I don’t think the sex of either party is really an issue. Yes, most platonic friends usually insist on going dutch. And allowing the other person to pay is definitely one sign that it’s a “date.” However, excluding that, if she has given him no other indication that she’s interested romantically (and by that I mean a lingering glance or flirting or constantly touching him) and especially if she’s said out loud that she’s not interested, then I’d say that she’s not interested.
Now whether or not she’s forgiven for giving mixed signals is not my call. That’s up to Lizard. If she were my girlfriend, though, I’d definitely admonish her for constantly accepting his generosity with no intention of repaying it in any form. It’s not nice.
I agree. I jumped to conclusions. I think so did he.
yes, I’m a hypocrite.
The point isn’t to get someone hooked. The point was to build enough of a relationship where polyamorism is actually given thought instead of being summarily dismissed.
You and I see this as unethical. But will you concede, as I do, that there is a small gray area where this is valid?
Nope. There is no chance that’s what Lisa was trying to do, because I just met her that very evening, and she had no way of knowing what I thought of TLB. I believe Lisa (who is quite nice) introduced me to Brian out of mere courtesy, and would probably be horrified if she knew what a mental cascade of events she accidentally initiated.
I am indeed trying to move on. But let me put to rest once and for all that Brian is a “creepy, stalker-type of guy” who had Lisa hoodwinked. Lisa has known TLB for years. I don’t believe there is any chance some guy could show up and fool her into thinking he is TLB’s significant other, especially with TLB in the same room. Not only that, but TLB’s prior behavior was evasive, I just didn’t believe she had malignant motives. It just all adds up, unfortunately, strongly in favor of the mainstream interpretation of these events in this thread.
Would you think it was valid if the roles were reversed? If a monogomous person was wooing a polyamorous person, hoping that they would give monogamy a chance after four months of dating? Why should either person be expected to even consider giving up something that is fundamentally important to their views on relationships, wether it be monogomy or polyamory?
Lizard
To address you directly. I am sorry I jumped all over you. I was wrong.
First off. Yes I do believe people can be asked to consider their views on relationships. Why the hell not? I do it internally all the time. How would one change/grow otherwise?
I see no problem with a monogamous person attempting to change a polyamorous person. It’s the polyamorous person’s choice wether or not to change. Just as it’s the monogamous person’s attempt to change them. But I believe it should be made clear early in the relationship. 4 months is much too long.
<hijack>Why is Brian even in his relationship with TLB to start with? The guy’s putting up with a girlfriend who doesn’t want anyone to know that she’s not available. That would strike me as trouble. If I were him, I’d wonder if she was planning on cheating on me, or if she was ashamed of me, somehow. </hijack>
Lizard, just be glad you didn’t end up really getting involved with TLB. She sounds like someone to stay far away from, no matter how cute she is or how cool she seems.
You’re silly. You’re not being a hypocrite either. I think you’re showing remarkable patience and sensibility in discussing this issue.
Hmmmm…Well, but if a person already knows what he or she wants, this is still unfair, sneaky and underhanded, if the other person doesn’t make it clear upfront.
No, I’m sorry, I don’t. The other person should be allowed from the beginning information. Especially if they’re being asked to consider something new and that far off the beaten path for their usual preferences. To hide what you want from them in the hopes that it will make it so that, as you say “polymorism is actually given thought” is manipulative. And again, it’s not just polygamy that I have a problem with here, it’s with ANYTHING that one person is hiding from the other in the hopes that they can “talk them into it”, “make it easier to swallow (no pun intended :D)”, “overcome their inhibitions” etc etc etc.
No, no grey areas, hiding information is sneaky and underhanded, particularly if the person who is considering “hiding” it is doing so for their own wants and needs. In this case, because they’re hoping “enough of a relationship will be built that the other person will give their own preferences a second thought”. IF a person is going to do that, they should be given the benefit of the doubt that they are capable of making that decision on their own, not that they’re so “closeminded” or whatever, that they have to be “led there” by allowing some relationship to develop first.
