Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Husband and wife + one

1235

Posts

  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Most the poly or open relatinships I have seen either lead to jealousy and relationship explosions, or is just someones excuse for sleeping around while having a solid to come home to.

    Not saying it can't work, just saying it is hard to make it work.

    And the reason for that is, IMO, that polyamory isn't for most people. They just use it as an excuse for their behaviour, or they're going along with it because they think it's what they/their significant other wants.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • Shadow_Dancer88Shadow_Dancer88 Registered User
    edited June 2009
    Most the poly or open relatinships I have seen either lead to jealousy and relationship explosions, or is just someones excuse for sleeping around while having a solid to come home to.

    Not saying it can't work, just saying it is hard to make it work.

    And the reason for that is, IMO, that polyamory isn't for most people. They just use it as an excuse for their behaviour, or they're going along with it because they think it's what they/their significant other wants.


    Er, yeah, that was pretty much what I was saying. Hence the "not saying it can't work" part. It takes a special person to make it work and not have it blow up on them.

    Shadow_Dancer88 on
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Well, really, it takes more than one special person. Everyone's got to be on board with it, otherwise the aforementioned jealousy/breakdown occurs. But again,
    Can we at least all agree that while non-"standard" living arrangements work for some and not for others, it's a horrible solution to "living with just two incomes is hard?"

    Yes.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Doc wrote: »
    Can we at least all agree that while non-"standard" living arrangements work for some and not for others, it's a horrible solution to "living with just two incomes is hard?"

    Well yeah.

    But that's boring.

    I wanna talk about SEX!

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    Doc wrote: »
    Can we at least all agree that while non-"standard" living arrangements work for some and not for others, it's a horrible solution to "living with just two incomes is hard?"

    Well yeah.

    But that's boring.

    I wanna talk about SEX!

    We used to have a thread about that.

    And Salt N' Pepa had a song.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Or, someone who feels like they're the main/more important/significant other feeling that their partner is giving someone else too much attention.

    In principle, how is this any different from somebody deciding that their spouse is spending too much time at work? Or spending too much time on a hobby? Or, hell, spending too much time playing WoW?

    You don't typically develop a strong emotional attachment to your job?

    Your job does not develop a strong emotional attachment to you?

    There is no intimacy between you and your job, unless your job involves fucking?

    People do not typically become jealous of inanimate objects or abstract constructs in the same way they become jealous of other people?

    The closest I can come to relating is with my kids. I have two kids. I love them both dearly, but it is becoming increasingly obvious as they age that making sure I treat them both equally and give them the same amount of attention will be challenging. They will be very different people, and I will likely bond to one more strongly than the other just based on things like shared interests and mutual synergy. It happens. And I will have to constantly be aware of both of them as distinct people, and of the time I spend with each.

    It's likely going to be difficult. There will often be hurt feelings. Fortunately, we're kind of stuck together - Riley or Maddie can't just say "Fuck this, I don't want to be ignored!" and leave. It's not really an option, even though there may be times they're feeling intense emotions that instill a desire to do just that. Polyamorous relationships have that option, though. You can, at any time, get up and leave. It's easy to do - often easier than dealing with your problems. This adds an extra layer of complexity and instability to a polyamorous relationship. Just one more source of potential drama and difficulty. And absent any firm mechanism to keep everyone around, it will, necessarily, drive apart poly relationships at a higher rate than we see in monogamous relationships. And this is in the best-case scenarios.

    This is one reason I always lobby so strongly for marriage as an institution. It serves as one more thing to make it harder to say "fuck it" and leave when the going gets rough. It makes it harder to abandon a perfectly good relationship based on fleeting problems.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Or, someone who feels like they're the main/more important/significant other feeling that their partner is giving someone else too much attention.

    In principle, how is this any different from somebody deciding that their spouse is spending too much time at work? Or spending too much time on a hobby? Or, hell, spending too much time playing WoW?

    You don't typically develop a strong emotional attachment to your job?

