Normally I try to keep events in this blog in chronological order, but I think it's important to resolve the ones left at the end of my last post.
The Blues Man and I kept texting throughout the weekend, mostly back to flirting and discussing random topics. He had promised to tell his girlfriend about what had happened between us, though, and I wasn't going to let him forget it. He texted me Tuesday afternoon saying that he'd done it.
From what I could piece together from his texts, she was understandably not very happy about it. I got the impression that she was feeling betrayed, even though they'd ostensibly agreed before that they were allowed to date other people. But being given theoretical permission and acting upon it are two very different creatures.
In the end she told him that we could date, but not have sex.
A few minutes after that text, I got another one from him asking if he could call. I was in an office full of our classmates, so I had to step out to talk. He said he was still discussing things with his girlfriend, and she wanted to know what “dating” meant. I very eloquently explained that to me, dating is “hanging out and having fun and stuff.” “You know to her that's going to mean sex,” he pointed out.
“If she says we can't have sex, we won't have sex,” I assured him. “But that doesn't mean I'm happy about it.” That's when I got on my polyamory soapbox.
I am all for guidelines of safety (e.g. no sex without a condom, no sex until you've both been tested, etc.). I even understand guidelines of comfort (e.g. I want to meet the other person, if you think things are getting serious between you and your Other Significant Other you have to tell me, if I have serious concerns about your OSO you have to give them honest consideration, etc.). What I don't understand are artificial limitations on what kinds of things can develop between two people. Those things can't be controlled.
So, let's look at examples.
Guy A, who you may recognize as the Linguist, is married and has 2 kids. He and his wife have an agreement that they can both date whoever they like. The only rule is that they are not allowed to date people who wish to break up their original relationship. If I started talking about him leaving his wife, for example, it is his responsibility to end things with me. That is totally fair, if you ask me.
Guy B, obviously the Blues Man, is in a long-term relationship with a woman. She agreed to allow him to date other people, but on the provision that he is not allowed to sleep with them. The reason she doesn't want him to sleep with anyone else is because she feels it would make that relationship as important to Guy B as his relationship with her is.
Now, Guy B's parameters are completely artificial. No rules can control what feelings develop between two people, and the decision to have sex should be made between the two of them as to its appropriateness and timing. I'm not saying the original partner shouldn't have some influence, but to have the complete decision-making power on this is absurd.
If you were an outside partner entering into a relationship with these men, which would you rather be in? The one where you're allowed to have an actual relationship that develops as it will, or the one where you have to constantly worry that you're breaking the rules set by his other partner? Or even worse, that the rules will change without you being able to have any input in them?
Now in this case, I'm really interested in dating the Blues Man. If I wasn't, I'd just say screw it, it's not worth it. I don't want to pretend that I'm fully okay with this, though, and I let him know it. If I have to operate within her rules to date him, I will. But this is definitely the exception for me, not the rule.
No comments:
Post a Comment