Non-Monogamy

[Xray the Enforcer]

Happy to, although it'll have to wait until next week. Still trapped in Hell Week at work, and I just don't have the emotional or mental energy to write something even vaguely intelligible or nuanced. :)

[Yagathai]

I don't mean to hog the floor, but I've been Dom for 6+ yrs now. If you have general questions, I can offer my experience and help. If it is specific and personal, try my PM.

ETA

X-ray - if you can share a couple thoughts from your reading of those books I think that can be helpful to some of the people reading this, like me. :-)

Don't be silly, Terra. You can't be a top. You're an Asian male, and therefore a submissive flower!

[Lily Valley]

Terra, thanks. I messaged you. It's easy to get lost out here.

In a totally unrelated note (I swear), did you know that there is such a thing as butler school?

I now feel like I have wasted most of my life because I didn't have this to think about.

[TerraPrime]

Don't be silly, Terra. You can't be a top. You're an Asian male, and therefore a submissive flower!

It's almost like you've read 20% of my online interactions in this area! How did you do that?!

[Otho Bracken]

I'm the M in a FMF exclusive relationship. We've been together 4 years now. It takes communication communication communication to make this work. On the plus side, my eye never wanders because I am eternally satisfied :drunk:

[Frisco]

Monogamy's being codified and reinforced by society at large, the rules don't have to be spelled out so much by the individuals involved. We know that monogamy will sometimes mean suppressing/ not acting on some attractions outside of the relationship.

As for non-monogamy, I could (hypothetically) really only accept one of two extremes, either sex-only side arrangements (maybe with a maximum number of iterations to eliminate the possibility of long-term attachment) or a fully commited polyamorous triad (MFF or MMF) with cohabitation. Don't think I could deal with the emotional flux of true side relationships that could vary in levels of attachment; I'm too jealous (or emotionally immature, if you prefer).

Don't roam GC much so am late to the thread, but this is kind of how I feel as well. When SO and I have talked poly logistics, I can't think of anything but free-for-all or LTR w/cohabitation. I'm very all-or-nothing, so I can't imagine having a secondary relationship with someone where I only spend time with them occasionally. If I want someone around at all, I want them around a LOT.

[Yagathai]

It's almost like you've read 20% of my online interactions in this area! How did you do that?!

It's almost as if you're not the only Asian dude on Earth with a fetlife profile!

[TerraPrime]

It's almost as if you're not the only Asian dude on Earth with a fetlife profile!

:lol:

[karaddin]

Don't roam GC much so am late to the thread, but this is kind of how I feel as well. When SO and I have talked poly logistics, I can't think of anything but free-for-all or LTR w/cohabitation. I'm very all-or-nothing, so I can't imagine having a secondary relationship with someone where I only spend time with them occasionally. If I want someone around at all, I want them around a LOT.

I dunno, on some level I feel like if you are going to have exactly the same kind of relationship, fulfilling the same needs etc are you getting much out of being poly? If you've already got one partner who is fulfilling your "all fulfilling" needs (not having a go at you, that's how I am with my partner), would you maybe find you could have a different type of relationship with someone else?

[Frisco]

I dunno, on some level I feel like if you are going to have exactly the same kind of relationship, fulfilling the same needs etc are you getting much out of being poly? If you've already got one partner who is fulfilling your "all fulfilling" needs (not having a go at you, that's how I am with my partner), would you maybe find you could have a different type of relationship with someone else?

Relationships for me aren't primarily about filling a need or getting something out of it other than having a certain connection with another human being.

I just don't think I'd enjoy, say, a side relationship where I had a date night with a person once a week. I don't even enjoy that type of monogamous dating--there's no type of person I want to be with only *sometimes*. Probably more to do with my personality than something like that not being fun, though. If I found someone I love, I'd want to share that relationship with my current partner.

I guess there are probably circumstances where I'd want something in-between "one-off" or "very infrequent" and "long-term cohabitation", but it's not something I yearn for.

[Xray the Enforcer]

Finally was able to finish both Ethical Slut and More Than Two.

Overall, both books are good, but they fill very different niches (I think Karaddin mentioned this first). The Ethical Slut focuses on the action of the individual, and is primarily about self-reflection and empowerment. More Than Two is all about traditional polyamory. It goes on and on and fucking on about committed non-binary long-term relationships. It's also a bit dismissive of people who have no interest in traditional polyamory and those who are of a more individualist bent. Everything is treated as Very Serious Relationship Stuff. Which is totally awesome if that's what one is looking for. But despite my current history of being in a long-term committed relationship, I have some intense antipathy towards the idea that people are incomplete without long-term committed relationships in their lives. I always have. This is how I have structured my entire post-pubescent life. So, while More Than Two has some very good advice in general -- and it really does have some good advice about negotiation and setting boundaries without relying on rules and controlling behavior -- those of you who are of a more independent bent may bristle at the tone of the book.

It's been so long since I've read the first edition of the Ethical Slut, that I cannot compare the two different editions. But I really like what I found in the second edition. It is much more sex-for-sex's-sake-positive and enthusiastic than MTT and, let's face it, there's no point in going the non-monogamous route if it ain't fun, because it's a lot of work no matter what. I actually thought that the section on opening up a monogamous relationship was more engaging than in MTT, if only because the authors address each of the three kinds of person in that scenario and do not talk down to any of them. For me, I thought that the authors' word choices were more meaningful to me as well -- they talk a fair bit about the guilt that one can feel if one is the person to ask for/initiate the discussion of opening up a monogamous relationship. Those paragraphs were tough to read and intensely liberating. It also took a more realistic (and compassionate) view of dealing with partners who have cheated.