    Your job does not develop a strong emotional attachment to you?

    There is no intimacy between you and your job, unless your job involves fucking?

    People do not typically become jealous of inanimate objects or abstract constructs in the same way they become jealous of other people?

    Right, all good points, and this is getting down to the core of it. The issue isn't time, really, it's intimacy, which is hard to quantify. Luckily, while time is zero-sum, intimacy is not.
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    The closest I can come to relating is with my kids. I have two kids. I love them both dearly, but it is becoming increasingly obvious as they age that making sure I treat them both equally and give them the same amount of attention will be challenging. They will be very different people, and I will likely bond to one more strongly than the other just based on things like shared interests and mutual synergy. It happens. And I will have to constantly be aware of both of them as distinct people, and of the time I spend with each.

    Exactly, and this is the closest sincere analogy I've ever been able to think of, too.
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    It's likely going to be difficult. There will often be hurt feelings. Fortunately, we're kind of stuck together - Riley or Maddie can't just say "Fuck this, I don't want to be ignored!" and leave. It's not really an option, even though there may be times they're feeling intense emotions that instill a desire to do just that. Polyamorous relationships have that option, though. You can, at any time, get up and leave. It's easy to do - often easier than dealing with your problems. This adds an extra layer of complexity and instability to a polyamorous relationship. Just one more source of potential drama and difficulty. And absent any firm mechanism to keep everyone around, it will, necessarily, drive apart poly relationships at a higher rate than we see in monogamous relationships. And this is in the best-case scenarios.

    This is one reason I always lobby so strongly for marriage as an institution. It serves as one more thing to make it harder to say "fuck it" and leave when the going gets rough. It makes it harder to abandon a perfectly good relationship based on fleeting problems.

    Sure. Most of the stable poly arrangements I've seen have a clear application of priorities. There's the husband+wife, and the extra lover or two on the side. If friction occurs, the extra lover is more likely to be jettisoned, but of course it depends on the situation.

    That said, one of the big reasons I'm poly, and I know that this is shared by a lot of the people I've dated, is because we want to experience stability and excitement simultaneously. I know that there is a comfort to being with somebody for years and knowing that they'll be there for you tomorrow rain or shine; knowing that this person knows you well and has seen you at your best and worst and loves you anyway. But it's not realistic to expect that said person would give you that butterflies in the stomach feeling that you get from meeting somebody new. So you get to go out, have your fun with the new partner, get a dose of excitement, and then come home and cuddle up with a movie with your primary. (In truth, that's an oversimplification, as any relationship new or old is going to have a mix of stability and excitement, but I think it's pretty obvious that the particular mix is going to be dependent upon the age of the relationship in question.)

    So if friction occurs, and if a choice has to be made, I would more than likely hold on the stable partner, the one who I'm comfortable and cozy with who's stuck with me for years. But, yeah, things do change, people do change, and such a situation would require an assessment of what I'm getting out of each relationship. Sometimes even an old relationship has to end, and while I wouldn't want anybody to throw away a good relationship over a momentary spat, neither do I value stability simply for stability's sake.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    Fair enough.

    I think poly arrangements are great for those who can handle them, as has been said. You can clearly handle them.

    Me? Not a chance in hell.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I think poly arrangements are great for those who can handle them, as has been said. You can clearly handle them.

    I muddle along. I've only set a couple of houses on fire, and there's only been one near-death-experience so far, so I consider it a net win.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    That said, one of the big reasons I'm poly, and I know that this is shared by a lot of the people I've dated, is because we want to experience stability and excitement simultaneously. I know that there is a comfort to being with somebody for years and knowing that they'll be there for you tomorrow rain or shine; knowing that this person knows you well and has seen you at your best and worst and loves you anyway. But it's not realistic to expect that said person would give you that butterflies in the stomach feeling that you get from meeting somebody new. So you get to go out, have your fun with the new partner, get a dose of excitement, and then come home and cuddle up with a movie with your primary. (In truth, that's an oversimplification, as any relationship new or old is going to have a mix of stability and excitement, but I think it's pretty obvious that the particular mix is going to be dependent upon the age of the relationship in question.)

    This is probably the one thing I really don't get about poly relationships. If I'm already seeing someone I love and care about, who knows what I like sexually, what's my incentive to go and add someone else to the mix? What's my motivation for having sex with both my girlfriend and another person when I could just have more sex with my girlfriend? Yeah you get to add someone else to your list of conquests and probably a little ego boost knowing someone else wants to fuck you but it just doesn't seem horribly worth it to me.

    I'm not judging you or anything, I'm actually geniunely curious because I really don't understand it.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    That said, one of the big reasons I'm poly, and I know that this is shared by a lot of the people I've dated, is because we want to experience stability and excitement simultaneously. I know that there is a comfort to being with somebody for years and knowing that they'll be there for you tomorrow rain or shine; knowing that this person knows you well and has seen you at your best and worst and loves you anyway. But it's not realistic to expect that said person would give you that butterflies in the stomach feeling that you get from meeting somebody new. So you get to go out, have your fun with the new partner, get a dose of excitement, and then come home and cuddle up with a movie with your primary. (In truth, that's an oversimplification, as any relationship new or old is going to have a mix of stability and excitement, but I think it's pretty obvious that the particular mix is going to be dependent upon the age of the relationship in question.)

    This is probably the one thing I really don't get about poly relationships. If I'm already seeing someone I love and care about, who knows what I like sexually, what's my incentive to go and add someone else to the mix? What's my motivation for having sex with both my girlfriend and another person when I could just have more sex with my girlfriend? Yeah you get to add someone else to your list of conquests and probably a little ego boost knowing someone else wants to fuck you but it just doesn't seem horribly worth it to me.

    I'm not judging you or anything, I'm actually geniunely curious because I really don't understand it.

    Purely from an "amount of effort to make it work" point of view I just plain don't get it. A committed relationship with just 2 people takes plenty of effort - I can't imagine how much more complicated things would be with another person in the mix.

    jclast on
    steam_sig.png
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Or maybe my standards for sex are just stupidly high, I don't know.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • PsycohedPsycohed On a Fool's ErrandRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    That said, one of the big reasons I'm poly, and I know that this is shared by a lot of the people I've dated, is because we want to experience stability and excitement simultaneously.

    For me, even though I'm in a poly relationship, it hasn't really been about actively seeking new people while I'm already in a relationship. There's just me, and her, and this other man in her life that I consider closer than a brother. So the three of us live together. (Which, getting back to the OP, is indeed a great boon to our financial situation.)

    Now, I'm not closed to the idea of meeting someone else and becoming intimate with that person. And if someone came into our lives that was just as important to us as we are to one another, things might change. I just don't see it happening because we don't go looking for "more," as it were, and I can't imagine using* one person as a "home base" while I go play the field.

    It's been great for us. But I wouldn't even begin to presume it'd work for other people. The 1:1 ratio is just too ingrained in most people, and it works for 'em.

    *Not "using," in the sense that the person is being exploited, of course. I just can't think of a better way to phrase that.

    Psycohed on
    brig_banner.png
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Polyamory isn't necessarily a 1:n ratio, which seems to be how you're perceiving this. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) It can be m:n where everyone is enjoying/benefiting from the additional partner(s) in the relationship.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Polyamory isn't necessarily a 1:n ratio, which seems to be how you're perceiving this. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) It can be m:n where everyone is enjoying/benefiting from the additional partner(s) in the relationship.

    That's true. I guess I just feel like even if you're a relentless hedonist it's more worth it to devote your time to one person.

    It's just not something I'll ever understand. Oh well.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    That's true. I guess I just feel like even if you're a relentless hedonist it's more worth it to devote your time to one person.

    It's just not something I'll ever understand. Oh well.

    Well, there's certain acts of hedonism that require more than two people. :P

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    That's true. I guess I just feel like even if you're a relentless hedonist it's more worth it to devote your time to one person.

    It's just not something I'll ever understand. Oh well.

    Well, there's certain acts of hedonism that require more than two people. :P

    Man, speaking from experience, threesomes are overrated (if you're a dude anyway).

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Or maybe my standards for sex are just stupidly high, I don't know.

    You honestly don't feel that sex can have a different flavor with different people?

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2009
    That's true. I guess I just feel like even if you're a relentless hedonist it's more worth it to devote your time to one person.

    It's just not something I'll ever understand. Oh well.

    Well, there's certain acts of hedonism that require more than two people. :P

    Man, speaking from experience, threesomes are overrated (if you're a dude anyway).

    Bragging rights is about all it amounts to.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    That said, one of the big reasons I'm poly, and I know that this is shared by a lot of the people I've dated, is because we want to experience stability and excitement simultaneously. I know that there is a comfort to being with somebody for years and knowing that they'll be there for you tomorrow rain or shine; knowing that this person knows you well and has seen you at your best and worst and loves you anyway. But it's not realistic to expect that said person would give you that butterflies in the stomach feeling that you get from meeting somebody new. So you get to go out, have your fun with the new partner, get a dose of excitement, and then come home and cuddle up with a movie with your primary. (In truth, that's an oversimplification, as any relationship new or old is going to have a mix of stability and excitement, but I think it's pretty obvious that the particular mix is going to be dependent upon the age of the relationship in question.)

    This is probably the one thing I really don't get about poly relationships. If I'm already seeing someone I love and care about, who knows what I like sexually, what's my incentive to go and add someone else to the mix? What's my motivation for having sex with both my girlfriend and another person when I could just have more sex with my girlfriend? Yeah you get to add someone else to your list of conquests and probably a little ego boost knowing someone else wants to fuck you but it just doesn't seem horribly worth it to me.

    I'm not judging you or anything, I'm actually geniunely curious because I really don't understand it.

    I can see the appeal. The magical puppy-dog feeling fades after the beginning of a relationship, and it never comes back. And that feeling is pretty fantastic. Even though I love my wife to death and consider our relationship to be fantastic in every way, it's a wholly different sort of sensation. If there were a way to have what we have, while also having that magical puppy-dog feeling, I'd be all over it.

    Except I know that it would jeopardize everything we have, and it's not worth it by any stretch of the imagination. I couldn't handle a poly relationship, and I doubt she could either. Even though a kobe steak is fucking fantastic, sometimes it would be nice to have a burger. Except in this case the kobe steak would get pissed and give me terrible indigestion and then I could never have kobe steak again and I would be sad, and all because I couldn't keep my dick out of the ground beef.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    That's true. I guess I just feel like even if you're a relentless hedonist it's more worth it to devote your time to one person.

    It's just not something I'll ever understand. Oh well.

    Well, there's certain acts of hedonism that require more than two people. :P

    Man, speaking from experience, threesomes are overrated (if you're a dude anyway).

    Bragging rights is about all it amounts to.

    Perhaps "You're doing it wrong"?

    also yes, Kate's dessert analogy is awesome
    edit- and so is Jeffe's meat analogy above which I will be taking out of context in just a moment here.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Or maybe my standards for sex are just stupidly high, I don't know.

    You honestly don't feel that sex can have a different flavor with different people?

    It can. It can also have different flavors with one person. People are pretty versatile.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    jclast wrote: »
    Purely from an "amount of effort to make it work" point of view I just plain don't get it. A committed relationship with just 2 people takes plenty of effort - I can't imagine how much more complicated things would be with another person in the mix.

    I just don't feel like it always takes that much more effort.

    PIH: Fair enough.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    Because "More" =/= "Different"?

    Yeah, but I've had casual sex with a lot of different people that hasn't been particularly unique or great, and I've had a lot of sex in commited relationships that has been extremely varied or fun.