And I’m not even talking about getting the other person completely hooked. Even if you only go out with a person a couple of times, for many, if not most people, even just the rejection from it not turning out hurts. So imagine the hurt if you start getting attached to someone, and start thinking “hmmmm, this could be the one” and along about the second or third week you’ve been dating them, they’re like “oh by the way”…
Oh, wow, so he’s not ever going to be my “one and only” he wants to be a ten and only with a whole harem of women. Great, so I just wasted 3 weeks of my time on someone who was plotting otherwise, how nice.
IF, on the other hand, the person wanting other than to look for a serious relationship, is upfront about it, he saves him or herself a lot of time and heartache too. No recriminations and tears from the person when they finally find out “the truth”, no “great, now I’ve got to start from scratch” and so on.
If you, collective you, tell the truth upfront, you can date the type that is suited to
your own personal choices right off the bat, no second guessing, no having to keep secrets and hoping that the other person will “change their mind” or give your wants a second thought", etc
But that’s not what we’re discussing. Yes, if two adults want to ask someone to reconsider their views, by all means, that’s reasonable. What is NOT reasonable, is to keep what you want them to change all to yourself, while you keep dating them, allowing them to begin to become attached to you, and then spring it on them.
YOU’VE had the chance to work it out during the whole period, THEY’VE been hoodwinked.
Can you see the difference?
In the first scenario, the cards are on the table to begin with, each side has an equal view of them, and is given the benefit of the doubt by the other party that they are adults and can discuss and come to an agreement on the issue, or disagree as it were.
In the second case, only one person knows what’s really going on. And that person is PURPOSELY keeping it a secret for his own purposes, that of hoping that he/she can convince the person based on shared history that is being built, to come over to his or her way of thinking. The other person doesn’t get to know until he has some attachment to the first person.
When the person PLANS it this way, ON PURPOSE, it’s selfish, manipulative and wrong.
So is more than a few dates, if that. Again, why waste yours or the other person’s time? That person is not the only person on the planet to be with, if they aren’t wanting that lifestyle, why try to "change them? That’s not “respect” why want someone who isn’t what you’re looking for in the first place?
That makes no sense. It’s like dating a skinny, dark haired woman and then trying to make her become Marilyn Monroe, why not date a Monroe type in the first place?
For what it’s worth, I think you sufficiently atoned before this message, although you seem to have jarred something loose in CanvasShoes. She’s normally quite mellow, so maybe you just hit a nerve. Good luck with that!
Let me explain how I see it. I see the desire to be considered as what drives this manipulation. There is no intent to hurt the other party, and certainly not a want to. Omission of information is often necessary even get your foot in the door. However there is no desire to manipulate anyone. The manipulation is a byproduct of their desires, it is not their primary intent. If they could go without, then they most certainly would. To some people it is a small but necessary evil.
I do not agree with this. I do not think it is a necessary evil. I do not believe it is acceptable. I see it is a purely selfish desire. A selfish want without the desire to hurt others. But because at its core I see selfishness and no desire to hurt others I can accept this view.
Which do you hold higher? Intent or actual action?
Maybe i’m just idealistic, but I judge a man by his motives.
I can accept selfishness. Who am I to stop someones pursuit of happiness?
You do not change people. People change themselves. Also Because besides this one lifestyle choice they may very well be perfect. I’m not personally going to give up a chance to be with someone I may very well end up changing for by my own volition.
TLB - “Lisa, Brian, I need you guys to do me a favor. There’s this guy I’m friends with who doesn’t seem to be taking the hint that I’m not interested…”
I’m not saying this is what happened, but this is exactly the sort of thing some people do to try and avoid confrontation.
Give it up. You two were never dating, we discussed this 4 months ago. You went out a few times, had a nice time and that’s it. It was pretty clear then that she didn’t consider you a romantic interest, why should it matter now if she does or doesn’t have a boyfriend? What is more important is that she is not interested in you as a lover.
If you like talking to her and hanging out with her, then go ahead, you’re a big boy, just don’t pretend you have something you don’t. If you can’t handle that emotionally, just break off socializing with her.
Yes, I understand. Though like you (I think you’re agreeing right? :)), I disagree with the actions of these folks, and not, they’re not all innocently doing this as a means to an end. I guess that’s what’s “jarred loose” in me. That is, that for too many of these folks it’s a deliberate part of their dating repertoire. I really, really hate dating as it is. To waste my time on what amounts to a lie is, to me, pretty annoying at best, heinous in more serious cases (someone lets it go all the way to marriage before “fessing up” as it were).
