Metamours

[Dragonfly4253]

I'm going to chime in and say that the "loving all parts" thing is something that rubs me the wrong way, because my ex used to love to use it against me. I don't like something/want to discuss something/have an issue with something? Well, if you don't like *it* then you don't like *me*!

It a manipulative, toxic idea to have under those conditions, and it effectively shut down any disagreement before it happened. If I turned it around? It was "well, I'm talking about <action>, not YOU." (Although he never accepted that answer himself)

I know that's not how you meant it, but it's a fine line between believing that, and then getting hurt when it really doesn't work like that.

While Chops and I have many things in common, there are plenty of things we don't. It means that we're our own people. I don't need (nor want) to feign liking (or MAKE myself like) something I just don't - like some of his musical tastes, etc. It just strikes me as sycophantic if I were to try.

Love and acceptance are very different things. Just because you love someone for who they are doesn't give them the right to hurt you. Nor does it give them the right to be toxic. For example, I have a temper. I get angry very quickly, burn real hot for a short period of time, and forgive and forget quickly. My partners love me for who I am. They understand that I am quick to anger. That does not give me the right to take my anger out on them. When I do start getting angry if I direct it toward them they calmly point it out to me and allow me to realize what I am doing. Just because my hot head is part of who I am does not give me an excuse to abuse my partners.

Further, Honey is a huge sports fan. I hate sports. Just because he loves sports does not mean that I have to love sports. I do however love that he has something that he is so passionate about and enjoys doing. I love seeing how excited he gets when his teams win and I love watching him get grumpy when his teams lose. It is a part of the whole picture of him.

Loving all the parts of someone does not mean loving all the same things as them or loving all the same people they love. It just means you love someone completely as they are not as what you want them to be.

 

[YouAreHere]

The other thing is that I care very deeply for my partner and by extension I care for his wife and kids because they are a part of him. If you truly love someone, you love all the parts of them including the other parts they love.

This is the context in which I made my comment. I get what you mean now, but in the original context, my comment still stands. I do not have to love all the people in my partner's life, just because they're in his life, regardless of whether or not they're other partners of his, family, or friends. I also don't believe I love him any less because of that.

That said, it doesn't mean I don't want to interact with my metamours. I just tend to think of them as 'his family', some of whom I like better than others.

 

[Dragonfly4253]

No I absolutely was not trying to say that you need to love all the people your partner's love. That is far from what I meant.

I also was not trying to say that interacting with metamours is for everyone. Not everyone feels the same way about that. For me it is a necessity though. For flings, no not so much. I have no desire to meet anyone Lovey has a fling with. But for us knowing metamours is important. I also know for my metamour it was important. There was a lot of pressure when I met Princess. Honey was terribly nervous about it. But at the end of the day it was a great experience for me. Princess and I hit it off and have a good friendship now.

Not to mention I love that my partners are friends. They spend time together and have a good relationship. They team up to drive me crazy and it makes my feelings for them even deeper.


In no way was I trying to come across is this is how you have to be. What I love about polyamory is that it looks different for everyone. I was merely sharing how it looked for me and my partners and metamours.