Not really a blog

Indeed, so I think the tax rebate thing here is a bit of a red herring. Financial planning needs think broader than any one of these issues. And as for the amount of board she's paying, that's heavily location dependent too, regarding fairness.

Really, I don't think there's enough information provided to really make a call if it's a sweet deal or if, in the medium to long term, someone is going to get utterly screwed over, financially.
 
Someone made reference to the idea that they should be equal. Something like that.

ENM people often talk about how unwise it is to promise that you won't have certain feelings. Namely, that you won't fall in love with an intimate partner. What we don't speak about as much is that we can also make false promises that we will fall in (equal) love with someone else. We do that unless we specify that we can't predict anything.

There might be a clear reason why we can't feel as "strongly" for one person as we can another. In the thread I'm talking about, the person is ace and therefore not up for (much?) sex. So one could say that there is a factor that is likely to be a common obstacle in relationships. It's a reason why someone might feel like they can't feel quite the same as they do in other relationships. Often it's a lot more vague.

You just don't feel that way. You can't change that. I'm not sure you owe it to anyone to try to change that, either.

I think some poly people end up leading a less content life because they chase "fair" to their own detriment. They feel like they can't allow one relationship to grow to where they'd ideally like it to, because it will push put existing connections or at least limit their opportunity to also grow which is somehow unfair.

It actually makes me think of some of the older poly people I know. I say older, I mean 50+. Those with a couple of decades experience with it. Some of them wonder "what if?" they'd been a little less committed to "fair poly" with previous partners. Would they now be in a more established partnership instead of the erring on casual, mid-term solo experiences they have now?

The practicalities of that type of partnership have become more evident as time has gone on. Sure there was a time when they had a network of chosen family in their 30s and 40s who would be there for those emergencies that partners usually cover. But over time, that became more and more "for emergencies" and less and less for lonely evenings. They had their own commitments which essentially revolved around an established partnership. Some of them move away. Some die. You drift apart.

Just writing this reminds me that I have been that person. I've been the person too genuinely busy with my own core relationships (familial and romantic) to really be there for someone who doesn't have that base. I've done my best. I've done shifts with others to give 24/7 support, but more than once in various contexts, we've all been too busy with our "main" life and the ball has ultimately been dropped.

In hindsight, I see the ball was dropped and sometimes the person felt let down by that occurring. Sometimes they were angry. Again, in hindsight, sometimes I see that the person was led to believe it would be different, that they were "equal" in priority and could sometimes be a top priority. Other times, it was a consequence of a life and relationship style that they had chosen. They just didn't quite realise the reality of that choice. If you're never the person to be called during illness, can you expect to call?

I guess what I'm trying to say in this post is that polyamory is great. I'll always be poly. I've just come to realise that it's probably more important to ensure you have partnerships where there is a true grounding of mutual desire and commitment. Shared desire and commitment. Sometimes you can only build one of those without compromising its integrity. Sometimes being in too many (even one) relationships where you'll never achieve that mutuality is wasting your time and distracting you from better situations.

I'm not saying that everyone needs a mononormative strict hierarchy in their polyamorous set up. I do think focusing on establishing long term partnerships (even platonic ones) where you have a mutually desired and shared understanding of your elevated place in each other's support network is vital.

Yeah, in that sense, you kind of do need at least one primary.
 
Back
Top