Non-traditional relationships and assoiciated stigma

[bene]

So, you have found a perfect form of relationship, he is the most interesting man in the world and everything is going exactly like you desire.

 

Why the 60 page thread then? I don’t see a happy person in those posts, there is a lot of anxiety and you don’t seem to enjoy the situation as much as you claim now. Would you turn him down if he’d show romantic (not necessarily in the mushy way you dislike) interest in you?

 

You don’t need to explain yourself to strangers or convince them of anything but just be honest with YOU. I see a lot of rationalizing and talking yourself into the idea that this “nontraditional” relationship is what you want.

 

I have wasted a lot of energy on non-relationships in the past and in hindsight they were all dead ends. It feels sad to witness a smart and articulate lady doing it to herself and I have the urge to somehow show other perspective and share my own life experience, not that my narrow petty bourgeois mind can’t handle an unconventional relationship (which isn’t really even the case in my opinion).

Edited October 25, 2017 by bene

[clia]

Well, I will grant you it’s non-traditional to want a man who:

 

1) Doesn’t want any romance at all, to say “I love you,” to never engage in any soppy or lovey-dovey stuff, pet names, etc.; and

 

2) Doesn’t prioritize you in any way and treats you exactly the same as he would treat a stranger or acquaintance; and

 

3) Doesn’t want to help you, but only wants to exist to inspire you and expand your goals.

 

Most women would consider this stuff to be red flags for a relationship, but if that’s what you want, more power to you. I actually don’t think a man like this should be that hard to find, especially if you also want a man who is unavailable. Maybe just look for men who are emotionally unavailable?

[NuevoYorko]

You got it right here! I want someone who *does not prioritize me in any way*.

 

 

I want someone who values me for me, NOT because he’s in a relationship with me. .

 

And I want someone who have strong enough principles to treat people the same way regardless of his feelings, positive or negative, towards them.

 

It sounds like you have, or want, only superficial relationships of all kinds. Intimate relationships are inherently prioritized over casual or group relationships. I am not talking about sex when I say "intimate" but rather the depth, meaning, and, yes, FEELINGS that an individual has in relation to another person. I am going to greater lengths for my childhood friend with whom I've shared some of life's most intense experiences, for example, and for my beloved daughter than I am for you. No offense. . I took care of my mother when she succumbed to Alzheimer's; I'm not doing that for my 3rd grade teacher.

 

I also devote as much time as possible to one charitable organization that I've chosen for personal reasons (including FEELINGS). I could not spread myself between two at that level, much less ever charity on Earth. I'd be useless.

 

If one were going to treat all people the same way regardless of personal feelings, they would not be giving much of myself to anyone or anything. Plus, it's physically and technically impossible. How this exemplifies a higher principle eludes me - unless you are talking about great humanitarians like Gandhi or Mother Theresa - but in your other thread you made it clear that you don't value that.

 

Treating certain people and things with special consideration doesn't mean or even imply that one things that these people and things are more valuable than others. If you treat your wife like a queen but are a serial rapist, you're an ******* and a scourge. If you treat your wife like a queen and treat your boss with kindness and respect, that's fine.

 

You are functioning with a HUGE misconception if you really believe that people who are in a loving reciprocal relationship are generally valuing each other because they are in a relationship and not for the essence of their partner. IMO the "traditional" relationships have become quite disposable, in any case. Divorce, etc.

 

Frankly, I don't think you really believe this stuff, but that you are pulling anything and everything out, no matter how far fetched, to rationalize your choice to elevate a crush to something that minimizes every other type of relationship dynamic.

[NuevoYorko]

I will share a "non traditional" relationship of mine. I have many and among my peer group this doesn't even qualify as "non traditional" - it's normal. Clearly to you it is completely out of bounds, so here you go:

 

 

To this day I have a treasured friendship with a woman that began over 30 years ago with my relentless pursuit of her and her rejection of that. We were, however, both active in a consuming and exciting art / cultural movement. That common ground is what brought and kept us together in early years. We have been through a lot of life together, traveled, been roommates in another country, made some memorable art, been there for each other in hard times. We prioritize each other. Also, when I chose to embrace our friendship I felt that it was my responsibility to function as a true friend and not as a sexual pursuer. If I had been what I understand (from this site) is known as an "orbiter," our friendship would never have developed, of this I am 100% positive and we've talked about it over the years. She would have been guarded and ultimately dumped me because she'd have been aware of my ulterior motives, or I would have become resentful of her for her constant rejection, so that was all banished forever and we became dear friends. Relationships need good common ground.

 

Ultimately I fell in love with someone, with whom I chose to form what you disparage - a "traditional relationship." She did as well. We are still friends. Our friendship and my care for her well being are a high priority for me.

 

If this type of bond is in the cards for you and this guy, I'm happy for you. It's a rare gift for most people. Things are going to have to evolve quite a bit for it to happen; he would actually have to prioritize YOU. Nurturing and maintaining any kind of relationship takes effort and desire from everyone involved.

[Cookiesandough]

Actually one sided love friendships are not really non-traditional relationships at all. They've been happening since the dawn of man...they're just ambiguous and people don't approve of them because the person in love usually ends up with the short end of the stick

[knabe]

Okay, so I figured out after a few posts that there is a whole other story here. My answer will just be in response tio part of your OP that struck me:

 

The part about the 3rd date-sex, 20th date-mom, 100th date-ring stuff.

 

I say to you - I completely agree.

 

I'll be blunt. I grew up very conservatively Christian. But even without that, I have always been a bit of a romantic. 3rd date sex rule to me is not so much traditional as it is....well, kinda slutty. There. I said it. And it is only my TAKE. 3 dates for me is still the VERY beginning. Sure I'll kiss 'em - we can even use tongue lol. But I think back to how many DIFFERENT people I had 3 or more dates with before my first marriage....I would have already slept with 15 or so people before I was even married. And, call me a prude if you want (which will GREATLY amuse my fiance), but in my book that would have meant I was cheap. Cause gross. Sex should be a little more though provoking than ordering a pizza and checking some stupid box.

 

Okay....sorry. I feel better now

 

And who says you have to meet mom at X time? Or get a ring? I would rather my own kids date "too long" and go "too slow" and be sure than marrying the wrong person or having a bunch of gross, low-self-esteem bedpost notches.

 

Now, I gather that you have strong feelings for a man who doesn't want to be romantic in any way, and you would basically rather be friends than nothing because you feel so intensely for him.

 

BTDT sister. More than once. It was painful in a lot of ways. It was kinda worth it in a few ways because they were awesome people. Neither of them changed their mind about me, however, and I eventually met someone else who DID like me "that way."

 

Unrequited love sucks, but it also isn't logical. I'd like to think if someone had told me in genuine care to stop hurting myself, I'd have listened. I doubt I would have.

 

So I don't have any answers, but I do have empathy.

[No_Go]

Guys - thanks for commenting and I'll get back to it a little later but I have one burning question for Lana, Nuevo, Clia. Have you guys been raised in a church setting (regardless of whether or not you are believers at the moment), which denomination and which geographic region? If it's TMI - just ignore.

 

The reason I'm asking is many of the comments on how a relationship/partnership should look like contain a specific language that I've personally seen only in the church circles of my ex-boyfriend. It could be coincidental but it just picked my interest because I've literally spend hours/days arguing with him on similar topics... and I see striking similarities in wording.

Edited October 25, 2017 by No_Go

[lana-banana]

What wording are you referring to? I have not said anything about how a relationship "should" look, only that partners should help each other out and care for each other. If that's a religion then I guess I'm a member of the Church Of Not Being A Jerk.

 

I am strongly inclined to agree with NuevoYorko, bene and Kamille---you don't really believe this and are breaking your back to justify why your obsession is totally okay and perfect for you. To that end, I am done here, because you aren't asking for help, you're practicing sophistry, which is repugnant to us classicists. When you're ready to be genuine I'll be around.

