![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I just finished listening to Poly Weekly's recent episode on advice for opening up a couple. I particularly enjoyed it because it was advice aimed at a couple from the point of view of the potential new "third" coming into the relationship. There are lots of advice floating around there telling couples how to open their relationship, like talking to each other and establishing The Rules before doing anything. But there is not much being said from this perspective.
Actually, there are quite a few sources telling couples what it feels like from the prospective Third, including me. But these sources consistently get shut down as couples defend their methods of "protecting [their] relationship". Now, it seems to me that if a group of people (and for these purposes, we'll include 2 people under the heading "group") want to attract another person or group of people, it would be in their best interest to actually heed the advice of said incoming person or group.
We see this in the skeptics and atheist communities too. And we see it in the larger poly community, not just first-time couples looking for unicorns. We have groups here of predominently white, educated, middle- & upper-class men (and women in the poly community) looking for more diversity. But instead of reaching out to the classes of people they wish to attract and asking them what they want from a community, what would convince them to try us out, and how we can improve their experiences with us, my communities of atheists, skeptics, and polys, continue to close ranks with locked arms, telling these other classes that they just need to deal with the communities as-is because that's how we like it, and then putting our own heads together to brainstorm ideas without input from the ones these ideas will most impact.
Back to the poly couples, they do the same thing. These two people (and sometimes it's a poly group about to open up for more) put their heads together and start discussing rules and regulations and future stuff without any input at all from the one person these rules will impact the most. And they defend it by saying that they don't want anyone who doesn't like these rules anyway and it's no different from pre-weeding out potential candidates based on other conflicting things like "I don't date guys who beat up kittens".
And then the poly couples and the atheist & skeptic organizers sit around and whine and moan about how hard it is to find people to join them and how mean everyone is being towards them and their policies.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
tacit and I have also faced this phenonemon before, where we suggest that certain methods have better success rates than others (as well as being more humane and considerate and compassionate), and couples who can't find their unicorns belligerently defend the need for rules by calling them "training wheels" - things you do when you don't yet have compassion and empathy and consideration and relationship and communication skills in order to start being poly first and learn the "advanced" techniques as you go. And yes, I have been accused by people for being "enlightened" and "advanced" - this is not me tooting my own horn, these are the things other people have said about me and the reasons people give for not following my advice. Frankly, I started out as poly with these same skills and have improved over time, so I have a hard time thinking of them as "advanced" or "enlightened" - as far as I'm concerned, being considerate towards those in your chosen family and thinking about what I bring to the table instead of how he will adequately fulfill my own needs are basic skills, not advanced. But I digress.
It seems to me that if one wishes to be successful at something, and that something is attracting new people, one ought to be following the advice given by the people one wishes to attract and those who are successful at attracting them, not telling those one wishes to attract how wrong their advice is for how to attract them. I'm pretty sure that I know better than anyone else what will attract me to that person or group, so if you want me in your group, you ought to listen to what I say will get me there.
So I liked this episode, and although I still don't agree with every single little itty bitty thingcunningminx said, I very much appreciated having someone with as big of a voice as she has saying these things in no uncertain terms and without bending over backwards to accommodate and pander to the couples, who already have an unequal distribution of power in the community, living in a heteronormative, couple-centric society to begin with.
Actually, there are quite a few sources telling couples what it feels like from the prospective Third, including me. But these sources consistently get shut down as couples defend their methods of "protecting [their] relationship". Now, it seems to me that if a group of people (and for these purposes, we'll include 2 people under the heading "group") want to attract another person or group of people, it would be in their best interest to actually heed the advice of said incoming person or group.
We see this in the skeptics and atheist communities too. And we see it in the larger poly community, not just first-time couples looking for unicorns. We have groups here of predominently white, educated, middle- & upper-class men (and women in the poly community) looking for more diversity. But instead of reaching out to the classes of people they wish to attract and asking them what they want from a community, what would convince them to try us out, and how we can improve their experiences with us, my communities of atheists, skeptics, and polys, continue to close ranks with locked arms, telling these other classes that they just need to deal with the communities as-is because that's how we like it, and then putting our own heads together to brainstorm ideas without input from the ones these ideas will most impact.
Back to the poly couples, they do the same thing. These two people (and sometimes it's a poly group about to open up for more) put their heads together and start discussing rules and regulations and future stuff without any input at all from the one person these rules will impact the most. And they defend it by saying that they don't want anyone who doesn't like these rules anyway and it's no different from pre-weeding out potential candidates based on other conflicting things like "I don't date guys who beat up kittens".
