Jump to content

The Polyamorous Solution


closetPonyfan

Recommended Posts

closetPonyfan

A thread for the discussion, and potential implementation of poly-romantic relationships as a proposed solution for couples in a mixed relationship.

After an honest discussion with my asexual wife about boundaries, sexual wants (quantities), and mutual happiness to support the longevity of our marriage, we both independently concluded that opening up the relationship to include a third and/or fourth really made the most since for both our sakes. But we aren't really sure how to go about transitioning the relationship into that, or how to find and meet potential candidates who would fit this niche of our relationship.

So where better than AVEN to meet similarly minded and situated individuals or couples looking for a way to meet everyone's needs in a healthy way. And where a better thread than here to discuss the pros and cons and how to's and who's?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of figure that step 1) is to even find anyone other than my partner to be interested in me. If that ever happens, I'm sure I'll figure the rest out somehow. ~_~

Link to post
Share on other sites
closetPonyfan

My wife am I are both comfy and happy in our marriage as it is. But we do recognize that there is a fairly significant stressor when it comes to sex. Generally we'll have a spurt of 2 or 3 nights in a row, about once a month, and be completely dry after for a while. This statis-quo has led to a sort of sinusoidal mental/emotional roller-coaster where we feel as close as ever for a couple of weeks, and then anxiety about growing apart the rest of the time. The proposed solution of finding someone who can fill in the gap of my emotional need for sex with a committed and loving partner, and her needs for consistent emotional stability (preferably in an asexual, very close friend kind of relationship.) seems like the perfect plan. So we're wondering how we might meet people looking for that kind of Polyamorous relationship. Are there other couples or individuals in here that may be looking for that kind of thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could never do polyamoury. Not that I will ever have a sexual partner again, but if I did, I would much rather give them the kinds of sex I am okay with doing (even though if given the choice I would rather game) than let them fuck someone else. Never gonna happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

In most (if not all) successful polyamorous mixed relationships, polyamory isn't treated as a "solution," but a relationship style both partners genuinely embrace. And other partners aren't just people who fill the gap of your primary relationship, but individuals with their own needs who share a unique connection with you. If you search for poly-related threads on AVEN, you'll see people say over and over again that poly shouldn't be used as a band-aid to fix a relationship. Not saying you're doing that, but some of your words (e.g. "potential candidates", "fit this niche of our relationship", "fill in the gap") rub me the wrong way, and I'm sure many poly people would find them off-putting. Do you and your wife genuinely like the idea of poly? Would you still want to be poly if there wasn't the sexual incompatibility? If you don't know much about poly yet, I suggest do some research first. You can visit poly websites like More Than Two or poly forums, or talk to poly people and hear their stories.


If you do genuinely want to try poly, you can use poly-friendly dating sites like OkCupid, or attend poly meetups if there's one near you. I think the best approach is talking to poly people, getting to know them as individuals, and letting relationships develop naturally, rather than searching for the perfect person to fill the gap in your marriage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I support polyamory, however I'm not one, I would rather date an androgyne instead of dating dating a male and a female simultaneously, like if you want a wife and a husband simultaneously, androgyne persons are very suitable for you, even genderfluid/flux person are.

Relationships doesn't work out if not all persons are deeply involved, the 3+ persons would have to love each other equally, otherwise jealously, which is a natural human feeling we should take into consideration, would ruin the relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In most (if not all) successful polyamorous mixed relationships, polyamory isn't treated as a "solution," but a relationship style both partners genuinely embrace. And other partners aren't just people who fill the gap of your primary relationship, but individuals with their own needs who share a unique connection with you. If you search for poly-related threads on AVEN, you'll see people say over and over again that poly shouldn't be used as a band-aid to fix a relationship.

Yup. Polyamory doesn't mean opening up the relationship because one partner is not (usually sexually) satisfied; it means three people in a close loving relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. Polyamory doesn't mean opening up the relationship because one partner is not (usually sexually) satisfied; it means three people in a close loving relationship.

Not three. More than two. And not neccessarily with everyone in them involved with everyone else in them, either.

Poly just means being 1) nonmonogamous, 2) honest and ethical with everyone involved about it, and 3) not "forbidding emotions" (i.e., there areloving, intimate relationships with the other partners, not just sex).

