3 ms·
I thought this would be the default case too, but it's surprisingly nuanced. One red flag is anyone wanting to open a monogamous relationship that isn't more-o
by sillysaurusx 3y ago
I thought this would be the default case too, but it's surprisingly nuanced.
One red flag is anyone wanting to open a monogamous relationship that isn't more-or-less rock solid. Polyamory isn't something to try if you're uncertain about your current monogamous partner.
The ideal case is for someone to go into the dating pool as openly polyamorous. But this will take a couple more generations, I think. Most people don't have the opportunity, because the idea that we need to choose a single partner has been hammered into us from the moment we were born. So I'm sympathetic to people who want to put in the work of exploring whether polyamory is possible within the bounds of an existing relationship.
The most important thing is communication. There will be misunderstandings, but at no point should someone feel like something is being hidden from the other. That's different than respecting each person's individual relationships – one is underhanded, the other is a social contract.
This isn't directly related to your point, but https://www.unicorns-r-us.com/ https://www.unicorns-r-us.com/ was an interesting read.
- jncfhnb 3y agoIt seems inevitable though. You can’t simultaneously be invested in a relationship and indifferent to its nature. This article points out a ton of issues and largely suggests just awkwardly independently dating other people as safer. Like “if you agree that everyone’s free then everyone’s free”. But… no that sounds dumb to me. I would not bet on such myriad bonds holding up in times of difficulty. Surely it can happen. But I just don’t buy it as a sensible strategy
- paulddraper 3y agoIt's like that scene from Arrested Development. https://youtu.be/7NnW7AA9STg?si=r32PdL56dR7NVQL4&t=39 https://youtu.be/7NnW7AA9STg?si=r32PdL56dR7NVQL4&t=39
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]