Starlet's and Bore's

Do our standards with partners change as our dating pool increases and decreases?

Have you ever said "I would never date that person", only to end up dating them later?

Why did you change your mind?

Some of the reasons I hear are things like "After getting to know them I liked them" or "My first impression wasn't fair, so I changed my mind". And sometimes I think those reasons are true. I also think there may be another factor at work here. The theory that with abundance comes selectivity. With dearth of options comes acceptance.

Starting from the bottom let's imagine a single female who hasn't been dating. She just isn't being asked out by anyone. It is easy to then imagine if anyone asks her out, she would accept. Why not? It isn't like there are other options available on her date card. She might as well go do something, right?

Now let's imagine the same woman being asked out infrequently. Maybe once a month she is asked on a date. Assuming a quiet social life she would probably accept the requests and go on the dates. But with a busy social calendar she might be a bit more selective.

And finally, imagine the same woman being asked out regularly, say once a week more or less. Regardless of her social calendar it is easy to think she will probably start being a bit more selective. Are the dates attractive? Is there long-term potential? Are they sexually attractive, financially and emotionally stable?

I believe that as our dating pool increases, so do our standards. By the same token as our dating pool decreases, so will our standards. The two are directly proportionate.

Now is this a bad thing? Generally I don't believe so. Accepting the available date, without respect for quality or fit, allows people to maintain an active social life and keep their dating or social skills up to date. Where I do believe it becomes a problem though is when lowering expectations to maintain a social life is done without consideration of the reasons for dating in the first place. In other words, if you lower your standards to maintain a social life but still expect to find that *perfect partner*, you may be leading yourself into dangerous territory. After all, you are dating people that may not meet your usual standards. Could this explain some of the frustration people have with the quality of those they are dating?

Chasing this a bit further, it would be easy to see how one could be dating someone they wouldn't normally date, only to become frustrated when they turn out to have different standards or beliefs.

Where this theory seems to fall apart a bit is when applied to the poly community. At least, in my experience, plentiful dating options seem for some to actually decrease their standards. People who previously led monogamous lives and had specific standards like lifestyle, income, or education, suddenly begin accepting any offer of a date. I haven't quite figured that one out yet.

Don't get me wrong here, I actually think it is a good idea to challenge your self-imposed guidelines once in a while. You never know when you might click with someone on a level you never thought possible. My suggestion is simply this; if you have modified your standards in any way, be consciously aware of doing so. It may help you avoid some heartache, and headaches.

PP

Beware the troll

The moon and stars must be in an unusual alignment today because I got comments on many of my blog entries. Although the moon isn't full, the comments were obviously meant to be inflammatory and originate with a single poster.
Those who read here regularly will know that I can appreciate different perspectives, viewpoints, and opinions. Hence the word "paradigm" in my blog title. I love a good paradigm shift!
So, with that in mind, I've decided to publish the comments in the interest of fairness. I encourage any of you reading to not respond to the comments which will only perpetuate the behavior. Instead I ask you to accept them as a poorly communicated emotional response and difference of opinion. A special, wonderful reminder why those of us who believe in polyamory realize it is the differences in people that make multiple loving relationships an integral, nourishing part of our lives.

Warmest regards,
PP

Thanks for sharing!

When was the last time you thanked your primary partner for sharing you with others?

No really. When was the last time you said "Thanks for being so open and sharing me with others"?

You do thank your primary partner, don't you?

I got to thinking about this the other day and while I appreciate the sentiment, I'm not sure I agree with it. I've seen thanking your partner recommended in some poly related books, and heard it from other poly people I know. I've even said it, paraphrased in one form or another, to more than one of the partners I've had in my life.

When I got to thinking about it though I wondered. . . doesn't thanking your primary for sharing imply that they have rights over you? That maybe they don't have to share you with others and it is a choice they have made? That's when I began to think maybe I don't agree with the concept.

At first this sounded like a very Poly thing to do. My partner is being open. They are sharing me with others. It is a beautiful thing that we can enjoy this type of relationship. Many people wouldn't be open to living this way so yes, I probably should thank my partner. Maybe even get some flowers.