And then the poly couples and the atheist & skeptic organizers sit around and whine and moan about how hard it is to find people to join them and how mean everyone is being towards them and their policies.
tacit and I have also faced this phenonemon before, where we suggest that certain methods have better success rates than others (as well as being more humane and considerate and compassionate), and couples who can't find their unicorns belligerently defend the need for rules by calling them "training wheels" - things you do when you don't yet have compassion and empathy and consideration and relationship and communication skills in order to start being poly first and learn the "advanced" techniques as you go. And yes, I have been accused by people for being "enlightened" and "advanced" - this is not me tooting my own horn, these are the things other people have said about me and the reasons people give for not following my advice. Frankly, I started out as poly with these same skills and have improved over time, so I have a hard time thinking of them as "advanced" or "enlightened" - as far as I'm concerned, being considerate towards those in your chosen family and thinking about what I bring to the table instead of how he will adequately fulfill my own needs are basic skills, not advanced. But I digress.It seems to me that if one wishes to be successful at something, and that something is attracting new people, one ought to be following the advice given by the people one wishes to attract and those who are successful at attracting them, not telling those one wishes to attract how wrong their advice is for how to attract them. I'm pretty sure that I know better than anyone else what will attract me to that person or group, so if you want me in your group, you ought to listen to what I say will get me there.
So I liked this episode, and although I still don't agree with every single little itty bitty thing
cunningminx said, I very much appreciated having someone with as big of a voice as she has saying these things in no uncertain terms and without bending over backwards to accommodate and pander to the couples, who already have an unequal distribution of power in the community, living in a heteronormative, couple-centric society to begin with.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 8/19/12 10:06 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 8/20/12 02:43 am (UTC)From:Instead of "we, the primary couple, are a corporation with a job that YOU want, so we will interview everyone to find the right candidate who can provide us with the skills we're looking for", it's more like "hi, we want to provide a product, a relationship with us, for your consideration. What would you want our product to do for you? Thanks for the feedback, we will try to incorporate that into our product because we know that if our customers don't like our product, we won't be able to sell it to anyone!"
I think I just found either a new blog post or a new poly conference lecture!
no subject
Date: 8/20/12 01:32 pm (UTC)From:Of course, there is the risk of the 'good dater' approach in that the good dater might be tempted to 'look good' to the date by submerging parts of him/herself or pushing in uncomfortable directions in order to better suit (in their minds) what they perceive the date would like to see. Out come the masks! Can you imagine the disaster if a couple tries to do that for someone they are wooing?
Advanced skills
Date: 8/20/12 01:26 am (UTC)From:The "effortless" application of "basic skills" is pretty much the definition of mastering something (in the traditional apprenticeship sense).
Ewen
Re: Advanced skills
Date: 8/20/12 02:55 am (UTC)From:And I think you're definitely right that people don't want to hear "lots of practice" as the answer. People want me to say "here is the Formula for a Successful Poly Relationship: first, institute the 10 Commandments of polyamory (i.e. everyone make these Rules for your relationships); next use this equation for determining the exact amount of time everyone gets so that it's perfectly equal and therefore "fair" and no one will complain about not getting enough; and finally, here is the one sure way to prevent anything from changing once your family is formed and everyone is happy."
I'm sure this will come as a total surprise to you and everyone else (sarcasm), but that magic Formula for a Successful Poly Relationship doesn't actually exist. I got to be a decent pianist only through years of daily practice, and I never made it to maestro, mainly because I stopped playing. Some people will never be virtuosos no matter how much they practice and they should stick with some other instrument, or poetry, or accounting. I knew a guy who could play just about any instrument he ever touched - except the piano ... he just couldn't master the whole two-hands-on-the-keyboard thing.
There's no shortcut to being a good musician and there's no shortcut to being good at relationships, even if some people happen to be born with a head-start or a natural affinity for it - we all still need to practice.
Oh, and apropos of your master/apprenticeship comment,
Re: Advanced skills
Date: 8/20/12 03:41 am (UTC)From:I also think that even more than not wanting to hear "there's no easy way", people particularly don't want to hear "you're going to make mistakes". Even more so when the "you're going to make mistakes" puts something that they value deeply (eg, their existing relationship) at risk. I think there's a feeling of being "all in" (in the gambling sense) which makes it seem extra risky. A lot of the "original couple first" type rules I've seen strike me as "we'll gamble, but just a little" safety mechanisms.
Possibly another aspect of the perception of "advanced skills" is the ability to notice earlier, when smaller corrections for going off course are required; beginners will tend to wobble all over the place, making corrections much later and in bigger more dramatic ways. Watching, eg, an expert bicyclist doing a track stand is enlightening -- it looks like they're just super balanced there. But in reality what they're doing is making lots of tiny corrections all the time. (Good) relationships (of any kind -- not just romantic) seem like that too, to me: lots of tiny corrections all the time.
Ewen
Re: Advanced skills
Date: 8/20/12 12:49 pm (UTC)From:Re: Advanced skills
Date: 8/20/12 01:22 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 8/20/12 12:58 pm (UTC)From:This very topic came up during the PolyTampa meeting last night. I'll link this on Twitter and @ Marc to post it to the list after any new people get signed up.
no subject
Date: 8/21/12 07:25 am (UTC)From: