<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: You Don&#8217;t Have to Do It</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/</link>
	<description>Wielding the Stick of Grandmotherly Kindness</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 03:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: trin</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3202</link>
		<dc:creator>trin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3202</guid>
		<description>Added a link to this to the mono_poly community profile on LJ.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Added a link to this to the mono_poly community profile on LJ.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linda</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3139</link>
		<dc:creator>Linda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:56:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3139</guid>
		<description>The most dangerous thing in an abusive relationship is hope.  Noel, I'm with you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The most dangerous thing in an abusive relationship is hope.  Noel, I&#8217;m with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3064</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3064</guid>
		<description>Poly can enlightening if it is right for you. Read enlightenment here as it should read in most contexts as 'what I think has highest value in life'. Inner freedom which is a part of my understanding enlightenment is the ability to know and to enact with joy what is right for yourself. This may entail  going against societal norms, which is often the case with poly. However, going against societal norms doesn't automatically make you more enlightened. It only does if you are doing it out of inner freedom. 

Non-possessiveness and compersion I believe are expressions of enlightenment. That is that I believe it enlightened to allow others their freedom  (and you are deluding yourself if you think you can take it away) and take joy in that freedom. These I believe are things to be explored in ANY relationship poly or mono. Even without other romantic or sexually partners monogamous partners may struggle with jealousy and subsequent needs to control due to their partners attention to and joy in their passions and friends.

For me the path to greater inner freedom and enlightenment often involves pain. Even in the misted of excruciating pain it still feels right!

If it feels wrong I try (very hard) not to do it. I'm far from my ideal but I believe I'm moving toward it.

A far better index of enlightenment I think is that a person accept other peoples relationship structures whatever they are as long as the relationships promote the flourishing of those involved. It is also enlightened to apply the same to yourself and build relationships that promote your flourishing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Poly can enlightening if it is right for you. Read enlightenment here as it should read in most contexts as &#8216;what I think has highest value in life&#8217;. Inner freedom which is a part of my understanding enlightenment is the ability to know and to enact with joy what is right for yourself. This may entail  going against societal norms, which is often the case with poly. However, going against societal norms doesn&#8217;t automatically make you more enlightened. It only does if you are doing it out of inner freedom. </p>
<p>Non-possessiveness and compersion I believe are expressions of enlightenment. That is that I believe it enlightened to allow others their freedom  (and you are deluding yourself if you think you can take it away) and take joy in that freedom. These I believe are things to be explored in ANY relationship poly or mono. Even without other romantic or sexually partners monogamous partners may struggle with jealousy and subsequent needs to control due to their partners attention to and joy in their passions and friends.</p>
<p>For me the path to greater inner freedom and enlightenment often involves pain. Even in the misted of excruciating pain it still feels right!</p>
<p>If it feels wrong I try (very hard) not to do it. I&#8217;m far from my ideal but I believe I&#8217;m moving toward it.</p>
<p>A far better index of enlightenment I think is that a person accept other peoples relationship structures whatever they are as long as the relationships promote the flourishing of those involved. It is also enlightened to apply the same to yourself and build relationships that promote your flourishing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rainy</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3053</link>
		<dc:creator>Rainy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3053</guid>
		<description>Oh dear sweet zombie Jesus, yes. What you said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh dear sweet zombie Jesus, yes. What you said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3051</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:05:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3051</guid>
		<description>(Cross-posted from LJ)

Well, to be contrarian and prove the rule that no rule is always true, I know someone on another board who went through a transition-into-poly thing that was like surgery without anesthesia -- with the screams posted on the board all the way through -- because &lt;i&gt;she personally&lt;/i&gt; wanted to get to the other side. Not because the others were making her (as far as it looked online, anyway). And she did. She seems at ease, thrilled to be in the triad she wished for, and talks like what didn't kill her made her stronger.

Heck, I once went through an unexpected crying-in-the-pillow stage myself. There are times cut your losses and times to persevere.

Not that I'd recommend this to anyone. In fact, a good test might be whether they decide to go ahead and do it even after everyone says they shouldn't.

I bet that being pressured toward polyamory will become an increasing problem in the future -- because right now, practically everyone in the world throws up their hands and says you're insane if you even talk about trying it... which means you have to be pretty damn motivated and self-confident to go against this cultural wisdom.

As poly becomes widely known as potentially workable, there will be less of this automatic screening against people who are &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; really motivated and committed. Moreover, unwilling people will be more subject to pressure when they can't fall back on the "That's just crazy and everyone knows it!!" defense. 

