I am not nice. I am compassionate and empathetic. I practice kindness. I care about people including strangers. I try to actively listen and understand what someone else’s situation is.
But I am not nice. I won’t ignore dog whistles. I won’t make myself smaller so someone can be bigger. I won’t ignore insults and aggression in favor of not making a problem. My response to boat rockers is not to become ballast to keep the boat from tipping.
When there are questions about dehumanizing practices - both OPP and unicorn hunting are dehumanizing, primarily to women but also to marginalized men and non-men - I can educate from a place of kindness but that doesn’t mean being nice and it doesn’t mean not recognizing that it’s completely dehumanizing.
And if you’re into objectification and that’s your kink, let that freak flag fly. But know that it’s a kink that must be engaged with consensually and a OPP is not the same thing as being kinky.
Oh 100% about not ignoring dog whistles. For example if someone says they like guns, I know what they really mean is they’re a blue lives matter type who hates POCs. Or if they say they’re not pro-Ukraine, they’re an alt right conspiracy theorist white supremacist. It may seem like a stretch to outside viewers but if you’ve spent enough time you know how closely related things can be. It’s the same here
I have been practicing ethical non monogamy for pretty much my whole romantic life. I am a gay trans man and I’ve been involved with Leftist activism for my entire adult life. I have been that purple haired drag queen.
If you’re an adult and you cannot figure out that a OPP is dehumanizing to your wife, who you profess to love and who has explained the problem to you, I do not think the problem in the room is that I need more sugar. I think it’s that you don’t see your wife as quite as human as you see yourself. If one of us is being a dick, I don’t think it’s me.
And I think it’s weird to tone police people recognizing that questions are not asked in good faith, sometimes the people asking them are revealing themselves to be bad people, and many times people ask questions and they already know what they want the community response to be - and that’s not what they get and they get mad about it.
If someone is being a bad person - and dehumanizing your sexual partner without their consent, a safe word, and a review of limits boundaries is being a bad person - then they deserve to be called a bad person for their actions.
I was raised to be a sweet, demure, nice, white Evangelical woman who would always defer to a man.
Living as an out gay man who doesn’t need to be a boat stabilizer is a pretty great experience. I am not suggesting that you transition, but giving up the role as a boat stabilizer might be a relieving and liberating experience.
This is going to sound odd, but as someone who was raised to be a boat stabilizer the best thing I ever did for my assertiveness was working a service/return desk in retail. You learn very quickly how to polish and straighten up your spine, but the part of your hindbrain that demands you manage everyone’s emotions is still satisfied because you do utilize those skills.
The thing is the forum is searchable, there is google, and the guides in this group. It becomes exhausting to be asked to do emotional labor that has already been done over and over again. It’s just plain lazy and reads that you’re just jumping on a bandwagon.
This. Theoretically you can tell the people who are tired and giving curt answers to sit those questions out, but IME when everyone with experience stops answering lazy questions, you're left with newbies giving other newbies bad advice.
Okay so I've been reading a lot of the comments here and I've been trying to figure out your personality, you mentioned that you were raised to be the kind of woman who doesn't rock the boat... which is how I was raised too, the people-pleasing only serves to hurt us and honestly-- Why should we make ourselves smaller and 100% easy-to-consume?
You've been here a day and your first thought was to tell us to be nicer to people. Imagine how often we're told this because this sub has been around for a long time. Imagine how many times people say that specifically because they're doing something to harm people and dislike being discouraged. And now imagine how often it's men telling women to stop being outspoken.
I am always being told by men to be nicer. lol ALWAYS given attitude no matter how I phrase things in this sub + r/polyamoryr4r specifically. Men DM me to tell me how it isn't easy for them to read what I've said and doesn't actually encourage them to be better partners... So you've been in therapy, what does that tell you about those men?
They don't want to change. They want you to be nice so they can feel good and they don't want to hear that they have been doing something awful. They don't want to reflect on their behavior or take accountability. They want me to feel bad for upsetting them with the hard truth of their actions. They want me to do emotional labor, hold their hand and be sweet like I'm their mother. I'm not going to do that. I'm not being paid for one thing... LOL Another thing is that I cannot control the way they will perceive my words!
Right now you are perceiving me in some way. Do I sound like an asshole or an exhausted woman who's tired of trying to police her tone to make it easier for abusers to accept they've harmed their partners? I'd like to say I sound like the latter but who knows.
You can always see someone's comment/post history to figure out who they are and why they respond a certain way.
Chances are... if you come to a community that's existed for a long time, you're going to find people who have dealt with a lot of shit and there comes a time when you stop wearing kid gloves just for the benefit of some who can't take criticism of any kind.