    Maybe I'm just good at convincing people to try new things, but I feel like if you need the extra person that's a sign something's incompatable between you and your significant other.

    Or maybe my standards for sex are just stupidly high, I don't know.

    You honestly don't feel that sex can have a different flavor with different people?

    It can. It can also have different flavors with one person. People are pretty versatile.

    Vis-a-vis "sticking your dick in tofu" maybe? :P

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    jclast wrote: »
    Purely from an "amount of effort to make it work" point of view I just plain don't get it. A committed relationship with just 2 people takes plenty of effort - I can't imagine how much more complicated things would be with another person in the mix.

    I just don't feel like it always takes that much more effort.

    PIH: Fair enough.

    Assuming the other party is bringing effort of their own it doesn't, in my experience.

    And if they're not bringing effort of their own to make things work, you're probably pushing them into it and should cut that shit out for everyone's benefit.

    PeregrineFalcon on
    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I'll be honest, there was a while when I was dating a girl who was totally freaked out by the idea of polyamory that talking about it was total drama every time. That wasn't worth the effort.

    Then again, it turned out that the whole relationship wasn't worth the effort, either.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2009
    But that just seems so juvenile to me. And I really don't mean to be a dick to anyone in this thread about it. It's the same thing about the following...
    So if friction occurs, and if a choice has to be made, I would more than likely hold on the stable partner, the one who I'm comfortable and cozy with who's stuck with me for years. But, yeah, things do change, people do change, and such a situation would require an assessment of what I'm getting out of each relationship. Sometimes even an old relationship has to end, and while I wouldn't want anybody to throw away a good relationship over a momentary spat, neither do I value stability simply for stability's sake.

    I grew out of relationship drama a long time ago. I've been in enough short term relationships to get that whole puppy love thing and it's not something I crave. Much much more interested in stability and having one single person I can turn to and knows everything about me. Someone that is a rock in my life.

    I feel like if I were to keep fleeting about, I wouldn't have that support. The same thing goes for my SO. If she one day decided that I wasn't enough, that feeling of support would be gone and I would not be able to continue the relationship.

    Funny enough. I can pin point exactly where I started to change my mind. My second serious relationship ended in disaster. I slept around for the next two years, got involved in a bunch of crap I shouldn't have, and then for the next two years I didn't have sex one single time. I couldn't find anyone to be my "rock" and I simply wasn't happy with how those short relationships ended.

    "Funny" story. I met a married couple about a year ago. A good friend of mine had known them for years and recently started hanging out with them again and introduced me, and my normal crew started hanging out there every other weekend or so. Guy's wife lets him mess around with the cute punk girl in the crowd. She has a charm about her. Very nice. Good in bed. He starts talking about running away with her, and she's all about it. Wife finds out, feels betrayed, and a shit storm opens up.

    I'm completely unaware. Friends are running damage control. Guy gets really upset about his wife threatening to leave him. Starts calling punk girl, trying to track her down, and in a paranoid fit comes to my house, pulls a gun on me, and practically breaks down in front of me. All cause he knew I was with her at one point in time in the past.

    I see stuff like this far too often, so it has, reasonably, affected my opinion on the matter.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    jclast wrote: »
    Purely from an "amount of effort to make it work" point of view I just plain don't get it. A committed relationship with just 2 people takes plenty of effort - I can't imagine how much more complicated things would be with another person in the mix.

    I just don't feel like it always takes that much more effort.

    PIH: Fair enough.
    I don't know. It's completely possible that I'm wrong here, but it seems like 2 wives would be roughly double the effort. I guess I'd be (theoretically) okay with her getting a second husband because that seems like it would be less effort for me.

    I think maybe this doubling of effort idea stems from gender roles that mean a bit less in a poly relationship though.

    jclast on
    steam_sig.png
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    I see stuff like this far too often, so it has, reasonably, affected my opinion on the matter.