So I think it's really important that warnings and advice like yours stay front and center.

The real solution will be for people to think up front about whether they want polyamory or exclusivity, and ask for it, when deciding whether to get into a serious relationship with someone. Like the "do you want children?" question for people who really do or don't want children. Right now monogamy is as much the unspoken assumption as marrying and having children was to people starting a romance in our grandparents' time (our grand&lt;i&gt;mothers&lt;/i&gt; anyway; often the grandfathers had other plans they kept unspoken).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Cross-posted from LJ)</p>
<p>Well, to be contrarian and prove the rule that no rule is always true, I know someone on another board who went through a transition-into-poly thing that was like surgery without anesthesia &#8212; with the screams posted on the board all the way through &#8212; because <i>she personally</i> wanted to get to the other side. Not because the others were making her (as far as it looked online, anyway). And she did. She seems at ease, thrilled to be in the triad she wished for, and talks like what didn&#8217;t kill her made her stronger.</p>
<p>Heck, I once went through an unexpected crying-in-the-pillow stage myself. There are times cut your losses and times to persevere.</p>
<p>Not that I&#8217;d recommend this to anyone. In fact, a good test might be whether they decide to go ahead and do it even after everyone says they shouldn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>I bet that being pressured toward polyamory will become an increasing problem in the future &#8212; because right now, practically everyone in the world throws up their hands and says you&#8217;re insane if you even talk about trying it&#8230; which means you have to be pretty damn motivated and self-confident to go against this cultural wisdom.</p>
<p>As poly becomes widely known as potentially workable, there will be less of this automatic screening against people who are <i>not</i> really motivated and committed. Moreover, unwilling people will be more subject to pressure when they can&#8217;t fall back on the &#8220;That&#8217;s just crazy and everyone knows it!!&#8221; defense. </p>
<p>So I think it&#8217;s really important that warnings and advice like yours stay front and center.</p>
<p>The real solution will be for people to think up front about whether they want polyamory or exclusivity, and ask for it, when deciding whether to get into a serious relationship with someone. Like the &#8220;do you want children?&#8221; question for people who really do or don&#8217;t want children. Right now monogamy is as much the unspoken assumption as marrying and having children was to people starting a romance in our grandparents&#8217; time (our grand<i>mothers</i> anyway; often the grandfathers had other plans they kept unspoken).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean Sparks</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3049</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean Sparks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3049</guid>
		<description>Whether a couple is practicing polyamory or monogamy, there's always going to be crying, and there's always going to be pain. In my view, there isn't such a thing as a "win-win" relationship, because we all have needs that evolve over time. We're not robots, we can't just find the compatible unit with the right operating system and dock with it for life, our desires, plans, practices, and emotions all shift through time. 

I have had some of those "White knuckled" periods in the relationship I'm in with my poly partner, in fact we just got out of one. It was the period during which we shifted from swinger to poly, and I had to change my whole mental model to accommodate for an emotional system of expression I hadn't before been used to. 

Polyamory, moreso (I feel) than monogamy, is about experimentation and negotiation.  Those processes aren't easy, for everyone involved to get what they want sometimes you have to let something go that you don't want to. I think that it's kind of a shame to throw away a perfectly good partner who's willing to negotiate and experiment with you simply because making changes in your life to make room for their needs can sometimes hurt. 

Life hurts. Relationships hurt. It's those factors that create the contrast in which we are able to observe what feels good and what doesn't. If everything went swimmingly in life and relationships, there probably wouldn't be a whole lot to talk about on the subject. 