Edited October 25, 2017 by lana-banana

[clia]

I wouldn't say I was raised in a church setting. My parents took us to church a handful of times for Easter and Christmas, but we did not go on any sort of regular basis. We were not a religious family. I don't think I've sat through a church service other than for weddings or funerals since I was about 8 years old. I'm not religious in the slightest.

[No_Go]

Possibly for the sophistry, but this particular question has had nothing to do with the obsession-guy. I just got flashbacks from my ex - language like: 'you might see me as a stronghold against whatever else might come in life'. He would make a lot of statements like this: 'I wanted you to be one with me'. I never quite understood where is he coming from with these statements and assumed church. It could be something in the educational system or another cultural difference that I'm simply not understanding.

 

What wording are you referring to? I have not said anything about how a relationship "should" look, only that partners should help each other out and care for each other. If that's a religion then I guess I'm a member of the Church Of Not Being A Jerk.

 

I am strongly inclined to agree with NuevoYorko, bene and Kamille---you don't really believe this and are breaking your back to justify why your obsession is totally okay and perfect for you. To that end, I am done here, because you aren't asking for help, you're practicing sophistry, which is repugnant to us classicists. When you're ready to be genuine I'll be around.

[TheWoman]

Hi there No Go

We have some stuff in common... Im a INTJ/FJ currently having a romantic friendship with a asexual man, So weird for me because normally I am completely sexually orientated, but i adore this person, enjoy his company immensely, look up to him in some ways (he is an extraordinary polymath). I am open to meeting someone else (ideally who likes sex!) But dont want to give up my 'friendship' - so just bumbling along with it, no expectations and enjoying it for what it is. I never feel the need to post or ask or seek advice or approval for any of this, because I just dont. I see it for what it is, and accept it for what it is. So if you were feeling alone in your weirdness dont, just enjoy your life and your choices. What anyone else thinks is largely irrelevant and I think you must see from other posters here, no one is angry or upset, why would they be. You asked for their perspectives and you got lots of really interesting diverse ones, which is great. Take on board what you want to from that.

FYI I didnt the 50 page thread so cant comment on the ins and outs there.

[knabe]

Possibly for the sophistry, but this particular question has had nothing to do with the obsession-guy. I just got flashbacks from my ex - language like: 'you might see me as a stronghold against whatever else might come in life'. He would make a lot of statements like this: 'I wanted you to be one with me'. I never quite understood where is he coming from with these statements and assumed church. It could be something in the educational system or another cultural difference that I'm simply not understanding.

 

Sounds like he was of the "personal revelation", "prayer language," "deliverance service" kind.

 

Did he ever ask you who stole your Honda lolololol

 

I kill myself sometimes.

[NuevoYorko]

No, I was raised a heathen, by Atheists who were originally Jews but never observant.

 

Kindly specify what in my posts has brought you to the conclusion that there is some kind of Christian leanings to my opinion of relationships?

 

I was preparing food and I thought of some bullet points:

 

1)I can't for the life of me wrap my head around why you think you are experiencing a "non traditional relationship." From my POV it is a very common thing that most of us have probably experienced. Main difference is that you seem to be taking it to an extreme. I think it would help if you would define what you mean by "non traditional relationship" and refrain from disparaging any other type of relationship. Just give examples. Also explain why you think you're in one.

 

2) I do not have any problem whatsoever with what you're doing with this fellow. The problems I've had are around your anxiety, rationalization, spinning and denial which I do not think are healthy but maybe you just need to go through them.

 

3) The dynamic between you and this man as I see it: you are obsessed and you show it. For you, it's worth it to be near him even if he gives you little back.

 

For him, he's flattered by your obsession. It sounds like he may be working through some things, perhaps his own sexuality, where interaction with a virtual stranger is helpful.

 

If I'm correct it is a win/win. For now. It would need a lot more investment and reality to become a friendship. I'm not seeing anything non traditional about it.

[No_Go]

Sounds like he was of the "personal revelation", "prayer language," "deliverance service" kind.

 

Did he ever ask you who stole your Honda lolololol

 

I kill myself sometimes.