Wait, hold on a second, we have a belief violation here.

See, I believe that being poly is inherent in my being. It isn't so much that I'm poly as Poly is what I am. Not being open to the relationship possibilities I can have with anyone just doesn't compute well for me. But that is a part of me, not my partner. I should thank them for letting me be who I am?

After pondering the idea a bit I have come to think that the concept comes from a monogamous mindset of ownership in a committed relationship. It sounds as if it is based in the tradition of believing there is some form of physical ownership in a romantic relationship. Sorry, but it really isn't something I believe in.

At this point I tried flipping things around a bit. How do I feel if my partner thanks me for letting them go on a date? In the past my response has been that they are welcome but don't need to thank me. I'm not the boss of them, they didn't need my permission, nor my approval. I respect them as a person, with all of their particular and peculiar needs, wants, and desires.

Where does this leave me? Honestly, with the same mixed feelings I had when I first started writing this article. I've had no epiphanies or change of heart. Although I don't think it necessary to thank your partner for allowing you to date someone else, I also don't think it is a bad idea. The next time I thank my partner, instead of simply saying "Thanks for letting me go on a date" maybe I'll say something like, "Thank you for letting me be who I am without trying to change me".  In that way I can show appreciation without implying control or ownership. And I do think it is important to let your partner know that their participation in your lifestyle is recognized and appreciated.

Where are you at with this one? Do you thank your partner for letting you date others? And if so, do you feel there is implied permission with the gratitude?

Guess what I want for Christmas?

Once in a while when the poly world is quiet, I'll write about other things. With only a single arrest, an attempted takeover, and some mild backstabbing over the past few weeks my poly community has been quiet and, this is one of those times.

So here I am, relaxing after a busy week and thinking about a couple of women I have been interested in dating. (Ok, so maybe this article is a little bit poly after all). It is actually a bit more complicated than that. I've entered a relationship with one of the women, the other one and I are still flirting. But, you get the picture.

These two ladies are almost as different as night and day as well. One tall, slender, and dark haired. The other short and curvy with red hair. One is well educated, the other a sci-fi gamer girl. One is older, one younger. Once experienced, and one not.

It was those differences that got me to thinking a bit. I wondered what it was that attracted me to two women who are so different from one another. Maybe they both have interests I enjoy. Maybe their differences compliment one another. Maybe I just like variety! Whatever the reason my mind drifted as it often does and I got to thinking about my physical interests in the two ladies, each of which has different *attributes* I find appealing. And no, I'm not just talking about physical attributes. Get your minds out of the gutter people!

That got me to thinking about why guys find different types of women appealing.

I think there are a lot of things that make a woman interesting to a man; lifestyle, beliefs, intelligence, stability, security, sanity, insanity, attitude, and yes sometimes simply physical attributes.

We have all heard the old saying (or a variation thereof); Men want a princess to take home to their Mom, and a slut in the bedroom. And it appears men often follow that saying as you see them court and win the princess only to be unsatisfied with their sex life later, or disappointed their princess isn't a slut in bed. Or on the other hand, they take the less than pristine girl home to mom only to have problems when yep, mom thinks she is a tramp. Men seem to want both in a woman which is somewhat rare.

Now, we can argue psychology all day long. We can debate genetics, society, women's rights or liberation, men becoming emasculated. We could even dissect how global warming could be causing some of our problems. But I have a different theory on the matter; Men don't want a woman who is pure. And despite popular opinion, they don't want a woman who is a slut.

What they desire is a pure woman who wants to be a slut.

That's right; they want a woman who has dreamt her whole life of the white picket fence life, saved herself for marriage, and will devote herself to her man. They also want her to be a closet nymphomaniac with dreams of doing the dirtiest, naughtiest things she has never done before in the bedroom. In line with the quote above, they want a woman they can take home to mom who won't drop a 4-letter bomb, have upsetting opinions of her own, or challenge family beliefs. They then want to take her home and have her wearing 4-inch heels and a garter 30 seconds through the door, prone on the bed with a come hither look while in a deep sexy voice whispering "You can do whatever you want to me". The key here is they want to be the one to do those things to (or with) her. They don't want to ever hear how she learned this from Bob and that from Bill. In other words, she can be a dirty, shameless slut with them but not with anyone else.