    My biological father was an abusive alcoholic drug dealer who tried to murder my mom on a couple occasions.

    My first step-dad was merely abusive and a philanderer.

    My second step-dad was a very nice guy and also gay.

    By your reasoning, I should have a pretty dim view on relationships in general.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    I see stuff like this far too often, so it has, reasonably, affected my opinion on the matter.

    My biological father was an abusive alcoholic drug dealer who tried to murder my mom on a couple occasions.

    My first step-dad was merely abusive and a philanderer.

    My second step-dad was a very nice guy and also gay.

    By your reasoning, I should have a pretty dim view on relationships in general.

    I wouldn't hold it against you if it did.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    I see stuff like this far too often, so it has, reasonably, affected my opinion on the matter.

    My biological father was an abusive alcoholic drug dealer who tried to murder my mom on a couple occasions.

    My first step-dad was merely abusive and a philanderer.

    My second step-dad was a very nice guy and also gay.

    By your reasoning, I should have a pretty dim view on relationships in general.

    I wouldn't hold it against you if it did.

    No, and perhaps it would be justifiable. But it would make me a pretty crappy judge of relationships. Clearly poly can work sometimes, as evidenced by Feral. I think everyone agrees that it can't work for everyone, even for most.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • CognisseurCognisseur Registered User
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    I see stuff like this far too often, so it has, reasonably, affected my opinion on the matter.

    My biological father was an abusive alcoholic drug dealer who tried to murder my mom on a couple occasions.

    My first step-dad was merely abusive and a philanderer.

    My second step-dad was a very nice guy and also gay.

    By your reasoning, I should have a pretty dim view on relationships in general.

    I wouldn't hold it against you if it did.

    No, and perhaps it would be justifiable. But it would make me a pretty crappy judge of relationships. Clearly poly can work sometimes, as evidenced by Feral. I think everyone agrees that it can't work for everyone, even for most.

    Thank you.
    This summarizes the whole damn thread.
    A lot of people going "eh, that's weird" and "eh, I couldn't do it", but at the end of the day some people just think and feel differently from others, and if it works for them we shouldn't judge negatively just because we can't or don't want to pull it off.

    Cognisseur on
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I'm curious as to the opinions of others?

    I'm curious how you come to the idea of polygamy before coming to the conclusion that two couples should move in together as a household, or that adult children should move back with their parents.



    There are plenty of solutions that already exist on a small scale that could occur without drastic change to our societal structure.

    Evander on
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Cognisseur wrote: »
    This summarizes the whole damn thread.
    A lot of people going "eh, that's weird" and "eh, I couldn't do it", but at the end of the day some people just think and feel differently from others, and if it works for them we shouldn't judge negatively just because we can't or don't want to pull it off.
    I hope what I wrote earlier didn't come across as "polys are icky." Because that's not what I think. I think I couldn't do it because I have a hard enough time making my two-person relationship work. Hell, I have a high school friend who now has two husbands and it sounds like the three of them get on better than my wife and I a fair bit of the time.

    jclast on
    steam_sig.png
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    I think poly is icky in much the same way I think coding software in assembly is icky. It's a whole lot of work just to squeeze a little more performance out of your peripheral, and if you fuck it up you leave yourself open to viruses.

    But hey, some people dig that sort of thing.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I think poly is icky in much the same way I think coding software in assembly is icky. It's a whole lot of work just to squeeze a little more performance out of your peripheral, and if you fuck it up you leave yourself open to viruses.

    :lol:

    <3

    ...temptation to sig this rising...

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited June 2009
    I should just write a book on relationships. The whole thing would consist of unwieldy metaphors spinning wildly out of control.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I would buy one and put it on my coffee table.

    jclast on
    steam_sig.png
  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I should just write a book on relationships. The whole thing would consist of unwieldy metaphors spinning wildly out of control.

    Polyamorous relationships are a lot like the Death Blossom in The Last Starfighter, if you think about it.

    Doc on
Sign In or Register to comment.