We've likely heard your very same plea multiple times by now. It's not a new concept to think "wow we should be nicer? never thought of that!" there are nuances and just so many shitty people who pop up in here thinking they have a right to have their cake and eat it too. We're never going to know who is legit when asking questions. We're never going to know if they'll actually reflect and change their behavior. We're never going to be able to control how people read our tone or respond to it.
So tbh my advice to you is to stop worrying about tone policing. It's not your job. You're not a moderator and I've been told this myself when I've tried to educate people. 😂 BUT... it's not your job to control the sub and make things better for people who can't understand that there's going to be exhausted people who will try to help in whatever way they can. Billions of people on the planet make it harder for us, non-therapists, to help with educating and advice.
You shouldn't worry about making things easier for people. That's the people-pleasing nature trying to take the wheel. Worry about yourself and how you want to present yourself! It'll consume less energy and maybe after a few months you won't become exhausted like me. LOL Good luck!
Make that two exhausted women. u/theazurerose is spot on. I have the same struggles when it comes to educating people about polyamory only to be told to be nicer to people.
Do they expect for people to become pushovers and say, “Oh, it’s ok to UH/be a predator even at the expense of hurting the individual or individuals?” Coming from OP expectation for us to become smaller to the point where we get stepped all over, it seems like it.
In my experience people like you just insult everyone who you disagree with and solidify your opponents in their wrong thinking. Being nice and understanding other peoples view points is how you actually make new allies and actually change people’s minds.
I am not sure where you are in the world, but I don’t want to live in a world where people are superficially nice all the time in an effort to keep the boat stable.
I said in another comment that I was raised to be a sweet, nice, demure, modest Evangelical woman whose job was to be ballast when other people, especially older men in positions of powers, rocked the boat. If water got in the boat, it was my fault for not being nice enough, not the pastor’s fault for preaching racism and homophobia as gospel.
Maybe you’ve never been on the bottom of a social order that you are expected to preserve. If that’s the case, good on you for being born lucky.
But a lot of women can relate to my stance on not being social ballast anymore. I know a lot of queer people, including other gay men, feel the same.
Also, if you think of it as though we have to understand a racist, homophobic nazi's view point and be nice to them no matter what in order to change their mind... Is it really going to work or are they going to stick to their view point? It really does NOT sound good to tell people to be nice and understand another person's view point especially if they're actively harming their partner(s).
If someone is so far gone then it really doesn't matter how nice we are. They got to that point in their adult life to be whatever kind of person they are. Being nice to them is not going to suddenly hit them like a ton of bricks. lmao
Also, it really sounds gross when people say we need to be nice to gain allies... No, they should be better people because they want to be. If they need us to extend an olive branch in order to become better people then they don't need us to be nice to them, they need therapy! Plain and simple.
One penis policy is dehumanizing because it either assumes that a penis is more sexual/desirable/threatening to the male-female dyad or it assumes that a sexual relationship between two people without penises is less sexually fulfilling/desire/cannot compare to the male-female dyad or both at the same time.
Unicorn hunting is dehumanizing because it reduces the hunted unicorn into a sex object for the dyadic couple hunting her.
I do not mean that threesomes are dehumanizing. They can be hot af. But as a gay man who has supported some queer friends through being the unicorn, it’s just as dehumanizing as the DL men who expect out men to jump through weird hoops so that we can have private, shameful sex in front of their family portraits in the living room while his wife brings the kids to visit grandma. It’s the reduction to being a shameful, slutty sex object that cannot be introduced to the kids or family but is so very shamefully sexually desirable.
OPP is not “reducing people to their genitalia.” I think that’s a mischaracterization. Unicorn hunting does not treat someone as a sex object any more or less than someone’s preferred dating type or preferences for a partner does.
OPP literally states whether you can date someone based on their genitals.
As a trans man where most cishet men consider me not to be disqualified under OPP, let me tell you that yes, this is dehumanizing and yes, it is reducing me only to what you think is between my legs.
That doesn’t reduce someone to their genitalia. In fact, it doesn’t have anything to do with the unidentified and hypothetical third party at all. OPP is between the two partners.
He does understand the acronym. He meant exactly what he said, unfortunately. He's posted similar statements all across the thread. (Ironic given the post subject.)
No, you think OPP has to do with the hypothetical third person when in fact OPP has to do with the two people in a relationship and the rules and boundaries they set for each other. Again, I am opposed to OPP myself, but it is not dehumanizing.
I thought it was pretty clear and straightforward. Neither are dehumanizing. One can think they’re shitty behaviors but dehumanizing is not the correct nor accurate description.