I think this because the guys who do get a princess aren't often happy with her. Yes she can meet mom, but she can't imagine new ways to screw 3 times a week. On the other hand, the woman who is already experienced and in touch with her kinky side must have learned it from somewhere and the poop will definitely hit the propeller if mom finds out! Besides, if she knows more than her guy, and is in touch with her sexual desires, maybe her guy won't be enough for her or she will go get her insatiable needs met behind his back.

Now don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying there are absolutes nor am I trying to park women into two categories. Nor am I saying all men fit into two simple categories either. My point is simply that the old saying may not quite be right. Men want a princess who wants to be a slut rather than a princess who is a closet slut. That might even be more rare. (By the way, I use the term *slut* with the utmost respect in this case).

What are your thoughts on this one? Ladies, do you see it this way or do you think I'm off the reservation again? And what about the guys . . . Is it time to update the old saying or was it fine the way it was?

PP

Dyslexic Dichotomy

If you visit here often you know that sometimes things bug me. Usually they are things that most people probably dismiss easily. For some reason I can't. They chew at my brain, and sometimes my morality, mercilessly until somehow they are vented from my consciousness, hopefully in a constructive manner.

Here is the one bugging me a bit right now. . .

I know someone who is poly, let us call her Ethel, who is in a family support group that includes both adults and children. The group is on the alternative side of things so it would theoretically be comprised of more open-minded people. Ethel however has recently found out that might not be the case. Being an overly affectionate and vocal person about her poly (and lifestyle) views, she has drawn some attention to herself, and complaints from group members. Being a sensitive woman, Ethel is deeply hurt by this.

Knowing Ethel personally, I know that she is publicly quite affectionate and indeed, quite vocal. She has even told me directly how a friend of ours was hiding their poly lifestyle from their children and she felt it was her obligation as a parent to take those children aside and explain polyamory to them, against their parents wishes. Yikes! Fortunately she ended up not having the opportunity to do so.

When she expressed her dismay at having someone complain about her public displays of affection, and vocal poly conversations she was having, I gently tried to let her know that some people are sensitive to things to which they, and their children, are exposed. The feedback was not received well and Ethel made it clear she knows how to act appropriately. Umm, okay.

I'm really only telling you these things so you know enough of the story for it to make sense. This next part is where I think it gets interesting.

Ethel decided to get some online feedback about the situation. There were quite a few comments made on the topic. Some suggested she ignore the issues, others that she try to find out who made the complaint. Some suggested she try to work things out, or turn the other cheek. Others suggested the complainer was simply a mean, unhappy person and that Ethel shouldn't change a thing about her behavior.

The overall theme was that Ethel had a right to act the way she was. Most believed that Ethel is a loving, caring person (which I think she is at heart) and it was ridiculous for someone to complain about that. An underlying tone was that Ethel did nothing wrong, shouldn't change, and it was the complainers problem not hers. Essentially, Ethel should be able to talk about whatever she wants, whenever she wants, regardless of the audience.

Here is the sticky part. Those commenting that Ethel should do as she pleases are primarily from the Poly community. They are the same people who scream bloody murder if a monogamous person starts espousing the benefits of monogamy, or God forbid a Christian falls into their pagan laps and is vocal about their religion, and they are the same people who become almost frenzied when exclusivity or discrimination over their Poly lifestyle comes up.

What I got out of the discussion about the problem was this; Do as I say, not as I do.

For some reason a lot of people seem to think it is okay to shout their beliefs from the highest rooftops, beat people senseless with them, convert the opposition, and that they should be legally and morally justified in doing so. But should anyone with an opposing view try to do the same they are the first screaming a breach of morality and begging for legal sanctions.

