| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Wilson writes:
> This is a real issue, and different groups of people resolve it differently.
> Poly groups are not all the same, there are a lot of different structures
Yes, I know. Hinge, triangle, primary/secondary, etc (those are the only ones
everyone seemed able to agree on).
> developed by the people involved to work for them, and often the structure
> changes and develops to deal with problems as they come up. In some groups
> there's a primary relationship and others are secondary, so given the need
> to make a choice the primary relationship will come first. The secondary
> person who also wants/needs attention may not like it, but they know to
> expect it. (I have been in this exact situation and stayed in it because the
> good points outweighed the bad. Someone else may not find it possible to be
> in a situation like this at all). For other groups, comforting may take
> precedence over celebration. Others probably would have different ways again
> of dealing with it.
Right. But my point stands- you're forced to make a choice that you would not
be forced to make if you were committed to only one person.
And that's the basis of my statement- you can't be committed to two (or
more) people as fully as you can be committed to one.
And, just to be clear, I don't feel there's anything wrong with that, as long
as everyone knows what's up going into the relationship/s.
eric
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Polyamory
|
| Lorbaat wrote in message ... (...) want (...) all (...) want to (...) you (...) that? This is a real issue, and different groups of people resolve it differently. Poly groups are not all the same, there are a lot of different structures developed by (...) (26 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
