quote:

Originally posted by dsmusic:
My wayward wife suggested she is poly. I'm pretty sure it's just a way for her to justify exploring a relationship with the OM while keeping me as a safety net - as opposed to a real shift in her thinking.

Mine said that 2.

foggy nonsense, really.

-ol' 2long

quote:

foggy nonsense, really.

Heh. The beauty of being succinct.

Well said.

P

quote:

I don't know that I would say 'just' since it's a big deal. But isn't that what all our challenges are about? Growing, learning, becoming? Otherwise what's the point?

P

I used "just" on purpose, 2 try and characterize how I feel now - 7.5 years post d-day - when I reflect back on my W's VLTA and the fact that she's never been on board with any "traditional" post-infidelity recover program or method.

infidelity is pretty pathetic from this perspective. I suppose it always could look that way, even soon after d-day amongst all the feelings of extreme emotional pain. But I'm not in pain anymore. When I learned that my W is still trying 2 get OM 2 respond 2 her emails and update her website, I just feel sad - and pity them both for not being able 2 sever ties for their own emotional well-being (not 2 mention that of their families). I don't feel any pain anymore.

I suppose things might be a little different if I had felt some urgency 2 have us recover our M in some expected manner, and perhaps having "failed" 2 do so, divorced and sought another partner before now. But I didn't, and I don't regret that I didn't.

In fact, for the most part, I'm pretty happy with life.

-ol' 2long

quote:

Originally posted by 2long:
Polyamory is like infidelity.

This is my definition of infidelity....

quote:

Infidelity is a violation of the mutually agreed-upon rules or boundaries of an intimate relationship, which constitutes a significant breach of faith or a betrayal of core shared values with which the integrity of the relationship is defined. ...

While I think it's very difficult to make poly work, I'd argue until blue in the face that it is NOT infidelity.

quote:

It's selfish and degrading.

It's as much Selfless as selfish.


Hey P, I think I remember when I first came here in 04 you mentioned someday you'd like to have a discussion on the topic. 5 years later it's finally come about.

Nice definition Sleepy. Did you make that up? One of the things I've always been insistent about - to the great unhappiness of some folks - is that infidelity is not just about sex and romance. There's financial infidelity, physical infidelity such as abuse, emotional infidelity also with abuse. There are all kinds of ways to betray marital promises besides just sex. It's our puritanical mindset and obsession with sex that blinds us to that.

I personally think the dynamics of any, mmm no ... most, relationship formats can be eitehr grossly selfish or beautifully selfless. It's all about connection, integrity, compassion, awareness and so on.

Heh - five years huh? Did I ever mention I'm easily distracted by shiny objects?

P

quote:

"Well, yes, I am involved with so and so and I can't leave him but I don't want to give up you so now I think I'm poly and if you loved me you'd be ok with that."

You can call a pig a horse, but it's still a pig.

quote:

Heh. The beauty of being succinct. Big Grin

Well said.

I wish I had succinctness! Whaaaa!!!!

quote:

There's financial infidelity, physical infidelity such as abuse, emotional infidelity also with abuse. There are all kinds of ways to betray marital promises besides just sex. It's our puritanical mindset and obsession with sex that blinds us to that.

Thank you for that reminder, P. So true. All of them are damaging. Seems like often an affair 'wakes' us up and shows us a different picture.

quote:

relationship formats can be eitehr grossly selfish or beautifully selfless. It's all about connection, integrity, compassion, awareness and so on.

Again, fantastic stuff! I'm so glad I read over here tonight. I came over cause I saw dsmusic had posted, and I wanted to check in and see how he is doing. [sidenote - So, how you doin dsmusic?]

quote:

Did I ever mention I'm easily distracted by shiny objects?

Yes, you have mentioned that before. AND, I wanted to tell you that I am doing student teaching working with Emotionally Disturbed high school kids. And many of them have ADD, ADHD, ADOS (Attention-Defficiii-O-Shiny), and AD...? (Attention Deficiiii...?).

I thought you might enjoy that story.

quote:

"Well, yes, I am involved with so and so and I can't leave him but I don't want to give up you so now I think I'm poly and if you loved me you'd be ok with that."

All of which are varying degrees of betrayal. The trust that I felt so deeply for X has been broken. That is his to repair. He chooses not to. We do not communicate unless it is about our kids. Those are my boundaries. That is what posting here and reading here helped me with: Figuring out what is most important to me, if it is currently happening or not, making a balanced thoughtful decision, and in very difficult situations.

That is my hope for all of us here.

*edited for meticulous attention to formatting detail ~ Why Am I Still Awake???

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Spider Slayer_SYMC,

AND, speaking of ADOS, *ahem*, I also meant to say:

HEY 2LONG!!!!

quote:

Yes, you have mentioned that before. AND, I wanted to tell you that I am doing student teaching working with Emotionally Disturbed high school kids. And many of them have ADD, ADHD, ADOS (Attention-Defficiii-O-Shiny), and AD...? (Attention Deficiiii...?).

Uhmmmmm.....

Did you just call me emotionally disturbed??



Sweeeeeeeeeet!

P

quote:

And many of them have ADD, ADHD, ADOS (Attention-Defficiii-O-Shiny), and AD...? (Attention Deficiiii...?).

There are suspicions my H has AADD. My cousin was going to try him on ritalin the other month but we didn't get around to it. The other day I forwarded him a funny joke about ADD that sounded just like him.

Would you believe he got distracted and didn't manage to read it...

quote:

Uhmmmmm.....

Did you just call me emotionally disturbed??

I knew you were going to say that! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!

quote:

Would you believe he got distracted and didn't manage to read it...

Somehow, yes, I do believe it! Takes one to know one, I guess.

quote:

Nice definition Sleepy. Did you make that up?

Heck no! I can't write like that. I first saw that years ago and saved it.

It's really good. Any idea where you got it?

P

quote:

Originally posted by Penny_SYMC:
It's really good. Any idea where you got it?

P

I don't. And if you google it you get lots of results. One of which is wikipedia using it as their definition. (I'm pretty sure that's NOT where I got it).

Something else interesting on Wiki's page as it pertains to this particular thread.

quote:

What constitutes an act of infidelity varies between and within cultures and depends also on the type of relationship that exists between people. Even within an open relationship, infidelity may arise if a partner to the relationship acts outside of the understood boundaries of the relationship.

OOoh! I really like that too. And, it's quite true, at least from my POV. What I and my spouse agree are the boundaries of our R may be significantly different than what you and yours decide. It's one of the reasons I'm always a bit taken aback when one partner is seeing and IC and then comes home to say, "my t told me this thing you and I have decided together is unfair."

Really?? I'm just not sure that's anyone else's job to decide. Give direction? Point out inconsistencies, expand horizons - sure - but the parameters of what is and isn't ok, seems to be are up to the couple involved.

Hum .... and then *that* opens the control and manipulation can of worms ......

Never easy is it

P

Hmmm. Am I really the only person here who was in a long-term (12 years isn't -really- long term, I agree, but it's what I had) poly relationship? How odd.

In any case, Sleepy said something about how you need to have a solid relationship from which to build a poly relationship. I would say that five years into my first marriage, I thought I had a solid relationship. Turns out I didn't. To be specific, I wasn't differentiated enough to maintain solid boundaries and to genuinely react to the real harm that was being done. I didn't understand that harm and pain are different. I thought it was all pain and (correctly) thought that I needed to deal with that on my own, and that everyone else had to deal with their own pain on their own as well. Harm was a concept I learned much later, and is a concept that is very useful to me today. It, and the concepts of ethics we use here, help to explain why one actually does have a responsibility to ensure that someone else's marriage doesn't implode under the weight of the pressure you're putting on it.

My ex was also lacking in that level of differentiation, and because of it neither of us set boundaries around the things that were actually important to us. After a few years of it, unsurprisingly, we built up to an exploding point. Unfortunately, the exploding point involved another person (a poly relationship that became an affair when she decided she wanted to be secretive and dishonest about it). And that's why poly relationships fall apart so completely. When that happens, there is no social structure to pull things back together, and way too many dynamics at work to pull the relationship apart. As a same-sex relationship that was also poly? The societal answer is, "You never should have done that in the first place and now you're suffering the natural consequences of your actions."

The question of whether polyamory is in our genetics is, I think, as yet unanswered. I know my own heart has room for multiple partners. I -also- know that I have no desire to explore that any further in my life. Breadth was interesting but in the end unfulfilling. Depth is.... wonderful.

quote:

I would say that five years into my first marriage, I thought I had a solid relationship. Turns out I didn't. To be specific, I wasn't differentiated enough to maintain solid boundaries and to genuinely react to the real harm that was being done. I didn't understand that harm and pain are different. I thought it was all pain and (correctly) thought that I needed to deal with that on my own, and that everyone else had to deal with their own pain on their own as well. Harm was a concept I learned much later, and is a concept that is very useful to me today. It, and the concepts of ethics we use here, help to explain why one actually does have a responsibility to ensure that someone else's marriage doesn't implode under the weight of the pressure you're putting on it.

My ex was also lacking in that level of differentiation, and because of it neither of us set boundaries around the things that were actually important to us. After a few years of it, unsurprisingly, we built up to an exploding point. Unfortunately, the exploding point involved another person (a poly relationship that became an affair when she decided she wanted to be secretive and dishonest about it). And that's why poly relationships fall apart so completely. When that happens, there is no social structure to pull things back together, and way too many dynamics at work to pull the relationship apart.

I'm no expert, but that sounds like classic dysfunction to me - conflict that occurs regularly and is accommodated by others in the relationship.

quote:

Infidelity is a violation of the mutually agreed-upon rules or boundaries of an intimate relationship, which constitutes a significant breach of faith or a betrayal of core shared values with which the integrity of the relationship is defined. ...

I agree that this is a great definition. But I think many people just assume that their boundaries and expectations will be telepathically understood and agreed to by anyone in the relationship. Sometimes we are not so good at communicating.

quote:

Originally posted by Just J_SYMC:
Hmmm. Am I really the only person here who was in a long-term (12 years isn't -really- long term, I agree, but it's what I had) poly relationship? How odd.

Ac2ally, I think it's more "odd" that you were in one. Not meant as an insult, just that I don't think poly relationships are really all that common.

quote:

The question of whether polyamory is in our genetics is, I think, as yet unanswered. I know my own heart has room for multiple partners. I -also- know that I have no desire to explore that any further in my life. Breadth was interesting but in the end unfulfilling. Depth is.... wonderful.

Genetically, I think it's pretty obvious that we're not polyamorous, or there'd be 3 or more sexes. But that's looking at it from a very, very basic standpoint. Some organisms are asexual. What's the prefix for "self" amorous (assuming that such critters could love at all, of course).

Intellec2ally, on the other hand, I think it's certainly possible for humans 2 be polyamorous. But I think that, from an evolutionary standpoint at least (speaking specifically of the evolution of intelligence in parallel with the evolution of the species), we're kind of on the hairy edge of the process, and so we make a lot of mistakes (the kinds of mistakes that, taken as a whole, consti2te "na2ral selection"). In the end, I prefer 2 minimize the mistakes I'm likely 2 make from here on out in choosing a mate (and considering I did that 34 years ago, I don't feel the need 2 'experiment' with polyamory/polygamy now).

I still think that wanting 2 have more than one partner is inherently selfish. Suggesting that it's "na2ral" for humans 2 strive 2 procreate with as many partners as possible because it's programmed in2 our biological ancestry is just rationalization for making the poor choice of "following our hearts" "in the moment" rather than following our heads.

But I'm out of the gene pool now. Y'all carry on!

-ol' 2long
P.S. Hi back at ya, Spidey!

quote:

Genetically, I think it's pretty obvious that we're not polyamorous, or there'd be 3 or more sexes.

I've missed the reasoning behind that one - why would there need to be a 3rd sex? Sorry if I'm just being slow.
I read a study somewhere that it's usually in polygynous (as in males with multiple partners) species that the males of the species are larger than the female (usually because of some aspect of fighting for partners). Based on that they suggested that there was a slight predeliction in the human history to be polygamous. I wish I could remember where it was and post the link.
Helen Fishers suggestion of serial monogamy made sense too.

JustJ, I'm also surprised you found it unusual that there would be so few. I don't know a single other soul who has been in one. Perhaps you've had more exposure to that fairly small population due to being in it?

quote:

I still think that wanting 2 have more than one partner is inherently selfish.

That's an interesting one. In a way wanting to have most things - even 1 relationship, having children, etc. is inherently selfish. We may manage to be unselfish IN the relationship, but the need to have that relationship at all is, arguably, for our own satisfaction. As such I'd say that wanting another partner - if (and only if) it didn't hurt the first, is just kind of an extension of that desire for one relationship?
Obviously cases where it's used against the wishes of the existing relationship is a different kettle of fish, and that's where it becomes an excuse. One could argue, I guess, that it ALWAYS risks putting stress on the original relationship, so there's an additional degree of selfishness in that. Then again there's a whole lot of things that risk putting stress on an original relationship - quitting ones job to pursue a business or whatever - where to draw the line...

quote:

Hmmm. Am I really the only person here who was in a long-term (12 years isn't -really- long term, I agree, but it's what I had) poly relationship? How odd.

Well, yes. The oddity is the combined understanding and acceptance of how multi-partner relationships work and their existence as neutral and the in depth understanding of personal and relational dynamics/importance. Most people get one or the other (or neither but that's a different can 'o worms).

It's similar to our unique framework here (and I don't think we realize how unique it is) of understanding the dual nature of individuation and relationship. So people who do individual healing/transformation get how important it is to find Self (not always in the context of Value but, again, another conversation). And people who are advocates of committed R's get how important it is to have the R skills. I know very few who understand how those two *must* twine together if there is to be health (wholeness). And even fewer who have an intuitive or learned understanding of what is personal responsibility and what is joint.

Anyway - that's way off topic.

quote:

I would say that five years into my first marriage, I thought I had a solid relationship. Turns out I didn't. To be specific, I wasn't differentiated enough to maintain solid boundaries and to genuinely react to the real harm that was being done. I didn't understand that harm and pain are different.

So what a) brought it to your attention that you did not know those things and needed to and b) how did you learn them?

quote:

It, and the concepts of ethics we use here, help to explain why one actually does have a responsibility to ensure that someone else's marriage doesn't implode under the weight of the pressure you're putting on it.

Mmmmmm ..... I'm not sure I agree entirely. Simply existing may put pressure on someone else's marriage. Or - even some of the things we suggest as strategies for infidelity put pressure on a marriage to the point of implosion. There are things that are beyond our control. I think we have a responsibility to self, other, and universe to examine our motivations and to act from the place of what HH the Dalai Lama calls compassion and which we might call grounded, clear, rationality - free of afflictive emotions. In that state we suggest exposure or confrontation or PP with thoughtfulness and care rather than, say, vengeance or manipulation for example.

quote:

When that happens, there is no social structure to pull things back together, and way too many dynamics at work to pull the relationship apart.

Yes. The taboo certainly is greater. There's not much for straight/mono partners when things fall apart either.

quote:

I'm no expert, but that sounds like classic dysfunction to me - conflict that occurs regularly and is accommodated by others in the relationship.

Yes...... and one of the most often presented opportunities for growth. How many of us actually grab on and do the work?

quote:

In a way wanting to have most things - even 1 relationship, having children, etc. is inherently selfish. We may manage to be unselfish IN the relationship, but the need to have that relationship at all is, arguably, for our own satisfaction. As such I'd say that wanting another partner - if (and only if) it didn't hurt the first, is just kind of an extension of that desire for one relationship?

Very interesting point, mags. Can't say I disagree.

quote:

Then again there's a whole lot of things that risk putting stress on an original relationship - quitting ones job to pursue a business or whatever - where to draw the line...

MMm hmmm. And what makes us think that we can avoid stressing a R? Or that such a thing would be good?? Relationships, intimate relationships, are the place where we are challenged to learn, to grow, to evolve. The idea that a R should be happily ever after is bunk. Not just bunk, but dangerous bunk.

P