jpolowin at hotmail.com
Sun Jun 24 17:32:45 BST 2018
pouncer at aol.com wrote:
> It seems to me analogous to Miles's remarks about Cordelia's
> adaptation to aristocracy. Something along the lines of:
> Democrats are fine with aristocracy, as long as they get to be
> Clearly, the monogamous are fine with polyamory, as long as
> they wind up among those enjoying amore'.
I don't understand what you're saying.
I've had two girlfriends. The first relationship wasn't a good one.
The woman wasn't comfortable with spending time with fannish people,
nor with poly people. She had some deep-seated insecurities, and
my contact with poly friends made her concerned that I was poly too,
and therefore unfaithful. Regardless of how many times I explained
to her that *I* was monogamous, with poly friends.
My second (and current) partner is poly by orientation, in a monogamous
relationship. Through her, I've spent more time with poly people than
I had previously.
Most of my adult life has been without a partner. There were several
severe unrequited mad crushes. I've never been good at letting go
I don't think my feelings about poly have changed much depending
on whether I was, or was not, in a relationship. I've had better
*understanding* of some aspects, at a rational level, since I've
had my sweetie to talk things over with, but my *feelings* have
shifted, slowly, by spending time with people who were non-monogamous.
And despite my being in a relationship now, there are aspects of poly
-- the tertiary / quaternary / etc. relationships and the "drama" --
that I'm still uncomfortable with. None of my business, as Anmar says
(except to the extent that I end up providing emotional support for
a friend who is going through "drama"), but that is sometimes a thing
I have to remind myself.
More information about the Lois-Bujold