Ridiculous. Treat others as you wish to be treated. Didn't anyone else learn that one growing up? It isn't a difficult concept really. Have some consideration if other parents don't want their children hearing about your poly lifestyle and multiple partners. Do you have to agree with how they are raising their children? Not at all. But it would be wise to respect their role as parents lest they decide to disrespect yours and educate your children on a subject of which you aren't fond.

Your thoughts?
PP

You might be poly if. . .

You might be poly if. . .


-If you oogle the same people as your partner, and discuss their hotness, you might be poly.
-If you find yourself attracted to random strangers on the train during your commute, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if you get excited when your partner has a date.
-If you use the terms Compersion, NRE, or Frubble in conversation regularly you might be poly.
-If you like talking things to death, then resurrecting them just to talk them to death again, you might be poly.
-If your idea of a shower involves more than one person, you might be poly.
-When invited to events you ask how many of your partners you can bring, you might be poly.
-If you are sick of seeing the same intertwined hearts and parrot pictures on every blog and website you visit, you might be poly.
-If you say things like "I love you, but I also love him/her", you might be poly.
-If you know what a Cuddle Party is, or have ever been to one, you might be poly.
-If you have ever heard the response "Oh, so you are a polygamist!", you might be poly.
-If you have ever been slapped after asking someone on a date then telling them you already have a spouse, you might be poly.
-If you have ever heard the saying "I'm bi-sexual, kinky, horny, and I'm still not sleeping with you!" you might be poly.
-If the number of places at the dinner table varies depending on how many of your partners are coming, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if you keep a calendar to know where you are sleeping each night.
-When your partner tells you they have a date on the same night you had plans with them and you just laugh because you had worried that was a mistake you would make, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if your toothbrush holder doesn't have enough toothbrush slots (or holes).
-If you have ever been told "You just want a harem!", you might be poly.
-You might be poly if your towel-bar isn't big enough to hold all the towels needing to be hung.
-If you have heard the names LovingMore or Franklin Veaux, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if a frequent discussion at dinner is who gets to park in the garage.
-If you change the sheets on your bed more often than you mop the kitchen floor, you might be poly.
-If you buy condoms or lube in bulk, while also buying books on communication, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if you know what the terms Vee hinge, Triad, or Quad mean.
-If a double date with friends means more than 4 people at dinner, you might be poly.
-If someone says "Your boyfriend/girlfriend is cute" and you wonder which one they are talking about, you might be poly.
-If you look at someone, think they are attractive, and wonder if your partner will find them attractive, you might be poly.
-You might be poly if when you get up to use the bathroom in the middle of the night you find a person on both sides of you in bed.
-If you don't have to look outside your immediate family to get help moving, you might be poly.
-If your big couch just isn't big enough a lot of the time, you might be poly.
-If you know for a fact that multiple marriage isn't legal in your state and have explored options such as handfasting or domestic partner contracts, you might be poly.
-If you have ever heard your kids say "My other dad/mom", you might be poly.
-If you know what a Unicorn is, and Unicorn Hunters are, you might be poly.
-If you neighbors ask how many adults actually live in your house, you might be poly.
-If you know what "OKC" is, and spend more time there than on Facebook, you might be poly.
-When buying things that come in pairs if you have to buy more than one pair, you might be poly.
-And if you are reading this, you might be poly!

So what other things do you think might make you poly?

What have I stepped in?

Today I would like to tackle something conceptually a bit more difficult for a lot of people to grasp. The thought that just because you can enter into a relationship, should you?

I frequently hear people talking about new or potential new, partners and questioning either the satisfaction they expect to derive from the relationship, or the durability. Often there are other factors involved such as SO's, privacy, or even lifestyle. The conversations usually end with the person saying something like "I don't have anything to lose, right?" or "Why not, it couldn't hurt to try, right?” While I can't argue with those sentiments, because I do believe very strongly in taking chances and following your heart, I believe there is a fine line that many don't recognize. That line is drawn between putting yourself out there, taking a chance on love, and entering into a relationship you are fairly certain will end in failure or flames.