 

In the last (post-break up 6 months) phase of our relationship - he sent me sadly, 30+ pages of revelations of the aforementioned kind ??? I admit I was trying very hard to understand where he’s heading with that but failed

[knabe]

In the last (post-break up 6 months) phase of our relationship - he sent me sadly, 30+ pages of revelations of the aforementioned kind ??? I admit I was trying very hard to understand where he’s heading with that but failed

 

Um....let me just say you dodged a bullet.

 

I don't know all your ins and outs or backstory. All I can say is that if you find yourself in a lot of pain over this man, no matter how compelling you find him, the best thing FOR YOU at that point would be to cut the cord and buy as much ice cream and tissues as you need

 

I had a sort of "non-relationship" like that right after I separated, and he did a real number on me. I am not sure whether he meant to or not....but when it began to be painful and making me doubt myself, I should have pulled back despite the fascination.

[basil67]

It is near shocking to me that people openly discuss and participate in adultery, relationships for financial benefits, status based relationships, but has been upset with a benign crush because it didn't develop as 3rd date - sex, 20th date - meet the mom, 200 dates - rings exchange, etc?

 

You're forgetting that those 'non traditional relationships' were traditional up until about 100 years ago. Marrying for romance is a relatively new thing for western society.

 

People married for land. They married because she wanted children and he needed someone to run his house. They married when they found someone who's status was appropriate and they got on well enough. They married because they needed another horse. And because they weren't romantic marriages, adultery was rife.

 

Read up on your history.

[No_Go]

Ok, I will relax

 

For marriage - you're right, this would have been my own motivation. I have a bit of a concern for the house and won't like to coparent in other setting.

 

you seem to believe you can't experience mutual, reciprocal love with anybody

It may happen but I think its quite unlikely. Maybe at older age.

 

 

Marriage solely for legal and/or reproductive needs? Now that's rigid thinking! There are very few legal benefits to marriage and not everyone wants kids, but millions of people do it anyway.

 

Kamille is right: you seem to believe you can't experience mutual, reciprocal love with anybody. Kamille is also correct that you're obviously overintellectualizing this in an attempt to rationalize your current circumstances. Just relax.

[Springsummer]

[]

 

The short answer is I don't really know. maybe I am too narcissistic? too ego-eccentric?

 

[]

Edited October 25, 2017 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Topical content and member on moderation yet again

[No_Go]

I started writing about it because I didn't quite know how to handle the physical effects (sleeplessness etc). Then it just turned very interesting because there are open questions. I hate leaving open questions unanswered...

 

I have wasted a lot of energy on non-relationships in the past and in hindsight they were all dead ends I did as well but it was a growth opportunity, I don't think it was wasted time. I also don't see this one going for years as I did with the last one - i'm now too old and pragmatic

 

So, you have found a perfect form of relationship, he is the most interesting man in the world and everything is going exactly like you desire.

 

Why the 60 page thread then? I don’t see a happy person in those posts, there is a lot of anxiety and you don’t seem to enjoy the situation as much as you claim now. Would you turn him down if he’d show romantic (not necessarily in the mushy way you dislike) interest in you?

 

You don’t need to explain yourself to strangers or convince them of anything but just be honest with YOU. I see a lot of rationalizing and talking yourself into the idea that this “nontraditional” relationship is what you want.

 

I have wasted a lot of energy on non-relationships in the past and in hindsight they were all dead ends. It feels sad to witness a smart and articulate lady doing it to herself and I have the urge to somehow show other perspective and share my own life experience, not that my narrow petty bourgeois mind can’t handle an unconventional relationship (which isn’t really even the case in my opinion).

[No_Go]

:lmao: That's the grotesque over-exaggerated version. Find me an emotionally unavailable single man who is kind, high on 1) and 3), an medium on 2), I'll give him a shot;) I swear I just don't meet role models (men or women) too frequently... This one happened to be the first one in quite some years...

 

Well, I will grant you it’s non-traditional to want a man who:

 

1) Doesn’t want any romance at all, to say “I love you,” to never engage in any soppy or lovey-dovey stuff, pet names, etc.; and

 

2) Doesn’t prioritize you in any way and treats you exactly the same as he would treat a stranger or acquaintance; and

 

3) Doesn’t want to help you, but only wants to exist to inspire you and expand your goals.

