promises is a Stepford Wife? I find that quite offensive. I kept every single vow throughout my marriage, despite all the garbage XH was piling on. I can guarantee you no one who knows me IRL would ever regard me as anything remotely like a Stepford Wife. I don't have to break promises in order to NOT be a 'Stepford Wife.'

We sometimes--in fact, often--have to do things we don't necessarily want to do. Or refrain from doing things we really want to do. I call it being an adult, and being responsible. I disagree that we have a 'right' to live, love, and pursue happiness 'wherever it takes us.' Our lives affect others, and that means as responsible, ethical adults--men and women both--we often need to temper our desires out of respect for how our choices affect those around us. This has nothing to do with feminism or valuing ourselves as women. It has to do with responsibility and thinking of others and how our actions impact them.

We do not have to pursue our every desire, or sleep with every man we get a tingle about, in order to be complete human beings.

As the mother of several sons, I also find your generalizations about men offensive. My daughter is HIGHLY turned off by 'feminism' exactly because of such statements. She has a mother with multiple advanced degrees and professional artistic accomplishments and a sister pursuing a Ph.D. in a very challenging field. She's surrounded by strong and independent women. But she's disgusted with such remarks about men, because she's also surrounded by brothers she loves.

 

[Magdlyn]

60 years may be an exaggeration...

Not "may be." Is.

but it certainly IS realistic to say her decision to tear apart the family...so she can sleep with other men, no less...IS going to hurt her children. My point stands that it was not a threat on his part.

"Sleep with other men?"

First of all, she loves another man. One man. And I hate the term, sleeping with. She wants to have sex with a man she loves. This is normal and natural human behavior, and not shameful. In fact, I don't doubt she desires her friend because he loves her for who she is now, not the Stepford wife role she has outgrown.

So you're saying that a woman who keeps her promises is a Stepford Wife? I find that quite offensive.

No, I am not saying that, so you can stop being offended by your straw man. Let's say Journey made promises that suited an evangelical Christian that she was however many years ago. Now she has found, to her own dismay, that religion no longer makes sense to her. And so, she has some painful choices to make. She is not sanguine. She is very upset. She is trying to salvage something from the marriage, but her h is hitting her with threats and sarcasm and wild exaggerations.

I kept every single vow throughout my marriage, despite all the garbage XH was piling on. I can guarantee you no one who knows me IRL would ever regard me as anything remotely like a Stepford Wife. I don't have to break promises in order to NOT be a 'Stepford Wife.'

Well, we weren't talking about you, dear, we are talking about Journey, and the apparent expectations of the strict cult she was living in, which she has obviously outgrown.

We sometimes--in fact, often--have to do things we don't necessarily want to do. Or refrain from doing things we really want to do. I call it being an adult, and being responsible. I disagree that we have a 'right' to live, love, and pursue happiness 'wherever it takes us.' Our lives affect others, and that means as responsible, ethical adults--men and women both--we often need to temper our desires out of respect for how our choices affect those around us. This has nothing to do with feminism or valuing ourselves as women. It has to do with responsibility and thinking of others and how our actions impact them.

You're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I feel women far too often put others' needs before their own, which can literally kill them. I feel it killed my own mother, in fact. She over-coddled my authoritarian and distant father, and her own sister, myself, my sister, and many of my mom and dad's friends agree. I see many women of my mother's generation having done this, and it saddens me. So, here we see a woman younger than me attempting to do otherwise. I am guessing she is 40? Why should she make choices women currently in their 70s and 80s were forced to do by the rather Victorian culture of the early 20th century?

We do not have to pursue our every desire, or sleep with every man we get a tingle about, in order to be complete human beings.

Now you are offensively exaggerating! Where is Journey trying to fuck every man she gets a tingle about?

As the mother of several sons, I also find your generalizations about men offensive. My daughter is HIGHLY turned off by 'feminism' exactly because of such statements. She has a mother with multiple advanced degrees and professional artistic accomplishments and a sister pursuing a Ph.D. in a very challenging field. She's surrounded by strong and independent women. But she's disgusted with such remarks about men, because she's also surrounded by brothers she loves.

Awww, poor widdle men, they have it so hard, ruling the world and all. lol If only women like me would sit down and shut up.

I've got an adult son too. He's a cool dude. He isn't trying to make women live in boxes constructed pre-1950.

We will just need to agree to disagree, because I am trying to keep my sarcasm in check.

 

[Journeyofawakening]

I'm pretty sure I get a say here right?? Right. Because this is about me and my situation. I find it bizarre how some people think they can make direct and hurtful statements about a person purely based on the things they write on a forum thread...

Firstly, as Mags said, I don't want to 'sleep with' every guy I get a tingle about. In fact, when I first realised I had feelings for my 'friend' I backed off. I told him how I felt and that I'm married and I can't be doing this. It was horribly painful for both of us. I've had feelings for other people in the past and not tried to get them into bed. Including when I've been single! That's really not my nature.

I don't bully my husband to try and switch to polyamory. I really don't get where people are getting this from?! Say you've been eating meat all your life...and then you decide you want to become a vegan because of reason A, reason B, reason C, whatever. It's a big lifestyle change and you can no longer go with your friend to steak night every Tuesday. Your friend is upset and sad because, well, we've always had steak on a Tuesday night! Would you turn around and say "I'm just a vegan, get over it?" or would you try and explain the reason you're not eating meat anymore to your friend who you care about, and who is obviously distressed at your change in viewpoint on eating? I would choose the second one. And yes, I realise that 'how to do relationship' is veeeeery different to what you choose to eat but I'm trying to say that I'm not bullying my husband. All I'm trying to do is explain to him why I've changed, why I feel the way I do. And instead of respecting my views, he tells me I'm wrong wrong wrong, and that I'm mentally unstable (well that was to do with spirituality but nevertheless...) and generally does some odd things (telling me to leave him and the children) reacting from his own fear of losing me. I've been spending my time trying to explain to him why I see things the way I do, why I'm being this way...because I love him. Because leaving him and not being in a relationship with him would make me sad. Not because 'he's helpful for child care', not because 'he makes the money so I can be a lady of leisure' as a couple of people here have unhelpfully judged me for. But because I LOVE HIM. Have I made that quite clear yet?!

I made my marriage vows as a 23 year old who went back to church to suit the people around me and to be with the man who I loved. I made them after 7 weeks of dating, 7 months of engagement. I made them because I loved him very much. I also made them because I couldn't have sex with him until I married him and we were both ridiculously keen. Ha! Honestly. 8 years later we still love each other (which is great!) but I let go. I let go of trying to fit in to what everyone thought. I had a huge shift in my spirituality and realised I was not living authentically. At all. In several aspects of my life. So, should I think to myself "I've made my bed, now I should lay in it", keep the promises I made as a (completely unaware of any other choice, trying to do what was expected) 23 year old? Forever?? Just because I made that one choice? Or should I embrace that I have changed...not even changed, because I've always been like this...and accept that life is fluid, life is ever-changing, and then try to express that to the man who says he loves me completely? I did the second. And I'm being hammered for it by my family and his family. It would have been easier in some ways to do the first so yes, I think I'm being brave. If you want to see it as bullying and being complacent of the choices I'm making and how they're affecting others then go ahead. You have no idea to be perfectly honest.

If I did not see the enormity of the situation, I would have left. I'm not stupid, I don't think it's going to be all sunshine and rainbows to separate from each other. I love him! He's my friend! We are bringing up children together! But I also feel deep within me that if I pretend to be something I am not, it has the potential to cause even more damage. I grew up with a depressed mother...I know the damage it can do...

Also, it's not a bait and switch. When I married him, I didn't even think to myself "oh we'll see how long this'll last, I might completely change and then he'll be stuck with me anyway and he'll just have to do as I say". No. When I married him I thought what everyone else thinks. This is forever, this is the man I'll grow old with. Now I look around me at what is happening to relationships in our society and I think...yeah, it's not just me who has realised that these ridiculously high expectations we put on our relationships and the family-unit just aren't working for a lot of people.

I do kind of wonder why some people even come to this forum when they're so against polyamory?? Not that I wanted to come here and be told "there there it's okay, your husband is the bad guy" (and no I don't think he's the bad guy) because I appreciate varying viewpoints (except the ones that directly accuse and judge my behaviour when all they see is a glimpse of my life in how I have tried to explain it in that emotion-fueled moment) but really...if you think I'm bad for wanting to share my life and body with someone else who I love and adore who came along after I made my marriage vows then, why the hell are you even here?? Or commenting here?

 

[Journeyofawakening]

I think it was pretty obvious to some of us that your husband has no intention of polyamory being a part of his life. It seemed like a) you thought a "good" husband would say yes and b) you wouldn't accept his no, regardless of how he told you because you were extremely invested in having it all.

"It seemed like". Thanks for the judgement. I thought a "good" husband would be understanding, supportive, take time to see a viewpoint. A "good" husband does NOT leave the house and go and 'out' his wife to her parents. Including regarding her sexuality. A "good" husband wouldn't have failed to mention that his wife's sister ALSO knew everything because she happened to be there when he released all this personal information. Perhaps Max, we have a different idea of what a "good" husband does.

"...you wouldn't accept his no..." Yesterday we had a conversation about how he can't accept polyamory and I can't be monogamous. Neither of us wants to divorce really. We're at a stalemate. It's not about not accepting his no, it's about not denying my true nature after so many years of doing so. Not because 'I want it all' but because I want to be happy. Don't we all just want to be happy?! I want my kids to have a happy mum. Sorry if that seems wrong to you?

 

[MightyMax]

"It seemed like". Thanks for the judgement. I thought a "good" husband would be understanding, supportive, take time to see a viewpoint. A "good" husband does NOT leave the house and go and 'out' his wife to her parents. Including regarding her sexuality. A "good" husband wouldn't have failed to mention that his wife's sister ALSO knew everything because she happened to be there when he released all this personal information. Perhaps Max, we have a different idea of what a "good" husband does.

"...you wouldn't accept his no..." Yesterday we had a conversation about how he can't accept polyamory and I can't be monogamous. Neither of us wants to divorce really. We're at a stalemate. It's not about not accepting his no, it's about not denying my true nature after so many years of doing so. Not because 'I want it all' but because I want to be happy. Don't we all just want to be happy?! I want my kids to have a happy mum. Sorry if that seems wrong to you?

But again, you're saying that you cannot be "happy" unless he allows you to be poly and stays married to you. That is pressure I'm afraid. You're saying to him "unless you go against what you want to give me what I want, I'll never be happy". When actually, if polyamory is what you need to be happy, you need to go and be poly with people who want to be poly and find happiness that way. What you're saying is pretty much the same as "I'll be sad and bitter for sixty years if you don't give me what I want".

To clarify, what is wrong is your expectation that he make himself unhappy to make you happy. You need to learn to be happy without having it all.

 

[Journeyofawakening]

disagree that it is supportive to cast her husband as a bad guy. All I can see JOA doing by following your advice is actually losing her kids because her attitude comes across as selfish and dismissive of the upheaval she is causing in all of their lives. Or at least, it would be very easy for her husband's legal team to argue that her dismissive, nonchalant attitude is evidence that she isn't the best person to be the primary carer for children. In this situation, I'd argue that support would be giving an honest opinion of the situation. My honest opinion is that her husband's behavior isn't right, but it is understandable and that JOA is deluded about the enormity of her expectations.

Okay so here you're saying that I shouldn't be selfish and dismissive of the upheaval I am causing...

And now you're saying if I want to be happy I should just go off and be poly with people who want to be poly...

If you read back, I am already trying to come to terms with the fact that my marriage and relationship may have to end because of our difference in viewpoint. I'm allowed to be sad about that right? Is that the happy medium between your two points? Because that's what's happening anyway.