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, more than two. But although the definition of polyamorous is as you state, Mysticus, what AVENites who've talked (a lot) about polyamory seem to feel is that it means all partners are in a group relationship: all with all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. Polyamory doesn't mean opening up the relationship because one partner is not (usually sexually) satisfied; it means three people in a close loving relationship.

Not three. More than two. And not neccessarily with everyone in them involved with everyone else in them, either.

Poly just means being 1) nonmonogamous, 2) honest and ethical with everyone involved about it, and 3) not "forbidding emotions" (i.e., there areloving, intimate relationships with the other partners, not just sex).

Yeah. Jane could be with Bob, while Bob is with Sandra and Jane doesn't need to even really know Sandra if she doesn't want to, for example. As long as everyone is OK with that. Kittenpuff and a few others didn't get involved with their partners other partners. I think that sounds a lot easier to get to work than finding a third that gets along with the other two romantically, personally.

But, I agree with starry. It needs to be something the couple truly wants, not just a band-aid fix. If you truly are interested in poly as a relationship style, then check out local poly communities (there are dating sites, fetlife has some, meetups, etc) and get to know people. Then relationships develop from there. The key to any successful transition is communication, honesty and openness. It's going to probably take some work as you start to do it. And insecurities and jealousies might pop up. I've read a few stories of transitions and it takes adjustment periods for some couples before they get it all worked out, it is a big change. Don't get discouraged if it takes a little while to get it going. Good luck though, if this is what you want to do. :cake:

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, more than two. But although the definition of polyamorous is as you state, Mysticus, what AVENites who've talked (a lot) about polyamory seem to feel is that it means all partners are in a group relationship: all with all.

No, that's actually rather rare. This would be called a triad (or quad if four, etc.). Polyamorous structures are far more often along a V- (one person has two partners, those two aren't each other's partners) or N- (a couple, either of which has another partner who isn't with anyone else in the structure) type structure.

As #4 of the polyamory fallacies points out: Partnerships aren't transitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
closetPonyfan

Oh my, I certainty wasn't in the right state of mind when I wrote initially. Of course we aren't just looking for a "band-aid fix" or anything like that, but I can definitely see that I misspoke in how I worded it. We've discussed in the past and we agree on certain things that open us up to the idea of polyamory, and it's something we're both excited to try. Specifically, ideas about what Love means, and what it means to be in a relationship with a person, and how that relationship is affected positively or negatively when either one or both persons are also in a relationship with another person, or group of persons. Basically we've embraced the idea of; "be true to yourself, and free to feel your emotions. Follow you're heart, and never repress love." which, is kinda hard to live by while also being monogamous unless you genuinely never feel any kind of attraction towards someone other than your one person. And we both trust each other, and are comfortable with our relationship enough to accept that either one or both of us might also love another person.

In that mentality, we approached this idea of poly with the question; "What would we be looking for in a non-monogamous relationship?" and we think that what would make both of us happiest would be if we could basically extend our marriage to include another (person or persons). Then when we discussed the practicality of finding someone we'd be interested in, and how to go about seeking/building a relationship, we concluded (after much communication) the easiest way would probably be a "V" relationship. Which we would be happy with, though would probably prefer a "Triad". But due to concerns we have about being new to poly, and not really sure ourselves on the dynamic of the "other person(s)" perspective until we're actually in a relationship and seeing it for ourselves, we consider that it would be most easy to balance everyone's happiness all around, if we found another couple to form a "quad" with. And based on our needs, and what we can offer in a relationship (as individuals and as a couple), we decided to try looking for a poly-amorous couple, with an asexual male, and a hetero or bisexual woman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, more than two. But although the definition of polyamorous is as you state, Mysticus, what AVENites who've talked (a lot) about polyamory seem to feel is that it means all partners are in a group relationship: all with all.

No, that's actually rather rare. This would be called a triad (or quad if four, etc.). Polyamorous structures are far more often along a V- (one person has two partners, those two aren't each other's partners) or N- (a couple, either of which has another partner who isn't with anyone else in the structure) type structure.

As #4 of the polyamory fallacies points out: Partnerships aren't transitive.

