I already practice most of what the article is encouraging — basically “Stop trying to control other people; start supporting them in empowered, non-coercive ways.” That part I fully agree with.
Where I struggle is with the author’s framing, especially the title “Love more, care less.” I know what she means, but the wording misrepresents the healthy dynamic she’s actually trying to describe. I would say “Love lots, care appropriately with boundaries.”
I also really didn’t like this line:
“I just love you. I don’t care what happens to you.”
Since the author presents Loretta as a
client, it feels unprofessional for a
counselor to tell a client they “love” them or that they “don’t care what happens.” Even if the intention was detachment from outcome, the wording misses the mark — and with someone in an abusive situation, it seems especially insensitive.
In Loretta’s case, the issue seems obvious to me: Rex was controlling her and treating her like she had no mind of her own. But her family telling her to dump him is also a form of controlling her and treating her like she has no mind of her own. It makes total sense to me that Loretta bristled during their intervention. Abuse victims are already dealing with someone taking their agency. They don’t need more people doing it -- even with good intentions.
I'm surprised the counselor was surprised.
I’ve supported friends who were leaving abuse — and friends who chose to stay. I’ve even argued with other friends about not calling the abuser an asshole
to the survivor. It doesn’t help. They don’t need more voices telling them what to do or what to think. They need someone who supports their agency in doing for themselves and thinking for themselves.
I can’t control anyone’s decisions. I can only control whether I stay in relationship with them, and how I show up.
If I were Loretta’s
friend (not her counselor), I would have said something like: “I care about you, your wellbeing, and your safety. But you get to make your own choices, in your own time. I won’t take away your agency or try to control you. I’ll support you as best I can. I’ll also protect my own boundaries. I reserve the right to step back if it becomes too much.”
That is healthy attachment with boundaries to me — not detachment disguised as love.
The article wraps things up in a “cute” way to entertain the reader:
“As you support your significant others, they may realize this same spectacular success. Or not… And if you disagree, I truly, respectfully, lovingly do not care.”
But I think the framing could have been stronger, especially around abuse. It could skip the “cute” and actually use the space to educate. It could give useful links for the reader who might be abused themselves or might have an abused friend/person in their life. A counselor could have used this opportunity to talk about how to help a loved one that is being abuse -- tips for supportive presence, autonomy, and boundaries rather than leaning on provocative phrasing like “I don’t care what happens to you.”
While I didn’t care for the article, I can see why the underlying idea appeals to you. Loving deeply while caring appropriately, with boundaries, and without controlling others applies very naturally to polyamorous relationships.
When the people involved in poly relationships bring these skills to the table:
- Love freely.
- Care compassionately.
- Don’t control; avoid being controlling.
- Hold strong personal boundaries.
- Let others make their own choices.
- Make your own choices -- decide how you yourself will or will not participate.
…it creates autonomy, steadiness, and relational health — exactly what healthy polyamory asks of people. Or really, what
any healthy relationship shape asks of people — be it friends, family, partners, etc.
Galagirl