 

Most women would consider this stuff to be red flags for a relationship, but if that’s what you want, more power to you. I actually don’t think a man like this should be that hard to find, especially if you also want a man who is unavailable. Maybe just look for men who are emotionally unavailable?

[No_Go]

Narcissism is quite overused word over here...

A true narcissist won't question themselves...

 

[]

The short answer is I don't really know. maybe I am too narcissistic? too ego-eccentric?

 

[]

Edited October 25, 2017 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Edited quote

[Cookiesandough]

:lmao: That's the grotesque over-exaggerated version. Find me an emotionally unavailable single man who is kind, high on 1) and 3), an medium on 2), I'll give him a shot;) I swear I just don't meet role models (men or women) too frequently... This one happened to be the first one in quite some years...

 

I am sorry I missed...why do you want an emotionally unavailable man? I thought you were looking for love and children??

 

Do you think you have the issue some people have where they only want people who do not want them ?

[No_Go]

Intimate relationships are inherently prioritized over casual or group relationships. Ah, this is it. I do not have any group relationship and very few casual (like coworkers that I just have to interact with). Pretty much any of my relationships is very serious,, heavy (like friends sharing about abuse etc), and my friends rarely know each other... I just meet them one-on-one.

 

I don't think you really believe this stuff, but that you are pulling anything and everything out, no matter how far fetched, to rationalize your choice to elevate a crush to something that minimizes every other type of relationship dynamic. I'm probably rationalizing but I also believe in what I've said. Maybe I will stop believing after experiencing it first hand.

 

It sounds like you have, or want, only superficial relationships of all kinds. Intimate relationships are inherently prioritized over casual or group relationships. I am not talking about sex when I say "intimate" but rather the depth, meaning, and, yes, FEELINGS that an individual has in relation to another person. I am going to greater lengths for my childhood friend with whom I've shared some of life's most intense experiences, for example, and for my beloved daughter than I am for you. No offense. . I took care of my mother when she succumbed to Alzheimer's; I'm not doing that for my 3rd grade teacher.

 

I also devote as much time as possible to one charitable organization that I've chosen for personal reasons (including FEELINGS). I could not spread myself between two at that level, much less ever charity on Earth. I'd be useless.

 

If one were going to treat all people the same way regardless of personal feelings, they would not be giving much of myself to anyone or anything. Plus, it's physically and technically impossible. How this exemplifies a higher principle eludes me - unless you are talking about great humanitarians like Gandhi or Mother Theresa - but in your other thread you made it clear that you don't value that.

 

Treating certain people and things with special consideration doesn't mean or even imply that one things that these people and things are more valuable than others. If you treat your wife like a queen but are a serial rapist, you're an ******* and a scourge. If you treat your wife like a queen and treat your boss with kindness and respect, that's fine.

 

You are functioning with a HUGE misconception if you really believe that people who are in a loving reciprocal relationship are generally valuing each other because they are in a relationship and not for the essence of their partner. IMO the "traditional" relationships have become quite disposable, in any case. Divorce, etc.

 

Frankly, I don't think you really believe this stuff, but that you are pulling anything and everything out, no matter how far fetched, to rationalize your choice to elevate a crush to something that minimizes every other type of relationship dynamic.

[No_Go]

I am sorry I missed...why do you want an emotionally unavailable man? I thought you were looking for love and children??

 

Do you think you have the issue some people have where they only want people who do not want them ?

 

I'll tell you what I think it is: if they get too 'available' I don't believe them. I know how many times I've said ILY and never *really* meant it... I mean there was some loving but nothing worth the expression...

 

Also my family is a big hurdle for me. The desire of my last ex to meet my family really gave me PTSD. I'd wake up in the middle of the night thinking how to avoid it. Not that they are scary monsters but I somehow relate my worth in front of them with being single. It is dumb but I can't get over it - even therapists have told me just to explain to partners rather than trying to fight this over-riding fear.

[Cookiesandough]

thanks, no_go. I think i understand. I'm sorry!