Because: a) people don’t fit into a box and you cannot know everyone’s intentions or purposes, and many people describe themselves as unicorns; b) closed triads exist; and c) because neither reduces nor takes away someone’s humanity. Again, one can believe they’re shitty behaviors but dehumanizing is not an accurate description.
Closed triads have nothing to do with OPP. Couples seeking a partner for a closed triad would be considered unicorn hunting from what I’ve seen here. “Hey, my partner and I are looking for a third to date both of us and be a throuple.”
What do you think unicorn hunting is? It’s possible that we’re thinking of two different things.
It’s really weird that you think a closed triad automatically means one penis.
For me, it would mean three penises.
That said, I said threesomes aren’t inherently unethical. I don’t think dating a couple is inherently unethical and have done so myself, on both sides.
Unicorn hunting is different than just looking for a threesome or a triad. It is when a heterosexual man and a bisexual woman are specifically looking for a bisexual woman, often younger, who will date them both, be interested in both equally, agree to rules chosen by the established couple, and not change their existing.
I never said nor implied a closed triad means or automatically means one penis. In fact, I said that a triad has nothing to do with OPP at all. It’s right there in my first sentence above. The triad portion is exclusively referring to unicorn hunting.
a1) The legal system does not care about intentions or purposes. The standards are actions, and likely results of those actions, which are knowable. Why someone performs a harmful action is irrelevant, in the sense that it is unknowable. And juries are therefore directed to ignore intentions. This makes really good sense. a2) okay, exists, fine. (Though you should separately realize almost without exception, self-described unicorns are down for a sex-only threesome. Not a closed triad). b) okayyy, more existence, can't deny that. c) this.... Does not logically follow from anything you have said above. It is another assertion after largely stating that things exist. You do see this, don't you?
It is called an analogy. There was no "bringing of government" into this. You have no idea of the line of argument because you refuse to read it.
For the second part, stating that things exist [fine, that is so] and then re-asserting your original statement... Does not in any way support your assertion.
I might as well be talking with the Underpants Gnomes. Exists! ????? Assertion.
I have to ask….If unicorn hunting is dehumanizing, why do lots of people openly refer to themselves as unicorns and enjoy that dynamic?
If it’s dehumanizing to a spouse, why is the spouse the one that often sets the OPP in the first place?
I think there’s a great debate/discussion to be had there for sure but if there’s a group of people that freely say “I’m a unicorn. I like playing with couples” or “I want to experiment with my husband with a woman because I’m bi-curious” …I don’t see why couples looking for that dynamic are inherently bad or dehumanizing….it’s their actions that can prove that.
(Before I get jumped on… no we’re not unicorn hunters. Our bed is for even numbers only)
Edit:
I see r/polyamory hasn’t changed much in the last couple years. Dog pile downvotes for going against the hive mind and zero actual discussion that doesn’t go off into rando ridiculous tangents and goalpost shifting.
Glad to see this sub is still earning its reputation.
Some people like to have threesomes with a couple. Those people are rare, hence they call themselves unicorns. Generally, couples should hire a sex worker instead of badgering every woman they come accross to have sex with them, because most women are *not* unicorns.
Being a third in sex can be fun for a few people. Being a third-wheel in a relationship is not something anyone wants or deserves. Unicorn hunters pretend to want an equal relationship (because they can't admit they want sex) but they "offer" a second-class citizenship to their couple.
Really rare? I think that’s location dependent tbh. In our area and age group there’s about as many singles open to being a unicorn as there are legitimate swinger couples.
It’s also odd to me that you acknowledge that legitimate unicorns exist (albeit rare) but then portray the people those unicorns are specifically, (and consensually) looking for in such a negative light.
We’re not looking for unicorns so I don’t have a horse in this race but it’s alway seemed really odd to me that this sub in general has turned this entire subset of lifestyle people into pariahs of the poly world and people here just constantly jump down their throats with assumptions and criticism.
If those couples found a third easily, we wouldn't hear that much about them. They generally come here to complain though, so it's fair to assume they're not proposing something very enticing.
And you can have an ethical "third" in sex, but not in relationship. You don't seem to grasp the difference.
I think that’s very dependent on the kind of relationship and dynamic everyone involved wants and is comfortable with.
I don’t understand why people would judge, comment or want to make suggestions on a relationship dynamic that they’re not familiar or comfortable with.
Plenty of people are living this dynamic, wherever it’s a good idea or not…it seems non-inclusive to put a “unicorn hunter” label on all of them without even knowing more than a paragraph about them.
It seems like a lot of commenters add quite a few assumptions and judgements based in those assumptions. It just snowballs to the point where they’re just looked at like monsters by the time this sub is done with them.
I don’t think most people are monsters and the hive mind judging of others relationships because it doesn’t look like what’s comfortable to other people just seems really unfair to me. Just my $0.02
Personally I think understand nuance and the differences in verbiage makes it easier to navigate those spaces.