But as I said, I was basing what I said on AVENites posts. It sounds like you're talking about strict definition/theory, and perhaps your own relationship; I'm talking about multi IRL AVEN exeriences I've read about over 7+ years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But as I said, I was basing what I said on AVENites posts. It sounds like you're talking about strict definition/theory, and perhaps your own relationship; I'm talking about multi IRL AVEN exeriences I've read about over 7+ years.

No, I'm also talking from what I've read on a forum that was explicitly all about polyamory, which I am/was sporadically active on for a good while. Triads/quads aren't "the standard model" of poly, in actual practice. Just trust me on this. There are many different configurations, and if anything, triads/quads are a rather rare variant among them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
closetPonyfan

Triads/quads aren't "the standard model" of poly, in actual practice. Just trust me on this. There are many different configurations, and if anything, triads/quads are a rather rare variant among them.

Yeah, we did research and find that to be the case. And we found actually that we caught a lot of flack for what people thought was "unicorn hunting" but that's really not what we're looking for. I had poor word choice in my OP but really we are looking forward to trying to open up to building a full relationship with another person/persons. That said, neither of us are particularly interested (currently) in looking for anything larger than maybe 4 or 5 people. I know that Triads/Quads aren't the norm, it's just what we believe is what would suit us best, and with her being asexual, and really wanting to have that level of a connection with another asexual (Something I can't offer her in our relationship) we figured AVEN would be a great place to look for people looking for the same thing.

Ultimately we don't really care what the "norms" are, or how other people see the relationship(s) that we form. Because, at the end of the day, all that really matters is that everyone finds what makes them happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
closetPonyfan

Perhaps both of us would be perfectly fine with a v or N or whatever configuration, but right now we're both so excited to try meeting new people in this way, that we anticipate us both wanting to be with the new person/persons. And, as a matter of maintaining the relationship for the long term, we're setting a "rule" for ourselves that we will only pursue someone if our current partner is specifically OK with that person(s). Which, imo increases the likelihood that the only configuration we will find that is agreeable to all parties involved would be a trio or quad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope it works for you. As others have said, my understanding is that polyamory is best embarked on from a position of a very strong relationship, not as a bandaid. I also suspect it's one of those things that is very different in theory than reality, and will need a lot shifting of the tectonic plates of your relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I get where you're coming from at least. Your relationship sounds very similar to my own, and I expect a triad with a sexual woman would work pretty well in theory, because:

1) My girlfriend isn't "hetero"-anything, and might even be more likely to be "homo"-something

2) Meeting my sexual desires would be easier with someone I'm emotionally and mentally intimate with, and having them be emotionally and mentally intimate with my partner would be another added bonus

3) The friendship between my partner and I has grown strong in a way that I'm sure someone else could benefit from this stability as well

It's just.. that's fantasies, pretty much. Fantasies are great, but not to be confused with reality. Real life people need to be approached as individuals, and without any such expectations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notte stellata

I'm glad that you and your wife really like the philosophy of poly, but you're looking for something very very specific. How likely is it to meet an asexual male + sexual female couple who are poly? Even if you meet one, how likely is it that you and the woman like each other AND your wife and the man like each other (not to mention if you want both relationships to develop at the same time)? It's okay to have an ideal, but I'd suggest being open to more possibilities that can make you happy. Maybe you meet a sexual woman (let's call her Alice) and your wife meets an asexual man (let's call him Bob), but Alice and Bob don't even know each other. Maybe Alice and Bob are a couple, but only one of them is interested in you or your wife, or they're not interested in a quad, or you and Alice form a relationship way before Bob and your wife warm up to each other. Maybe Bob isn't asexual, but a sexual guy who is okay with a non-sexual relationship with your wife. There are many ways the reality can deviate from your ideal, but you can still have satisfying poly relationships.

And, as a matter of maintaining the relationship for the long term, we're setting a "rule" for ourselves that we will only pursue someone if our current partner is specifically OK with that person(s). Which, imo increases the likelihood that the only configuration we will find that is agreeable to all parties involved would be a trio or quad.

