Non-traditional relationships and assoiciated stigma

[Els]

 

To prove this point and also make myself a little pathetic (showing I don't really oppose 'traditional' relationships ): I have left 1/2 of my drawers empty for the guy that will move in my home one day. I have assigned kid's room as well :lmao: And I'm not even dating...

 

Ummm.... this is just a wee bit too far on the other extreme of the spectrum, dontcha think???

 

I dunno, OP... I honestly think you tend to take things to an extreme too much in general. You can't be mildly attracted to someone but still cognizant that a one-sided crush isn't good for you or at least cognizant of the fact that you barely know this guy... you have to be either 0% ("omg this guy is such a pathetic puppy") or 100% (pretty much all your descriptions of him!). Ditto with your views on "traditional relationships", other people's relationships, etc.

 

Do you think this is something you could work on?

[No_Go]

Ah thank you for bringing this up, that's why I like to keep a written rapport of thoughts. The reality is that after 2 months things are getting blurred. Let say as a working hypothesis for now he knows I've been attracted to him.

 

I don't know why he thinks we're not compatible - we never discussed is it attraction or something else. Not that the limit is not the same but that's why I brought back details.

 

Hm. Consider the following, from the first few pages of your epic thread. If he apologized for lack of action, I guess he knew that you were attracted.

 

You also have evidently had a conversation where he let you know he's not attracted and he doesn't think you are compatible for a relationship, which was discussed on other thread.

 

I haven't pointed this out to make you feel bad. It's a concise example of your "spinning" whatever happens to fit your narrative of whatever moment. What is the reality?

[No_Go]

Although I'm monogamous so this lifestyle is not for me, I've always been qute fascinated with your story, and a similar one of another poly poster who stopped writing here unfortunately.

 

I seldom suggest polyamory because it is much harder than monogamy.

I can't even imagine - it will be a torture to invest all this time and energy in more than one person...

 

It is not a natural state for mammals.

I think it is for some species: monogamy evolved as a reproductive strategy for species that have lower numbers of offspring.

 

It is surprising how a wedding ring leads people to assume things. Yeah It is hilarious to me as well.

 

What I do not get is why do people stigmatize alternative relationships even when they work better than theirs. Absolutely! Every person supports their own current relationship state as the best one possible

 

I lived in a poly triad with my wife and our girlfriend for 30 years. We went out as a threesome and vacationed as such. We just felt that we did not need anyone's approval of our lifestyle so only those with a need to know, knew. It is surprising how a wedding ring leads people to assume things. Nothing wrong with a married couple and the wife's best friend go out or at home hosting guests. If anyone knew they did not tell us.

 

Not until I started to post online did I realize how inflexible many people are. They are handed monogamy with no alternatives but divorce. I think monogamy is great. We have been monogamous for the last 7 years of our 45 year marriage. If is works for you, great. However it does not work for 50% of marriages and the only out is to first destroy the life you built with your spouse before you can love another.

 

Also funny how people rather cheat within the context of monogamy than find an alternative that works for them. We are taught at a very young age that we can only have sex with one person. We can only love one person in marriage. That just is not so. Our marriage has been great. Better than I could ever imagine. No one person can fulfill the needs of another or expect their spouse to fulfill them all.

 

I think everyone is entitled to have whatever relationship that works for them. Why leave your spouse because she cannot or will not fulfill a few of your needs? The writers of the Bible pushed monogamy but they had concubines. Society created monogamy. It is not a natural state for mammals. Hence all the cheating going on.

 

I seldom suggest polyamory because it is much harder than monogamy. It requires what most relationships lack, good communication and an openness to alternative lifestyles. There are many monogamous police out there ready to pounce on those who do not think as they do. They feel that they hold the moral high ground despite half of them divorced or heading that way. They rather go down with the monogamy ship than seek the safety of another ship. We do not have true monogamy. We have serial monogamy where you first have to destroy what you have to get what you want. That supposedly is better.

 

What I do not get is why do people stigmatize alternative relationships even when they work better than theirs. So many people rather drown in a pool of their own morality rather than find a new morality that works for them.

 

Rethinking monogamy today - CNN

 

Polyamory: When three isn't a crowd - CNN

[No_Go]

you are too old to not know how to cook well Yeah I need to get some basic skills else I'm dependent on take outs and willing partners& friends

 

Seriously though, if I get 'complete' man this would mean a drastic shift in my lifestyle to accommodate him, and I'm quite frankly not willing to stretch that far. That's why I'm mostly looking at free spirits, men that are very fluid and flexible...