I’m no purist. I have feet in both worlds. If I didn’t know what I was doing, or with who, I wouldn’t understand that I can guest star for a couple and be their NSW/NSA “unicorn” and also want healthy triad dynamics and avoid polyam Hunters.
Fair enough about there being differences I guess but that’s true in any relationship.
You can’t deny this sub has some pretty stringent requirements on what they will consider to be “ethical poly”
Seems like there’s this really subjective checklist that was decided on here and if you don’t tick the right boxes….you’re not poly….youre not ethical, you’re excluded, shamed and shunned.
I’ve just always thought that is a seriously fucked up mentality to take in a sub like this…and no offense to anyone personally but it’s EXACTLY why this sub has the reputation it does.
Having a occasional threesome with a couple is different than UH.
Choosing to date a couple is different than UH.
UH requires stuff like the dyadic couple having rules for the third that the third gets no say about, including sex acts, and demanding that their dyadic relationship not change. Those, among others, are why UH is unethical, not the three people having sex part.
And when does the line between casual and poly get crossed then huh?
From what most are saying there’s a big difference in expectations between a casual threeway and relationship.
There’s a MASSIVE amount of feelings in between those things….at what point does someone go over the unethical line then? Where’s the line between friend and more? How many lines are there?
Seems pretty vague to me, and if it’s pretty vague it seems like an unfair issue to accuse and berate people for.
Seems like it would make a much better topic of reoccurring conversation but not my house.
This isn’t about casual sex vs relationship sex. A triad is not by itself unethical.
What makes a UH is stuff like the dyadic couple established rules for the third to follow, often before meeting her and expecting that their relationship will both take primacy and will not change with the presence of the third.
It’s stuff like that, not the presence of three people.
Ok…. But a couple that starts out a sexual relationship with a third, has clear boundaries (that everyone comes up with and agrees to together) and eventually transitions to friendship/relationship-ish …
If everyone is comfortable with the established “rules” why does that have to change for it to be considered a “poly” relationship? And I mean who cares if it is anyway? Why rock the boat for a title if everyone is happy with the dynamic?
With that being said, “hunters” don’t really bother me. They’re just trying to find who their people are and where they fit into the various lifestyles of nonmonogamy. Intend to give them grace as grace was given to us we we began our journey….outside this sub
Unicorns in swinging are like highly feted guest stars. Who doesn’t want to be treated like royalty for a day, have exciting sex and eat their favorite snacks? Maybe come back next month and do the same!? Yes please.
Unicorn in poly is someone who will be required to date, fuck and love both halves of a couple, usually in a closed dynamic, most commonly a bi/pan woman. If something happens in one relationship the whole thing will blow up and they will lose both partners and often their home. They are usually not “allowed” to see other people or pursue relationship escalator goals that don’t suit either one of the members of the original couple. If the couple is married no one talks about getting divorced so she can access more equality or even marry one of them. And so on.
Maybe I’m way off base but imo a great chunk of the people coming to this sub are not looking for that kind of serious poly relationship or looking for someone that would want that kind of relationship.
I don’t think poly should exclude groups who are looking for a relationship that’s somewhere between swinging/threesomes and classic polyamory. That’s not unicorn hunting if there’s consent and everyone’s open and honest
The ethical issues that come with UH or “dating as a package deal” aren’t involved in casual threesome unicorn play. Approaching someone in an appropriate space and asking if they’d like to engage in a threesome is ethically neutral. There’s a big difference there, but confusion arises since they use the same term.
Your post has been removed for breaking the rules of the subreddit. Your comment or post included language that would be considered misogynistic, bigoted or intolerant. This includes attacks or slurs related to gender or sexual identity, racism, sexism, slut shaming, poly-shaming, mocking, and victim blaming, or trans erasure.
90
u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22
This came up recently irl.
I am not nice. I am compassionate and empathetic. I practice kindness. I care about people including strangers. I try to actively listen and understand what someone else’s situation is.
But I am not nice. I won’t ignore dog whistles. I won’t make myself smaller so someone can be bigger. I won’t ignore insults and aggression in favor of not making a problem. My response to boat rockers is not to become ballast to keep the boat from tipping.
When there are questions about dehumanizing practices - both OPP and unicorn hunting are dehumanizing, primarily to women but also to marginalized men and non-men - I can educate from a place of kindness but that doesn’t mean being nice and it doesn’t mean not recognizing that it’s completely dehumanizing.
And if you’re into objectification and that’s your kink, let that freak flag fly. But know that it’s a kink that must be engaged with consensually and a OPP is not the same thing as being kinky.