My point was, I get emotional manipulation in 'this will be devastating for 60 years' and comparing our situation to every divorcee he knows when in fact they're completely different. The point I was trying to make to him was if we do decide to split because of this difference then let's do our best to make it not horrendous for the children. Which I think is fair right? And then he basically says no. HE is trying to convince me to come back to church, drop the polyamory and choose him and just him. So that we can all be 'happy' again whilst using emotional manipulation tactics (fear tactics essentially) to convince me to his viewpoint.

 

[MightyMax]

Okay so here you're saying that I shouldn't be selfish and dismissive of the upheaval I am causing...

And now you're saying if I want to be happy I should just go off and be poly with people who want to be poly...

If you read back, I am already trying to come to terms with the fact that my marriage and relationship may have to end because of our difference in viewpoint. I'm allowed to be sad about that right? Is that the happy medium between your two points? Because that's what's happening anyway.

My point was, I get emotional manipulation in 'this will be devastating for 60 years' and comparing our situation to every divorcee he knows when in fact they're completely different. The point I was trying to make to him was if we do decide to split because of this difference then let's do our best to make it not horrendous for the children. Which I think is fair right? And then he basically says no. HE is trying to convince me to come back to church, drop the polyamory and choose him and just him. So that we can all be 'happy' again whilst using emotional manipulation tactics (fear tactics essentially) to convince me to his viewpoint.

Sometimes in life, we have to be selfish to pursue our goals and it hurts the people we love. I don't think that means we should never be selfish, but when we have to be, we need to acknowledge that we've hurt those people. I've broken up serious relationships three times to pursue career goals. The first time, I was dismissive of the pain my decision caused, the last two times I wasn't. Those two people are still in my life as friends.

I said in another post that I'd advise your husband to part amicably. I'd tell him that your needs aren't wrong or inherently dangerous to your children but that you do seem somewhat oblivious to the enormity of the situation and that must be hurtful and frustrating for him. So yes, I agree that he is also guilty of having unrealistic and unreasonable expectations and I agree that you seem more willing to "settle for" an amicable split than he is.

 

[KC43]

Polyamory isn't about "fucking any man you get a tingle from" or however it was phrased, anyway... It's polyAMORY, not polyFUCKERY. They aren't mutually exclusive, but neither are they mutually *in*clusive. (Just look at me, the one who posted a couple months ago about how to improve sex with her partners and now isn't having sex with anyone but herself...)

Journey, as I see it from this thread, is trying to convince her husband to understand her FEELINGS, not necessarily to give his blessing for her ACTIONS. She isn't doing anything for him to accept! She just wants to be acknowledged as someone who's capable of having more than one loving relationship, and who might want to try putting it into practice at some point.

That isn't bullying. It isn't bait and switch. It isn't "I'm going to go fuck every man I see". It's "I feel like I need to love more than one person to be happy and whole, and I'd like you to be open-minded about trying to understand why I feel that way and how it works."

On the "bait and switch" thing... if that's what "suddenly" announcing you're polyamorous is, I pulled one hell of a bait and switch--not on Hubby, who figured it out long before I said anything just by watching me with certain male friends--but on myself. Because while I knew I didn't feel happy or whole loving only one person, and couldn't understand why it wasn't okay to love more than one, I *believed* it wasn't okay, and so I spent about a quarter of a century of my adult life being monogamous. It wasn't until I confessed to Hubby that I'd developed feelings for another man, and Hubby said, "Oh, that's polyamory, like in the Heinlein books...you love more than I do, and that's okay with me" that I even had a bloody clue what I was thinking or feeling.

Journey didn't "bait and switch" anything. She believed monogamy was the only possibility, and believed she would be happy that way because it's how she was supposed to be. Then she discovered that there are other possibilities, and realized that she fits into one of those others. She grew, she learned things, and she tried to share with her husband.

 

[MightyMax]

1) JOA admitted her goal is to get her husband to say yes to having sex and dating others. She said if it was a theoretical thing, she wouldn't bother. She wants him to okay action. I'll find the post where she makes this clear and quote it in a sec.

2) It was a bait and switch, whether intentional or not. That sometimes happens in life, you just have to acknowledge how your change of heart impacts on others.