 

This would have scared me to death, it seriously sounds like something out of a horror film. You might as well have worn a sign that said "I am seeking a man whose exact dimensions fit into the man-shaped space I have reserved on my bed". At least now we know what happened.

 

No_Go, you do not live a life with empty drawers and spaces. Use up every damn drawer, even the ones in your head; fill them with dreams, ambitions, and goals for yourself. Use all your cookware---you are too old to not know how to cook well. And when the next man comes over you can take pride in showing off your home and your life, for yourself. If the next man wants to fit in he won't be filling a void, but adding to an already complete picture.

[No_Go]

But Lana (and June), I don't want to build life together. I really don't want to flex that hard. I want someone who is flexible and open enough to fit in what I have already build.

 

wanting a full and developed individual - yes, full and developed, but flexible enough. In my other thread (the OLDing thread) I was trying to explain that - I don't want someone settled in their life already. I want someone to fit in, and for some people this can be a wonderful thing. He wouldn't have to bother with logistic cr*p and can focus on bigger and better things. This guy was perfect in that sense - he's not bounded by possessions, he has a beautiful mind, getting together with me would have allowed him to continue living his way, and me - my way. No drastic flexing needed from both ends.

 

Incredibly controlling and creepy. For me, the drawers are the worst. "I've already selected the dresser we'll use in our life together!" I'm a new homeowner and I plan ahead more than anybody, so empty rooms don't strike me as a big deal, but the dresser and cookware and all of it together just creates an absurdly unrealistic expectation for what a potential partner would do.

 

No_Go, you talk so much about wanting a full and developed individual. No strong individual wants to be slotted into someone else's completed life. You would be mortified if a man did that to you; I am sure this guy had a similar reaction.

 

I think if it's a woman does this, it's more of a sitcom, but if it's a man, it's definitely horror material!

[BluEyeL]

To the polyamory guy, 50% of marriages do not fail because of monogamy. There are many reasons sex is not everything. But glad you had a good experience in a truly non traditional relationship that has stigma associated with it.

 

To ES: Right , but it's not me who starts it. It's always the opposite side who feels the need to put down couples. Some settle but some do!t settle, although you and others like you (like my ex roommate) wouldn't choose "him" or whatever.

 

I had a crush /obsession and I've done this. I suggested being friends and he agreed basically told me to contact him when I want to see him. I just let it go. It wasn't the doctor, No_Go, some other guy. A bit different reasons why he said to me he doesnt want me . He just wanted sex and I didn't just want sex. Not with him. I would only do casual with much younger and much more physically attractive guys, not with him. I had a crush on him but want gonna be his pump and dump. When I do the casual I wouldn't do it with someone I really liked. So tried to bargain with the friends thing but then I changed my mind and started dating other people .

 

The empty rooms etc I heard this on the Secret, to feng shui the place waiting for the one. But you should never tell a guy you like that's what you're doing. Just say you didn't get around to fill up your spaces.

[No_Go]

Yeah... there must be a middle ground and there maybe a way to find it... I'm close to my birthday and therefore reevaluating life, what happened and what doesn't in the past year, so it is maybe the best time to think/work on this

 

Ummm.... this is just a wee bit too far on the other extreme of the spectrum, dontcha think???

 

I dunno, OP... I honestly think you tend to take things to an extreme too much in general. You can't be mildly attracted to someone but still cognizant that a one-sided crush isn't good for you or at least cognizant of the fact that you barely know this guy... you have to be either 0% ("omg this guy is such a pathetic puppy") or 100% (pretty much all your descriptions of him!). Ditto with your views on "traditional relationships", other people's relationships, etc.

 

Do you think this is something you could work on?

[No_Go]

It's always the opposite side who feels the need to put down couples I think both sides put each other down Which is meaningless because obviously the person (single or coupled) has made a conscious choice.

It wasn't the doctor, No_Go, some other guy. A bit different reasons why he said to me he doesnt want me . Ha, I'm curious about this story What happened in the end? Did you stay friends?

 

Just say you didn't get around to fill up your spaces Oh heck of course I'd not tell it! I blurted something about 5 year planning, not anything specific.

 

To the polyamory guy, 50% of marriages do not fail because of monogamy. There are many reasons sex is not everything. But glad you had a good experience in a truly non traditional relationship that has stigma associated with it.

 

To ES: Right , but it's not me who starts it. It's always the opposite side who feels the need to put down couples. Some settle but some do!t settle, although you and others like you (like my ex roommate) wouldn't choose "him" or whatever.

 

I had a crush /obsession and I've done this. I suggested being friends and he agreed basically told me to contact him when I want to see him. I just let it go. It wasn't the doctor, No_Go, some other guy. A bit different reasons why he said to me he doesnt want me . He just wanted sex and I didn't just want sex. Not with him. I would only do casual with much younger and much more physically attractive guys, not with him. I had a crush on him but want gonna be his pump and dump. When I do the casual I wouldn't do it with someone I really liked. So tried to bargain with the friends thing but then I changed my mind and started dating other people .

 

The empty rooms etc I heard this on the Secret, to feng shui the place waiting for the one. But you should never tell a guy you like that's what you're doing. Just say you didn't get around to fill up your spaces.

[Gaeta]

I don't know why he thinks we're not compatible - we never discussed is it attraction or something else. Not that the limit is not the same but that's why I brought back details.

 

It's just a phrase people say to mean they're not feeling it.

 

Something you said stuck with me. You said you are curious about him because he is exactly the way you were some time ago. That hit me as weird, who wants to date a version of themselves? Well apparently No_go, but maybe this guy is not attracted or is no longer attracted toward a woman that is too similar to him.

 

If you could see who is been chatting with online I say you'd fall off of your chair.

[BluEyeL]

So no, like I said, we didn't stay friends. He told me yeah let's be friends I'm around get in touch. And I changed my mind because I realized that it's only hurting me, hanging around.

 

Well don't say anything about a 5 yr plan either.

[lana-banana]

But Lana (and June), I don't want to build life together. I really don't want to flex that hard. I want someone who is flexible and open enough to fit in what I have already build.

 

wanting a full and developed individual - yes, full and developed, but flexible enough. In my other thread (the OLDing thread) I was trying to explain that - I don't want someone settled in their life already. I want someone to fit in, and for some people this can be a wonderful thing. He wouldn't have to bother with logistic cr*p and can focus on bigger and better things. This guy was perfect in that sense - he's not bounded by possessions, he has a beautiful mind, getting together with me would have allowed him to continue living his way, and me - my way. No drastic flexing needed from both ends.

 

No, he wasn't perfect, he was the worst possible choice! You found a man who is happy and settled in his ways (most men in their 30s are) and who is, by your own account, really satisfied with his life the way he lives it, and not interested in "lifestyle" or possessions. He would have been horrified at the idea of being forced in to a box of your choosing. Any free spirit would be.

 

Even "unsettled" people are still allowed to have a sense of their identity and themselves. They should get an equal say in their living arrangements. The odds of finding a single man in his mid-30s who is still not secure enough in his identity that he'd happily accept living however a woman told him to are near zero.

 

You need to learn to compromise---and cook, for that matter. I am biased because my husband and I are both serious cooks, but there is no excuse for anyone, male or female, to not have mastered at least a few basic casseroles, risottos, and roasts by the time they're 25. Better Homes and Gardens sells a wonderful cookbook (released annually) with a lot of great advice for beginners and useful tips for cooks at all levels. Start with a Crock-Pot if you're really intimidated. Or pick a couple recipes you love and learn to make them yourself, then expand from there.

[Gaeta]

Can you specify what is that 5 year plan about?

 

When I red it first I thought it was a 5 year plan with the house like you are giving yourself 5 years to renovate the bathrooms and redo the landscaping. I have a feeling that's not the 5 year plan you explained to him?

[RecentChange]

Expecting a guy to be "fluid" enough to fit in the box you have created for him is completely unreasonable.

 

Further - would you truly respect such an individual?

 

A happy relationship should be made up of two equal partners. If you do not wish to be crammed into a box, why do you think your partner should be willing to?

[clia]

Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with buying cookware, even if you don't cook that much! Who knows when you might get the urge. I was never interested in cooking at all in my 20s in 30s, but now that I've hit my 40s I enjoy it quite a bit.

 

Likewise, I don't see anything wrong with buying a house with kids' bedrooms in mind, if you want kids, and to be thinking along those lines. But that information doesn't need to be shared with a new man.

 

I do find the empty dresser drawers, waiting for the right man to come along and dump his underwear in, to be a little strange, though.

 

wanting a full and developed individual - yes, full and developed, but flexible enough. In my other thread (the OLDing thread) I was trying to explain that - I don't want someone settled in their life already. I want someone to fit in, and for some people this can be a wonderful thing. He wouldn't have to bother with logistic cr*p and can focus on bigger and better things. This guy was perfect in that sense - he's not bounded by possessions, he has a beautiful mind, getting together with me would have allowed him to continue living his way, and me - my way. No drastic flexing needed from both ends.

 

You seem to want to take the role of provider and caregiver --you provide the house and stability, and your man is free to flutter around like a butterfly doing whatever he wants without having to worry about life's responsibilities.

You had that role in your previous relationships, didn't you? And didn't you ultimately have a problem with it, with the men mooching off you, not being financially responsible, etc.? Are you sure that's what you want?

[Kamille]

Wait. He knows about the empty drawers? How? I've yet to ever have to explain my messy dresser drawers to any guests. They simply don't look there.

 

Still, I think this whole tangent is moot. He was wishy washy before the house date. A more interesting question - one I can relate to - is why No_Go is so attracted to someone who stated in his profile he wasn't relationship material, who read as being hesitant on dates, and says he isn't interested in anything serious with her. Why is that attractive?

[Imajerk17]

This is quite a long thread.

 

I'm going to make a general observation. No_Go, my understanding is that you are rather intellectually gifted. The problem with a lot of intellectually gifted people is that they are all too good at mapping out hypothetical situations (your ideal relationship), and rationalizing things to draw out the conclusion they desire (how things ended with the last guy and the real lessons you actually *should be* drawing from that, as opposed to how you *want to* look back at things such as saying it was a "non-traditional" relationship frowned upon by our supposedly uptight society).

 

Anyway, *of course* both partners including the guy have to be flexible. But to e.g., build your house and life with a man in mind and expect him to come live with you and fit in, well that sounds weird and creepy to me. And to other guys except maybe the moochers. A guy who is actually into a relationship will run the other way.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Imajerk17

[thefooloftheyear]

I dunno.....seems like all she was doing was "nesting"....A lot of women do the same things...

 

And quite honestly, if she wants to be the heavy in the relationship, who cares?? Guys have carried the freight since forever, and now that we are in the supposed age of enlightenment and equality, now its a huge problem?? Not sure I understand it...and even though I could never be that type of guy, I don't have issue with a turn of the tables here..

 

I don't really see the problem, outside of the fact that its probably a solid bet she wont be sexually satisfied and the issue of having kids would be a problem...

 

 

TFY

[NuevoYorko]

This is a fun discussion. To get back to bare bones:

 

This does not qualify as a non traditional relationship

 

The OP may be well advised to ramp it down quite a few notches

 

Time will tell if true friendship grows from this.

 

Buzz killer again, but I have rarely heard of a situation where the well worn cliche, "I only like you as a friend" actually resulted in a bona fide friendship. There is no base. I don't question that it can and does happen, but infrequently.

[No_Go]

If you could see who is been chatting with online I say you'd fall off of your chair

 

I admit I'm curious. Your hypothesis may be correct and he goes for an 'opposite' instead of 'similar' (I've done both but I was unhappy with the former).

 

But I checked his ex gf (I know it's a bad idea) and she's very similar to him. Like a female copy of him (not visually - interests and attitudes). And he's very hang up on her (mentioned her on our first meet), although it has been many many years since their break up and she married to someone this summer.

 

It's just a phrase people say to mean they're not feeling it.

 

Something you said stuck with me. You said you are curious about him because he is exactly the way you were some time ago. That hit me as weird, who wants to date a version of themselves? Well apparently No_go, but maybe this guy is not attracted or is no longer attracted toward a woman that is too similar to him.

 

If you could see who is been chatting with online I say you'd fall off of your chair.

[No_Go]

So no, like I said, we didn't stay friends. He told me yeah let's be friends I'm around get in touch. And I changed my mind because I realized that it's only hurting me, hanging around.

 

Well don't say anything about a 5 yr plan either.

 

Oh but I'm assuming if you didn't change your mind friendship would have developed & maintained. I see how it is hard in practice though.

[No_Go]

You found a man who is happy and settled in his ways (most men in their 30s are) - I agree but what rubs me in a wrong way is you said 'men' not 'people'. Because as a human in my mid 30s (am I mid or early 30s? I'm about to turn 33), I'm also happy and settled in my ways. So why would be more reasonable that I'm the one doing the flexing?

 

I think after 30 (or even after 25) everyone is more or less set in their life, but flexing is possible if we split domains. E.g. I'd be totally willing to leave all the social entertainment planning and choices to a partner. I really couldn't care less if he'll prefer us to stay home, go out on a concert or meet friends on Friday night. I'd do whatever he likes and makes him happy. Same with food choices, movie choices etc. I'm open and fluid on this. So why don't I pick another domain where HE should be open and fluid?