Ahh, okay, then the only place you and I differ, is that I do NOT accept this behaviour in dating potentials.
Hmmmmmmm, difficults question. See, I’ve always believed that actions speak louder than words. But then, some people are good at hiding, or disguising their intent with their actions and their words. I guess this is why the sneaky underhanded “I’ll hide what I really want and spring it on them when I’m more sure I’ve ‘got’ them” approach makes me a little irritated.
Okay, I’m guessing you’re viewing it from merely watching two OTHER people do this dance, I’m viewing it from the inside out. And the answer in that case is ME, I’m who is to stop it, if the other person’s pursuit if happiness is at the expense of my own, or is in some process of trying to change me so that I suit their wants and desires.
Hell with 'em! Like I asked before, if they want someone polygamous, then PICK someone like that in the FIRST place!! I don’t get the picking someone who Is NOT already that way and wanting to change them thing.
Lizard
Good, i’m glad. Good luck to you as well.
[/QUOTE]
Um, i’m not 100% sure I get what you’re saying here. Could you clarify?
No. I can view this from the inside out. I’m obviously not going to like it. I’d bitch, i’d moan. I’ll be angered. But i’d still try my best to find out his/her side of the story first.
If you also believe you can make them happy, what then?
Well, was attempting to answer your question about what counts more with me, intent or actions.
If the other person’s side of the story is that they had kept something, such as died in the wool polygamy, to themselves, hoping and expecting that the other person (let’s say ME in this example to make it simpler), would after a certain amount of time together, have developed enough feelings for them that they might then change their views on the trait that was originally hidden from them. Then there IS no “story” that they’re going to have that I’m going to want to hear.
Like most people, my sexual orientation isn’t something that can be changed, and CERTAINLY not because someone else merely wants to “have” me. And in the case of polygamy, that IS what we’re talking about, is sexual orientation. You either are, or are not gay. You either are or are not bi, you either are or are not cut out to have multiple partners at the same time.
Thinking that someone could just be talked out of that is just as insulting to a monogamous person as it is to a gay or polygamous person. I have to answer the question with “it depends upon what the intent IS”. If it’s motivated by selfish reasons, then actions are more important. If it’s motivated by open and honest ones, then intent.
It’s not UP to me to get to “have” someone merely because I believe I can “make them happy”, particularly if that entails trying to force them to change some inextricable part of themselves, such as their sexuality. Them’s the breatks, you don’t get to have anyone, and everything you want. Sometimes, even when YOU (collective you) want something, or someone badly, and can see every reason why, if they or it were only to allow it, it would work and you think you’d “make” them happy, it’s still not your choice, and not meant to be.
As to the change someone into what you want. I’m not talking about trying to help someone who is a slob be a better housekeeper, or helping someone become better educated, or develop a taste for beer or something.
Sexual orientation (wanting them to change from monogamous to poly etc) is not something a person can, or should change. To try to get them to is wrong, imho.
Thats fine. I pretty much agree with you. But I’d like to point out that it is not so much an attempt to change you, but an attempt to have you consider it. As I said before, you do not change people, people change themselves.
Uh, you think this is the case because? Presumedly the attraction is mutual otherwise the problem is moot anyway. Since both parties obviously see something then wouldn’t you want to be considered as a person as a whole instead of a single trait? What if you were Butt Ugly, wouldn’t you want to be judged on your personality instead of wholly and immediately on your looks? Is it really any different from make up or plastic surgery?
I do not think monogamy and polyamorism are wholly incompatible like sexual orientaitons are. Whether or not it is a choice is up to debate. I personally haven’t completely decided.
To clarify; Would it be more accurate to say you don’t abide by selfishness and are consistent for intent instead of action?
oh, I completely agree. Not my choice. But this wasn’t the point I was trying to make. If one believes they can make another happy while by omitting a fact then there is no purposeful movement to hinder your pursuit of happiness. It is in fact a desire to aid you on it. If it so happens that you are hindered, then so be it. It was a honest mistake.
I don’t see why you insist on putting this in terms of possession and force. I don’t see it that way. I see selfish manipulation, but only to allow the you the ultimate choice.
