Have you had, or do you have an ideal relationship configuration?

When the cohabi-tater and I got together, we talked about ideal scenarios. Both of us agreed that living in a large house with enough land for gardens and an orchard with other poly people (possibly people we're actually involved with) would be ideal.

Than, reality set-in. I met more polyamorous/avowed non-monogamous people. What I found is that people are people, and that poly people don't necessarily have the market cornered on ethical behaviour.

So, it's just the two of us living in a small house on enough land for gardens and an orchard, with the cats. I think we'd comfortably have room in the house for one other person, although we haven't talked about it lately. Neither of us is looking for the proverbial HBB.

What about you?

Views: 526

Replies to This Discussion

One challenge is mathematical, familiar to communications theorists: As the number of people involved in any network grows, the total number of pairwise connections abundantly exponentiates -- people are involved with others in ways besides fucking.

I'm an extreme introvert, and quickly become saturated with simple maintenance loads. I have to shape my relationships to make them all as simple as I can, and autonomous enough not to complicate my other simplicities. For me, there probably isn't even a template that could work; individuals are different enough that it actually pays for me to "reinvent the wheel" for each relationship. A custom fit spares me some of the ongoing maintenance effort.

The proverbial HBB isn't even a template, but more of a cookie-cutter. To me, an "ideal" configuration resembles the legendary bed of Procrustes: Occupants who are naturally short are painfully stretched, and those who are tall get chopped off -- all to fit the prescribed bed.

Of course, I sleep on the floor sometimes.

Also, in the back yard I have a small collection of rusty, half-completed wheels left by people who got tired of waiting.
The proverbial HBB isn't even a template, but more of a cookie-cutter. To me, an "ideal" configuration resembles the legendary bed of Procrustes: Occupants who are naturally short are painfully stretched, and those who are tall get chopped off -- all to fit the prescribed bed.

Heh. Well put.
Our ideal situation would be more in the form of an intentional community of poly and poly-accepting people rather than a big house full of poly people. I'd just like to live in a nice neighborhood of open minded people with a generous portion of poly people in their number. Then, what happens, happens.
That sounds good to me!
My wife and I don't have a pure poly relationship but we are close. We have been married for almost 10 years and have been "open" for a year now. At first we had many rules and other restrictions. But we have very open communication and slowly the rules are talked about and bent or dropped. We are both very empathetic people and care about others. So what we started out as opening our sexual lives is slowly becoming more. Where it will lead is anybody's guess, but we love each other and talk about everything so it can only be good.
Do you mean that you and your wife mostly have other relationships independently? I think that also is poly. I had originally thought that was more common than the group relationship, but lately it seems everyone is looking for a group thing.
I like being in a couple and having other relationships independently. Of course if there was someone who liked both of us or who we both liked, that would be groovy. I have nothing against triads or even more relationships, but with more people involved, it is harder for everyone to really be in love with everyone else. It seems like with people seeking them so heavily, the triads I've seen seemed kind of forced. One person I've known also used being in a triad as a cliquey thing and a way to have power over other people ("Want to date my boyfriend? First I get to interrogate you").

I've also read that in group relationships, people's issues emerge more quickly, and the theory is you're supposed to work on them as a group. I haven't seen the second part work too well in real life. Groups of people can be judgmental and group sessions can just lead to resentment. My issues are my issues, some of them get better over time but some will never change, so leave my issues alone and let me deal with them! To me, living in a house full of relationships is more public than I would like--I need to have my own space.
I agree about the increased difficulties when larger numbers of people are involved, in nearly any capacity. The pairwise communications channels alone, without regard to the degrees of intimacy they are supposed to convey, vastly increase in number compared with the human capacities.

Group Intercommunication Formula: n(n - 1) / 2

2 people need 1 pairwise channel to communicate
3 people need 3 pairwise channels
4 people need 6
5 people need 10
6 people need 15
7 people need 21
8 people need 28
9 people need 36
10 people need 45

In any event, I require a great deal of autonomy (and it's easier for me if my partners expect that for themselves, too). I understand measures to ensure safer sex, but disfavor agreements which seem designed simply to assert power over otherloves. Recently, I saw a purported "safer sex" agreement that called for blood tests before engaging in any "breast fondling." I suppose if it were that important to me, I should clearly define what breast fondling is (just in case my pectoral muscles come back).
What was this argument about breast contact? Should we also kiss with dental dams?

I've dealt with people who are OCD about "safer sex". All my partners had been tested but if someone is not doing things with other people I'm not going to demand that they get tested every year, esp when not everyone has health insurance. So I am not allowed to do more than gloved hand contact with the guy who I am otherwise in love with. Well, we still are in love but are a lot less physical.

The people who made this rule eat unhealthy food, smoke cigarettes, and would consider asphyxiation play. I mean if you're going to be OCD, at least be across the board about it--lung cancer is at lot worse than herpes, and there are lots more risky things--like driving on the highway--that people do every day.
My wife and I have talked about how cool it would be to have another guy in a relationship with us. Honestly though I don't see that it would ever happen. Most people don't like to share and I would think even more find a triad relationship weird. It would be very hard finding someone that is ok with this type setup and that has chemistry with both me and my wife.
Hope springs eternal. Have you tried placing an ad on any of the polyamory social networking sites?

I can't imagine having another persona equally involved with my partner and I. Strangely, our tastes are very different. I think I am an anomaly.

With so many couples only interested in adding a woman, I think there is a surplus of males who would like to get into poly but have a harder time than women...

...only problem is guys are not as flexible about their sexual orientation, but there are lots of bi guys in poly. I think there is more acceptance of male bisexuality in poly. Some guys I know are pretty flexible about their sexuality too.




Update Your Membership :



Nexus on Social Media:

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service