 

no excuse for anyone, male or female, to not have mastered at least a few basic casseroles, risottos, and roasts by the time they're 25 Why the age treshold? I admire when people are good cooks but I haven't mastered it for the mere reason there has been no need. If I'm by myself I chop a couple of tomatoes for a salad, grill for 5 min a piece of meat + add some bread and I'm done. Or eat a pint of ice cream and call it a dinner (or, the latter is not healthy I know). When I'm living with a partner or roommate and they prefer warm food - they cook it for themselves and if they offer I join them.

 

But yeah, I'd love to know a few signature dishes to entertain guests So I'd look for the Better Homes and Gardens cookbook, thanks for the advice!

 

No, he wasn't perfect, he was the worst possible choice! You found a man who is happy and settled in his ways (most men in their 30s are) and who is, by your own account, really satisfied with his life the way he lives it, and not interested in "lifestyle" or possessions. He would have been horrified at the idea of being forced in to a box of your choosing. Any free spirit would be.

 

Even "unsettled" people are still allowed to have a sense of their identity and themselves. They should get an equal say in their living arrangements. The odds of finding a single man in his mid-30s who is still not secure enough in his identity that he'd happily accept living however a woman told him to are near zero.

 

You need to learn to compromise---and cook, for that matter. I am biased because my husband and I are both serious cooks, but there is no excuse for anyone, male or female, to not have mastered at least a few basic casseroles, risottos, and roasts by the time they're 25. Better Homes and Gardens sells a wonderful cookbook (released annually) with a lot of great advice for beginners and useful tips for cooks at all levels. Start with a Crock-Pot if you're really intimidated. Or pick a couple recipes you love and learn to make them yourself, then expand from there.

[No_Go]

Can you specify what is that 5 year plan about?

 

When I red it first I thought it was a 5 year plan with the house like you are giving yourself 5 years to renovate the bathrooms and redo the landscaping. I have a feeling that's not the 5 year plan you explained to him?

 

I haven't explained to him what it is about, and he didn't ask. Just mentioned I have one when he saw the cookware.

 

Otherwise it is of course big time about what you mentioned (landscaping, renovations) and I hope to get over more people in the house - you know what I mean.

[No_Go]

I'd be "fluid" enough in other areas. As said - about daily logistics (food, in and out of home entertainment), I am really open to about anything. I do whatever makes my partner at a time happy.

 

Equals doesn't mean clashing on the same "domains". Equals can have different strengths and responsibilities that sum up to about the same level.

 

Expecting a guy to be "fluid" enough to fit in the box you have created for him is completely unreasonable.

 

Further - would you truly respect such an individual?

 

A happy relationship should be made up of two equal partners. If you do not wish to be crammed into a box, why do you think your partner should be willing to?

[Gaeta]

But I checked his ex gf (I know it's a bad idea) and she's very similar to him. Like a female copy of him (not visually - interests and attitudes). And he's very hang up on her (mentioned her on our first meet), although it has been many many years since their break up and she married to someone this summer.

 

Do you know why they split up?

 

I don't know about him, or you, but the last thing I wanted while single was to date a copy of my ex.

[No_Go]

Indeed! I was not saying I expect someone to come using my cookware, I just thought in the next 5 years I will need it (regardless that right now I don't). Same for the extra bedrooms and drawers... I thought it will be another person that I'll have in the house but more so - I wanted to be prepared if something like this happens, not necessarily waiting in hopeful anticipation.

 

I had the provider role in my past relationships BUT they speculated and turned into parasites. I nowhere said I want a parasite who moves in with me and tricks me into paying for everything lying that he lost his job (like one guy did to me), or asking me out multiple times a week and expecting me to foot the bill for both (even though I was trying to save, and going out with him only to make him happy). They make the initial idea (positive) appear grotesque, and yes, I hated it in the end, because of that.

 

I'm all for taking the provider role for an open, honest individual, who is taking another responsibility at the same time. For a mooch - never again.

 

Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with buying cookware, even if you don't cook that much! Who knows when you might get the urge. I was never interested in cooking at all in my 20s in 30s, but now that I've hit my 40s I enjoy it quite a bit.

 

Likewise, I don't see anything wrong with buying a house with kids' bedrooms in mind, if you want kids, and to be thinking along those lines. But that information doesn't need to be shared with a new man.

 

I do find the empty dresser drawers, waiting for the right man to come along and dump his underwear in, to be a little strange, though.

 

 

 

You seem to want to take the role of provider and caregiver --you provide the house and stability, and your man is free to flutter around like a butterfly doing whatever he wants without having to worry about life's responsibilities.

You had that role in your previous relationships, didn't you? And didn't you ultimately have a problem with it, with the men mooching off you, not being financially responsible, etc.? Are you sure that's what you want?