Another aspect to the question, and one that may help explain the concept, is ethics. Just because you can screw that hot chick (or hot stud), should you? The same question applies without the sexual aspect; just because you can have a relationship with someone, who may or may not be viewing the relationship from a different perspective, should you?

Let me give you an example. Recently I found myself in an intimate situation with a friend. We enjoyed ourselves and had a good time. I found afterwards that our physical interaction had ignited better conversations and a connection we hadn't experienced before. My friend also began dropping hints that she may be interested in more than just a friendship going forward. It was clear to me that we could easily try to have more than a friendship so I sat down to think about it for a minute. What I realized was that although I enjoy our friendship, and had enjoyed the "play-time" we had experienced, I didn't feel enough for my friend to explore a more emotional relationship, let alone was I feeling "love" in the context of a romantic relationship. I ask myself, "Why not?” Maybe I could develop those feelings; maybe the relationship could be great. I then ask myself; would taking the chance be ethical? My friend is obviously looking for a romantic relationship but if I was just "taking a chance" would we be on the same page with our intentions? I don't think so which for me doesn't feel ethical. In the end although I could have the relationship, or try to have it, I don't feel it would be fair to her since we would be looking at the relationship from different perspectives.

This is where things can get a bit sticky and controversial. I could have sat down with my friend and explained my position. We could have talked about how we may be approaching a relationship from different directions. And we may have agreed to try anyway. Assuming my friend was honest, and didn't let emotion cloud her thoughts, we might have found a workable path for us both. And honestly, there is nothing wrong with that. What I did at that point was consider the possibilities if we could find a workable path. The feeling that remained for me was that even if we could give it a try I honestly didn't see myself loving her the way she was hoping I would. Final answer; it didn't feel like it would be fair to her.

Another aspect of the question that I mentioned above are outside factors such as SO's. Let's try another example. I have a friend who fell quickly in love with a married man she knows. (His marriage is openly polyamorous by the way). Their relationship went well until my friend began to integrate more deeply into her new SO's marriage and create a relationship with the wife. That is when my friend found out, to be blunt, the wife is a loon. (I know the wife personally and have been the focus of her loony behavior so this isn't conjecture or second-hand information). My friend quickly began to struggle with how her SO was treated by his wife. She wanted to interject herself and help her new SO stand up for himself against his loony wife. Her feelings opened a big can of worms to be sure. Was it her place to intercede in their relationship? Would it be ethical for her to do so? The question I posed to my friend was this; Poly people enjoy the variety of multiple relationships. It sounds as if you are imparting your morality and ethics on your new SO. If he is happy with his marriage what right do you have to interfere? And if you can't be involved with him without interfering, should you be involved with him?

For me the answer to that question is No. If I can't have a relationship with someone and accept how differently their other relationships function then I shouldn't be in a relationship with that person. To do so would create a lot of stress for both of us and in reality, I would want to change them. Always a dangerous proposal in my opinion. Could I remain in a relationship with that design? Sure. I could work on "fixing" what I see as problems. But does it really make sense? Not at all.

Polyamory inherently includes the possibility of multiple relationships. Freedom to be involved with others is awesome and can be heady so say the least. But with that freedom comes the need to act responsibly, both to you and to others. I believe that Polyamory opens us up to multiple relationship possibilities which require us to take a deeper look at those possibilities and realistically determine if they make sense. The flip side is that dismissing a potential relationship because it isn't a great fit doesn't diminish the ability to still have multiple relationships. Maybe a better, simpler way, to say it is this; quality is more satisfying than quantity. Which would you rather have, 1 or 2 awesome relationships or 4-5 mediocre relationships? Personally I would rather have the awesome relationships which still allow me time to explore other awesome relationships whereas overloading myself with mediocre relationships is a time suck that ends up limiting me to those mediocre relationships.

Quality not quantity, ethics and morality, and knowledge of self. In my mind those are the things that can make Polyamory not just successful, but satisfyingly beautiful as well.

Love well friends,
PP