![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Irony: a woman who helps adopted kids find their bio-families ranting about the "loose morals" of people who fall in love with more than one person, how it's impossible to love >1 because if you love #2 then you never loved #1 to begin with.
She apparently completely missed the part where us adopted kids love two moms and two dads. Which came first or second for me? Was it my adopted parents who came second, so I never really loved my bio-parents? Or was it my bio-mom since I didn't actually meet her until I was 30, so I never loved my adopted mom who raised me & cared for me & is responsible for the person I am now?
But it's DIFFERENT! You're not having sex with your parents!
That's true, but if sex is really the only defining element of your romantic relationships, if that's REALLY the only thing that sets your marriage apart from any other relationship you have, including your friends, then I have to say that I think I got the better deal.
Now, in MY relationships, if you took the sex away for some reason (like, say, a medical condition), my relationships would still be special, would still be set apart from my friends or my siblings, or my parents, or my pets, for instance. My romantic relationships are intimate on so many different levels, and in so many ways, that removing the sex, while disappointing, would not sufficiently take away enough from my feelings for my partners to actually destroy the relationship, or even make it so much less somehow that they were indistinguishable from my friends, co-workers, and acquaintances.
And I have nothing but pity for those for whom sex is the ONLY thing of note in their primary romantic relationships (people who choose to have fuckbuddies are a different subject all together). I also have nothing but pity for those for whom they completely become un-special just because their partners happen to do the same thing with them as with another person.
I mean, if I had a partner who would cease to find me special just because some other woman cooked him dinner, or called him "honey", or was prettier than me, I don't think I would think much of that partner, or of my relationship with him. My partners love me so much because of who I am, that I am not so easily replaced that anyone who can give a good backrub can come along and destroy my relationship. But I guess that, if their relationships really are so tenuous, I would probably be hyper-sensitive and jealous if my relationships were that fragile too.
As for the "loose morals" and "being selfish" and "hurting others", really, I can't find any more ways to explain that it's the opposite of "selfish" (of or for one's self to the detriment of others) to feel happiness at your partner's happiness in his other relationships and it's not hurting someone when they gleefully accept the arrangement - you can only hurt someone if you do something they don't like and trusted you not to do, which is not the case in my relationships. If you still believe it is even after I've said so in plain terms, you're just refusing to listen, and if you refuse to listen, there's nothing more to say to someone who is more interested in closing their mind than in respecting that other people have different wants, needs, desires, and preferences.
No one is asking you to jump on the poly bandwagon, just stop insisting that what would make you miserable would make everyone else miserable, especially when you are told that some of us are not, in fact, miserable.
She apparently completely missed the part where us adopted kids love two moms and two dads. Which came first or second for me? Was it my adopted parents who came second, so I never really loved my bio-parents? Or was it my bio-mom since I didn't actually meet her until I was 30, so I never loved my adopted mom who raised me & cared for me & is responsible for the person I am now?
But it's DIFFERENT! You're not having sex with your parents!
That's true, but if sex is really the only defining element of your romantic relationships, if that's REALLY the only thing that sets your marriage apart from any other relationship you have, including your friends, then I have to say that I think I got the better deal.
Now, in MY relationships, if you took the sex away for some reason (like, say, a medical condition), my relationships would still be special, would still be set apart from my friends or my siblings, or my parents, or my pets, for instance. My romantic relationships are intimate on so many different levels, and in so many ways, that removing the sex, while disappointing, would not sufficiently take away enough from my feelings for my partners to actually destroy the relationship, or even make it so much less somehow that they were indistinguishable from my friends, co-workers, and acquaintances.
And I have nothing but pity for those for whom sex is the ONLY thing of note in their primary romantic relationships (people who choose to have fuckbuddies are a different subject all together). I also have nothing but pity for those for whom they completely become un-special just because their partners happen to do the same thing with them as with another person.
I mean, if I had a partner who would cease to find me special just because some other woman cooked him dinner, or called him "honey", or was prettier than me, I don't think I would think much of that partner, or of my relationship with him. My partners love me so much because of who I am, that I am not so easily replaced that anyone who can give a good backrub can come along and destroy my relationship. But I guess that, if their relationships really are so tenuous, I would probably be hyper-sensitive and jealous if my relationships were that fragile too.
As for the "loose morals" and "being selfish" and "hurting others", really, I can't find any more ways to explain that it's the opposite of "selfish" (of or for one's self to the detriment of others) to feel happiness at your partner's happiness in his other relationships and it's not hurting someone when they gleefully accept the arrangement - you can only hurt someone if you do something they don't like and trusted you not to do, which is not the case in my relationships. If you still believe it is even after I've said so in plain terms, you're just refusing to listen, and if you refuse to listen, there's nothing more to say to someone who is more interested in closing their mind than in respecting that other people have different wants, needs, desires, and preferences.
No one is asking you to jump on the poly bandwagon, just stop insisting that what would make you miserable would make everyone else miserable, especially when you are told that some of us are not, in fact, miserable.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 1/10/12 12:38 pm (UTC)From:To react in jealousy that anyone else might threaten your marriage (primary love relationship) is to tell me that you are insecure and territorial, and very likely over-protective in that you feel you cannot trust your partner. Strike one. To threaten violence against the threat, rather than some clearer conversation aimed at your partner, who apparently broke an agreement, tells me you place blame externally rather than internally. Strike two.
To tell me to my face that you are like this tells me clearly that I cannot ever be your friend. You are not adult enough to handle me. I am not safe around you. Strike three, out.
Another person talked the talk for awhile, but her walk illustrated that she lied.
But I have explained poly successfully to a few people. One told me that she was glad I had, because even though she didn't think it was for her, she had the tools with which to correct this wrong-headed set of assumptions for a friend of hers. That delighted me. :) I thanked her. Key to poly being more widely accepted is that we educate non-poly friends, who can then also explain why it works even when it is not for everyone, and what it is versus what it is not - from a non-poly position themselves. That's why I bother being as out as I am. Clearly, that step is critical to acceptance. Anyone can tell you what monogamy is. That's the level of awareness we need in order to reduce the sort of nonsense you wrote about here.
(That bit about poly being selfish is never going to make sense to me. How can anyone use that word when they are protesting sharing? It makes no sense!)