Not necessarily. Being okay with someone doesn't have to mean having mutual attraction with that person. There's a big difference between a configuration agreeable to all parties and a triad or quad.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
improbability

Perhaps both of us would be perfectly fine with a v or N or whatever configuration, but right now we're both so excited to try meeting new people in this way, that we anticipate us both wanting to be with the new person/persons. And, as a matter of maintaining the relationship for the long term, we're setting a "rule" for ourselves that we will only pursue someone if our current partner is specifically OK with that person(s). Which, imo increases the likelihood that the only configuration we will find that is agreeable to all parties involved would be a trio or quad.

Okay, it's great that you're both excited about opening up the relationship... but just because both of you are excited about finding a new partner doesn't mean that it has to be the same new partner for both of you. And in fact it will likely be much easier to find partners if you don't require the same person to fit both your criteria and your wife's. Especially since some of your criteria might be conflicting--you want a sexual partner while your wife wants to connect with another asexual. And keep in mind, this person would also have to be interested in both of you! You've been thinking about what you want from a nonmonogamous relationship, but your hypothetical third person will also have things they want. Will disagreements between you and your wife leave this third person caught in the middle? And what happens if, down the road, they want to break up with one of you but not the other?

You know how much trouble single people can have finding a partner? You're inherently setting yourself an even harder task by requiring one person to fill all requirements for both of you. (Even more so if you're trying to find a couple to fill all requirements.) And really, isn't the beauty of poly that you don't need a single person to be all things to you?

Really, the quad arrangement you proposed is a partner for you and a partner for your wife. The part where they're also dating each other is incidental. (And anyone you meet in poly circles may well have other partners of their own already, who have nothing to do with you or your wife.)

And "people I would be OK with my partner dating" is going to be a rather larger set than "people I, myself, want to date."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hijacking this thread.

So the consensus between me and my girlfriend has been open, non-romantic relationship until such time that either of us would not be okay with the other taking an interest in someone else. It didn't really matter much because there never was anyone for either of us.

But now I'm getting to know this really awesome girl, and my girlfriend is getting to witness that, and for the first time she said she was "irritated" by that (by me getting along so well with that other girl, specifically).

I don't know what that means. She said she doesn't "love" me, and that her feelings are more "inbetween" than romantic. But now she seems irritated about me giving attention to another woman? She also agreed it was irrational. But this makes me wonder whether she doesn't feel more for me than she thought.

Not sure what to make of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

People can get jealous whenever attention that was specifically focused on them gets given to someone else. Even friends can feel that when a friend makes a new friend. Perhaps she's just getting irritated because, up until now, all that energy of yours was 100% hers and now it's shared? Does she feel like this is going to cause problems between you two?

Link to post
Share on other sites

People can get jealous whenever attention that was specifically focused on them gets given to someone else. Even friends can feel that when a friend makes a new friend.

Yes, that makes sense. I only find that a bit worrying, because she rarely gives me that kind of attention, so finding that she expects me to give that to her while she doesn't give it to me, I don't like it. Though, I guess this could set something positive into motion, as she seems to be re-evaluating the balance in our relationship.

It might be that she's worried about losing me, because she probably doesn't fully understand in what way I love her. She might think, that because my romantic and sexual feelings for her have been so strong, if that were to become less significant she wouldn't be as important to me anymore. Which isn't true, but I guess she can't know that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it might not be she expects you to give it to her so much, as she's used to it... so on an emotional level, it probably feels pretty weird now seeing you give that to someone else. Kinda like you get so used to something, you might not realize how important it is to you until you feel it threatened in some way. Hopefully she can figure it out so that you three can be OK. :)

And yes, insecurity could be playing a role.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Autumn Season

Or she doesn't like anyone talking about romance. For example if she is romance-repulsed.

Or you don't act very much like your usual self while talking about the other girl. And for some people different = bad. At least for a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or she doesn't like anyone talking about romance. For example if she is romance-repulsed.

There isn't any romance going on.. I mean, she wouldn't know that, because she doesn't actually know anything about romance. But the thing with me and that other girl is not romantic, and it probably will stay that way. My partner was upset at us getting along, not at anything romantic happening.

Or you don't act very much like your usual self while talking about the other girl. And for some people different = bad. At least for a while.

Yeah, I believe it's something like that. She said so herself, she felt irritated because she's not used to this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hijacking this thread.