Just to throw this out. Is it ok to decieve someone if its for their own good? I don’t particularly think this is the case. I just want to hear your answer.
I don’t think I finished this post, but I need to go.
Either way, it’s the same thing, because what is being asked is to “reconsider” one’s sexual orientation. Insulting whether you’re being asked to change it, or to “consider” something else.
As I stated in the beginning of that paragraph, it was merely an example for the sake of illustration. And yes, if two people are attracted to each other the attraction is mutual, it’s not as if you’re going to know at first attraction that the object of your attention is polygamous, or is just out to get laid. THAT is where I have the problem, that of them knowing it, but not sharing it until they feel it’s “safe” to do so because to withhold it might enhance their chances of getting what THEY want, hell with how the other person might feel about it.
Well, a lot of people don’t really know, until they “KNOW”. Many gay people date and even have sex with opposite sex people until they finally realize their “true” nature.
Again, just an example, but I know, deep down about myself that casual sex and multipartner sex is NOT for me. And yes, like a lot of people I had to actually go through that to know that. But even if I (or anyone else in the same situation) did NOT already know their orientation, it is still NOT okay to withhold infomration for your own gain. (yeah, Lizard is right, this IS a rather hot button issue for me, I hate dating as it is, throw this kind of sneakiness into it, and grrrrr ffffft fffft :D).
I don’t think, that within the context of a relationship, even a new undefined one, that you can separate intent and action. Sorry if I seem to be dodging your question. Example, my boyfriend INTENDS to call and come over to see me, and he really WANTS to, but he falls asleep and takes a nap instead. Intent doesnt’ matter, it’s his actions that said what he really thinks.
So, I guess if I HAD to choose, it would be unselfishly motivated action.
I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, I can’t wrap my mind around any sort of dishonesty in a relationship. Withholding something from someone, no matter how “new” the relationship to me is a deal breaker. A huge one.
Because, by purposely withholding information, the other person is deciding FOR the second person what he/she “needs” to know. And like I said above, I personally would highly resent that, and it would probably be a dealbreaker for me.
Note, I’m not talking about somethiing the person is trying to work up to, or needs to find the right time to disclose, I’m talking of purposeful withholding of information for his/her own benefits and choice.
In my book? No. For one thing, I can’t imagine a case where being lied to would really be for “their own good”.
I was raised that way, and it’s really ingrained in me. With me, you may not get what you want if you’re honest, but if you lie, and try to hide something, that’s it. Period, you’re done. That’s how important it is to me.
I really don’t see why this is insulting, but meh, Thats me. Would it be insulting if you were a fundamentalist homophobe and I asked you to consider alternate views on homosexuality? Consider meaning that you can 1) adopt, 2) accept as valid, but disagree 3) Still reject.
This is obviously where we differ irreconcilably. I can only do so if it is not malicious. As I said earlier, it’s the difference between the ends justifying the means and the means justifying the ends.
How do you feel about make up and plastic surgery?
I have a question. Do you think most people have ever even seriously given thought to non-monogamous relations?
i’m confused. What he really thinks is his intent. What happened was him falling asleep. It’s a fundamental miscommunication. In anycase, you suscribe to the actions model, so the point is moot.
In the end we agree on how things should be done. I think we just have different reasons as to why it should be that way
My answer is “of course not,” for the same reason I don’t go out drinking or to museums with married women.
Why not? As a straight married male, I have married women friends with whom I have common interests in history, photography, drama, art and food. Of course I go to bars and museums with them; also on trips to functions in distant cities, sailing, and to countless dinners and myriad plays. One in particular, married to a police chief, has been my fine arts and picture taking buddy for forty years. She gets along great with my wife, who is more focused on law and politics than I. Where did you get the idea that a sexual relationship was implicit in every sustained contact with a woman?
Has it occurred to anyone that “TLB” may be considering an end to her current relationship and gently testing the waters to see what’s out there? Her behavior seems to fit this premise.
Her lack of transparency is irrelevant. Women are under no obligation to specify their exact degree of sexual availability. What happens, happens. The complainant seems to be lamenting the INEFFICIENCY of the process, like he wasted his time zeroing in on this target when he could have been having sex with a less encumbered girl sooner.