Both books were very good at debunking the idea that people choose non-monogamy because they're bored in their relationships or missing something (both books make an exception for kinks, which is a case where non-monogamy can address a need not met in a primary relationship). And I have to say that this rings true for me. I can be totally happy with a primary relationship and still not want to be monogamous. I don't know how to articulate this in any other way than to say that sometimes, when I like a friend, I just kinda want to express that in more than just words and platonic affection. It's the way I'm wired. Oddly enough, it took until I read those damned books to articulate that to myself in plain language, rather than as something that just seemed to happen (well, it happened before I got into my current relationship anyway). Forty-plus years on the planet, and in some ways I am still a fucking moron. :lol:

So, yeah, I've spent a lot of time over the past week thinking about my motivations and past actions. The books definitely helped me work out (and also reinforce) my frustration with the whole "gotta have a relationship to be happy" narrative, because while I am totally stoked with my current relationship, I don't actually NEED it to have self-worth. Looking at TerraPrime's descriptions of the difference between romantic, emotional, and sexual intimacy, I am not much of a romantic. Never have been. As such, traditional polyamory (multiple parallel/entwined LTRs) is probably not for me. That's also a very good thing to learn about oneself. So, I thank Karaddin again for bringing up the existence of More Than Two. I think it'll be a great resource for a number of people in this thread. Both books will, in fact.

ETA: One thing I forgot to mention is that More Than Two is the far superior book when it comes to evaluating and implementing communication strategies. They cover a lot more ground, and I feel like they also include many different kinds of communication. tES only focuses on two or three strategies only, and they're really not my style.

[TerraPrime]

I don't know how to articulate this in any other way than to say that sometimes, when I like a friend, I just kinda want to express that in more than just words and platonic affection. It's the way I'm wired.

If I were to culturally appropriate a Native American custom and head for a vision quest, I am fairly certain that mine will be a bonobo monkey.

You are not alone, oh most violent of kungfu shrimps.

[Lily Valley]

Bumping this thread because of current dating situation.

In short I just don't date lesbians because they stereotypically get super clingy immediately. Please tell me they don't all do that. I'll trot out my shortlist that do. It's every single solitary one that I have dated. Yes, that says something about me. I realize that.

I need to have a chat with this one. I really like her, she seems to like me. After a couple dates I think she's being a bit much especially since she knows NOTHING about me. I need to have the non-mono chat sooner rather than later. She's making plans to come meet my folks. FFS.

Help.

TP, my beloved friend is never ever going to leave Florida and I'm never going to move there. :( Else I wouldn't be dating.

[TerraPrime]

Lily:

Well, with ties to life, it is not surprising that a relocation is out of the question. Still sucks, though.

And yes, the stereotypical lesbian thing is stereotypical. Give your current date a chance. Set clear boundaries, articulate your expectation on how the relationship will progress, then listen to her side of the story, and then work something out. Worst thing you can do is to be completely reactive and only bring things up when her actions press you into it, imo. And yes, non-monogamous arrangements need to be brought up early on if you intend to be serious about her, and I'd also suggest your bisexual orientation's impact on that, as well, should be discussed.

Do you know if in her dating history she's had non-monogamous arrangements? I hope she has not had a bad experience with open relationships before, because if she has, it'll make your pitch that much more difficult.

Best of luck.

[Frisco]

Bumping this thread because of current dating situation.

In short I just don't date lesbians because they stereotypically get super clingy immediately. Please tell me they don't all do that. I'll trot out my shortlist that do. It's every single solitary one that I have dated. Yes, that says something about me. I realize that.

I need to have a chat with this one. I really like her, she seems to like me. After a couple dates I think she's being a bit much especially since she knows NOTHING about me. I need to have the non-mono chat sooner rather than later. She's making plans to come meet my folks. FFS.

Help.

TP, my beloved friend is never ever going to leave Florida and I'm never going to move there. :( Else I wouldn't be dating.

Stop being cling-worthy and people will stop clinging to you.

I'm not sure if I'm more clinger or clingee. I kinda feel like I'm an even split.

[Lily Valley]

TP,

I'm going to try that. She does that "yah, yah, yah" thing that New Yorkers do when they are on the phone which makes me feel like she is absolutely NOT listening to me. I know it's reactive from her job, but I'm not a gal that can be put in a lady-box. I am going to try to find a better time to talk to her about this shit. It's kind of important. What people have to say about what they want cannot be ignored without peril.

I'm not sure if I'm more clinger or clingee. I kinda feel like I'm an even split.

You're an ass, my friend, and you attract clingons. Not your fault at all. It's Van der Waals interaction and nobody can explain it.

[Xray the Enforcer]

It's Van der Waals interaction and nobody can explain it.

You need to hang out with more chemists. :P

(in all seriousness, I agree with TP. Shocking, I know.)

[IheartIheartTesla]

I always thought dipole-dipole attractions were a metaphor for same sex relationships [van der Waals joke]

I'll let myself out now. Good luck to everyone in their dating endeavors.