So the consensus between me and my girlfriend has been open, non-romantic relationship until such time that either of us would not be okay with the other taking an interest in someone else. It didn't really matter much because there never was anyone for either of us.

But now I'm getting to know this really awesome girl, and my girlfriend is getting to witness that, and for the first time she said she was "irritated" by that (by me getting along so well with that other girl, specifically).

I don't know what that means. She said she doesn't "love" me, and that her feelings are more "inbetween" than romantic. But now she seems irritated about me giving attention to another woman? She also agreed it was irrational. But this makes me wonder whether she doesn't feel more for me than she thought.

Not sure what to make of this?

Here's what I see. You want an open, non-romantic relationship, but have little control over who falls in love in whom, and you have little experience with what to do about falling in love when it happens. This rule to not fall in love and have only non-romantic relationships will inevitably be broken by someone. One can't legislate whether to fall in love or not.

You also agreed that any new relationships can continue only "until such time that either of us would not be okay with the other taking an interest in someone else". That rule puts on you the responsibility to micro-manage the emotional state of your first girlfriend as if she wasn't an adult who can own her own shit and process her own emotional states on her own. You are expected to end any new relationships on the first day you fail to micro-manage the emotional state of your first girlfriend. I want to add to that my background knowledge that you've written many times that your first girlfriend suffers from OCD, which means she is really into worrying and over-thinking things.

I also note that your preliminary agreement with your first girlfriend contains not even a single word about the needs and opinions of any third party that may come into the picture. Right now anyone interested in non-romantically dating you must acknowledge 2 non-negotiable rules: (a) you must not fall in love with TarFeather, and (b) you should expect that TarFeather's girlfriend will ask him to end this new relationship sooner rather than later. This is not an inviting setup.

I don't see a winning strategy in this game.

You are in a situation in which any new relationship is bound to end in a heartbreak due to the limitations you've placed on it to sabotage yourself. This will feed your social anxiety and confirm the distorted thinking patterns at the core of the social anxiety. Your social anxiety will continue to tell you that you must stay with your first girlfriend and act as an enabler for her OCD or else be completely alone and desperate.

The absolute minimum you can do to salvage this attempt at a non-monogamous relationship is to:

  • get any pre-existing mental conditions treated and under control
  • grab a copy of More Than Two, read it cover to cover, answer all the questions at the end of the chapters
  • ask your girlfriend to do the same
  • grab and read all the relevant books in the "Resources" section of the More Than Two book.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

To play devil's advocate for a moment...

Tar, your girlfriend isn't your girlfriend in any commonly accepted usage of the term. Effectively, you're not in a relationship with her. She's a friend who happens to be female, and you'd like it to be more, but she can't go there. From your other posts, you've also chosen to accept her behaving in a way that I'd find hard going even from a friend. Now after contorting your own needs for months to try to accommodate her, you're striking up a friendship with another woman, entirely innocently, and nothing wrong with that, and your 'girlfriend' doesn't like it. But you haven't liked what she's been doing either (or you wouldn't be here). You've been bending over backwards to support her, but she's not able or willing to even let you have another female friend, whatever the reason.

I think there'll come a point where you have to choose between the strained, stressful semi-relationship (semi not just because of the sex issue, but how her OCD and anxiety makes her behave) with your 'girlfriend', or a relationship not mostly defined by tension with someone you haven't yet met. At that point, it might well be that choosing to turn your relationship with your 'girlfriend' into a friendship will seem like the clear and obvious thing to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer: I'm really not at a point in my life where I'd agree to have a monogamous relationship with anyone. I used to think, maybe I have to, because 1) not much disadvantage for someone like me whose average amount of partners is like 0.01 at any given time 2) I have to "compromise" because that is so unusual. But, now that I've found C., I'm not willing to give up the kissing and cuddling with her, for a monogamous relationship that I'm not even really interested in to begin with. If I ever find a "good" partner, they'd be poly anyway.

@tkadlubo: I meant that my relationship is non-romantic AND open. Two separate concepts. We don't have any agreements regarding how we feel for others, that'd be stupid. From my side, if she falls in love with someone else, that's great because I want her to experience good things. And from her side, she doesn't really care how I feel for others, it's just unusual for her not to be the total and only focus of my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

That reads like you're only with C till you find someone 'better'...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...