-Sean</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whether a couple is practicing polyamory or monogamy, there&#8217;s always going to be crying, and there&#8217;s always going to be pain. In my view, there isn&#8217;t such a thing as a &#8220;win-win&#8221; relationship, because we all have needs that evolve over time. We&#8217;re not robots, we can&#8217;t just find the compatible unit with the right operating system and dock with it for life, our desires, plans, practices, and emotions all shift through time. </p>
<p>I have had some of those &#8220;White knuckled&#8221; periods in the relationship I&#8217;m in with my poly partner, in fact we just got out of one. It was the period during which we shifted from swinger to poly, and I had to change my whole mental model to accommodate for an emotional system of expression I hadn&#8217;t before been used to. </p>
<p>Polyamory, moreso (I feel) than monogamy, is about experimentation and negotiation.  Those processes aren&#8217;t easy, for everyone involved to get what they want sometimes you have to let something go that you don&#8217;t want to. I think that it&#8217;s kind of a shame to throw away a perfectly good partner who&#8217;s willing to negotiate and experiment with you simply because making changes in your life to make room for their needs can sometimes hurt. </p>
<p>Life hurts. Relationships hurt. It&#8217;s those factors that create the contrast in which we are able to observe what feels good and what doesn&#8217;t. If everything went swimmingly in life and relationships, there probably wouldn&#8217;t be a whole lot to talk about on the subject. </p>
<p>-Sean</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graydancer</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3048</link>
		<dc:creator>Graydancer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3048</guid>
		<description>I'm currently in a dating relationship with a woman who is new to poly - but not to nonmonogamy. She has a history of the "don't-ask-don't-tell" kind of thing, which in my own view is only slightly beyond cheating (and which is why, as we date, she is getting used to the whole full-disclosure thing). Recently, though, when some friends of hers asked if she was poly (since she was talking about two men she was seeing) her response was "Well, no...I just really like to fuck..." Which I find hilarious, in a lot of ways, especially as it makes her sound like a shallow hedonist when in fact she's a very deep hedonist.

But I'm entirely with you on this. I tell people often that if monogamy works for you , DO IT - all other considerations aside, it's easier just in terms of scheduling. I didn't choose to be poly; there are times I really wish I wasn't; but I know that it is the most successful relationship model for me. 

Really like your writing style, btw - glad I've found your blog. Keep it up!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m currently in a dating relationship with a woman who is new to poly - but not to nonmonogamy. She has a history of the &#8220;don&#8217;t-ask-don&#8217;t-tell&#8221; kind of thing, which in my own view is only slightly beyond cheating (and which is why, as we date, she is getting used to the whole full-disclosure thing). Recently, though, when some friends of hers asked if she was poly (since she was talking about two men she was seeing) her response was &#8220;Well, no&#8230;I just really like to fuck&#8230;&#8221; Which I find hilarious, in a lot of ways, especially as it makes her sound like a shallow hedonist when in fact she&#8217;s a very deep hedonist.</p>
<p>But I&#8217;m entirely with you on this. I tell people often that if monogamy works for you , DO IT - all other considerations aside, it&#8217;s easier just in terms of scheduling. I didn&#8217;t choose to be poly; there are times I really wish I wasn&#8217;t; but I know that it is the most successful relationship model for me. </p>
<p>Really like your writing style, btw - glad I&#8217;ve found your blog. Keep it up!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LadyPoetess</title>
		<link>http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3043</link>
		<dc:creator>LadyPoetess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:37:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/07/you-dont-have-to-do-it/#comment-3043</guid>
		<description>If both partners want to remain involved romantically, but are not suited to long-term primary relationships, sometimes secondary-style situations work better. A beloved I've been with for 5 years now and I are completely unsuited to living together or being primary partners to each other. We fight, we argue, we butt heads on everything. But as a secondary level relationship? We have great success. We tried living together once, and it was a disaster after 2 weeks - but as long as we aren't living together or trying to be a much larger part of each others' lives, we have a happy, fulfilling relationship.

Of course, we're both poly, so this works for us. I can't image how hard it must be for a monogamous person to try to make it work, being in a relationship with a poly person. It must be similar to a gay/straight couple, or a sexual/asexual I'd imagine, but possibly with more feelings of abandonment because of the poly partner's other relationships. Mixed orientation relationships can work, but that a lot of work on the emotional state of things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If both partners want to remain involved romantically, but are not suited to long-term primary relationships, sometimes secondary-style situations work better. A beloved I&#8217;ve been with for 5 years now and I are completely unsuited to living together or being primary partners to each other. We fight, we argue, we butt heads on everything. But as a secondary level relationship? We have great success. We tried living together once, and it was a disaster after 2 weeks - but as long as we aren&#8217;t living together or trying to be a much larger part of each others&#8217; lives, we have a happy, fulfilling relationship.</p>
<p>Of course, we&#8217;re both poly, so this works for us. I can&#8217;t image how hard it must be for a monogamous person to try to make it work, being in a relationship with a poly person. It must be similar to a gay/straight couple, or a sexual/asexual I&#8217;d imagine, but possibly with more feelings of abandonment because of the poly partner&#8217;s other relationships. Mixed orientation relationships can work, but that a lot of work on the emotional state of things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
