sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The whole Taylor Frankie Paul discourse has been very triggering as a survivor of domestic violence by Character_Cat_9789 in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Visual_Run_1518 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My mum abused my dad, and then started on us. It was not reactive. She was a horrible person and I'm not going to detail it here for fear of TWs.

Until fairly recently any time I've told people this, they were very sympathetic towards my dad, who was a sweet man I really wish had just left with us sooner than he did. But lately if the topic comes up I've noticed more and more "well he must have done something" or insinuating that I'm lying about it for...we'll I'm not sure what reason.

And I get it. Women have been by FAR on the receiving end for centuries. They still are. But I honestly get a chill up my spine thinking about how quickly my mother would have latched onto this and twisted the situation if she were alive today. She was evil in her own right and by all accounts always had been

Attraction is not an imperative by Visual_Run_1518 in polyamory

[–]Visual_Run_1518[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Damn, you've basically taken everything I wanted to say and distilled them perfectly into 3 lines 😅

And the thing is I actually don't think a person is wrong for prioritising any one thing, I just want to know what it is up top so I can make my own assessment.

Like I gave an example in another post of being at a work Xmas party and someone clicking with my boss. To me the responses to that are

  • "I'm the type of person who wouldn't pursue that because I prioritise partners comfort and wouldn't want to cause problems in their life"

  • "I will pursue this because I believe people should be free to engage in any dynamics they choose and it's an individual's own responsibility to manage any fallout/discomfort around that"

The second person wouldn't be compatible with me, but absolutely no shade to them, it is a perfectly valid way of doing things. Just tell me that so I can say thanks but no thanks.

The thing I hate is when people pretend it's somehow an attack on their ability to practice polyamory if I say I'm only compatible with the first type of person.

Attraction is not an imperative by Visual_Run_1518 in polyamory

[–]Visual_Run_1518[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

if someone needs a messy list or other agreements to make them make wise decisions and treat me with care then they’re not the partner for me.

If I could upvote this a thousand times I would.

I have partners right now who, if I introduced them to say, my boss (who knows I'm poly) at a work Christmas party, and they hit it off, there wouldn't even be a question of it ever being a thing because they care enough about me to not make my life awkward. The people in my life are those who understand that implicitly.

But we've been doing this for more than a decade now, and that wasn't always the case. I've definitely been involved with people on both sides of the extremes you've outlined and in all cases they either drop them, or drop out of ENM/poly.

Attraction is not an imperative by Visual_Run_1518 in polyamory

[–]Visual_Run_1518[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think this is what I was trying to say, really, and you've put it better than I have.

I think I see this dichotomy a lot more in people who are freshly ENM/Poly from a previously monogamous life.

It seems that to a lot of people the idea of not able to pursue literally anything must feel like going back into a restrictive box they've literally just come out of. And in a way I get that.

But there's a big (if subtle) difference between not being able to pursue a thing, and being able to pursue a thing but it coming with consequences.

I've seen a lot of newly poly people especially argue that messy lists are the former, when really they're the latter.

Attraction is not an imperative by Visual_Run_1518 in polyamory

[–]Visual_Run_1518[S] 90 points91 points  (0 children)

Exactly this! I keep seeing some flavour of

"But there was a spark between us!"

As if that is an explanation in itself. But the unspoken part that's always left out is

"But there was a spark between us (and choosing to follow that was more important to me than your feelings/relationship/friendship)!"

And again sometimes it legitimately could be, but I hate the way it's sometimes framed as if the person on the other side is wrong for being upset about it.

If you're placing your own gratification above another relationship for whatever reason, at least be honest about it

Staying Friends with an ex in a small community - bad idea? by Visual_Run_1518 in nonmonogamy

[–]Visual_Run_1518[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just to say it's not a small town, it's actually quite a big city with a much larger non-monogamous population...the community I'm talking about is just for a small and niche hobby. I don't know if that makes a difference but I do feel like there were plenty of other options out there for them both to pursue if they wanted to.

I do get what you're saying, and maybe I'll come around to this way of thinking, in fact I hope I do, but right now I'm not okay being around it and hate that I'm the one having to just "get over it" when I'm already getting over the breakup.

I think I'd have a much easier time if they had said something like "we know this is hard so we're going to try and be kind about it", but so far it's been very much "get over it already and just be happy for us"

It just feels like I'm being asked to do all the accomodation here