then it's love. This is a story about love. I am a lover and in that noted is the
word love! It's about love! To be her lover. Otherwise it would be called sexer
and in that case that is not even a word as it's about love!
Things that have higher meanings!
The willingness to meet both to have a talk, wanting to date the wife,
being the willingness to jump should be noted for it's value!
The willingness to bend over backward for her, support, a smile.
To make it work, by such value there!
Willing for long term that will last! Lasting being she would be good for me!
She's gold!
She is the vortex, it's about her and what's wrong with that,
being her big fluffy cat! I'm ok with that if there is a smile then
it all has it's meaning! It's about things that have deeper value,
like to have other emotional support offered to her!
It's not sex, sex, sex it's support, support, support!
My needs are easy, it's about her needs that fills my needs!
To lift her up, she is the desired one regardless!
Have coffee and talk, I have a 10ft couch!
The main point is to talk about it give me a yes, no or something!
Something is needed, life is bad in the abyss! Please give me a something!
And that is the point the willingness to meet the wife and husband to
talk about it! I know I am willing. That is better than this abyss!
I'm a big fluffy cat, how about that! Please make that call and take me home!
It's up to you sweetheart! We would be a good pair, I would be good for you!
I am willing to make it work! You are a higher value!
~~~~~5 Myths About Polyamory
When someone goes outside a relationship looking for companionship or sex,
it's natural to assume there's something missing from their romance.
But that doesn't appear to be the case for polyamorous individuals.
Melissa Mitchell, a graduate student in psychology at the University of Georgia,
conducted research while at Simon Frasier University in Canada on 1,093 polyamorous
individuals. The participants were asked to list a primary partner and a secondary partner
(more on that later), and they averaged nine years together with their primary and
about two-and-a-half years with their secondary.
Mitchell and her colleagues surveyed their participants about how satisfied and
fulfilled they felt in their relationships. They found that people were more satisfied
with, felt more close to and more supported by their primary partner, suggesting
that their desire for a secondary partner had little to do with dissatisfaction in the
relationship. And satisfaction with an outside partner didn't hurt the primary relationship.
"Polyamorous relationships are relatively independent of one another,"
Mitchell said in January at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and
Social Psychology in New Orleans. "We tend to assume in our culture that if you have
your needs met outside your relationship, some kind of detrimental effect is going to result,
and that's not what we find here."
Myth #2: Polyamorous people are still paired up
Many polyamorous people do form relationships that orbit around a committed couple,
with each person having relationships on the side. But the primary partner/secondary
partner model is an oversimplification for many poly relationships, said Bjarne Holmes,
a psychologist at Champlain College in Vermont. "I'd say about 30 percent or so of the
polyamorous population would say they think of one partner as being primary,"
Holmes told LiveScience. "A large part of the population would say,
'No, I don't buy into that idea of primary or secondary.'"
Many polyamorous people resist that hierarchy and say they get different things
out of different relationships, Holmes said. There are also many people who live in triads
or quads, in which three or four people have relationships with each other or with just one
or a few members of the group. "What I've come across most is actually configurations of
two males and a female living together," Holmes said.
Myth #3: Polyamory is a way to avoid commitment
Research by Amy Moors, a graduate student at the University of Michigan, finds that
people whose relationship style involves little emotional entanglement often say they'd
love a polyamorous relationship, thinking that they could have the benefits of coupledom
without too much attachment. Wrong. Joining a polyamorous relationship and thinking it's
going to be a commitment-free breeze would likely be a huge mistake. For one thing,
of polyamorous relationships are very serious and stable Holmes says he's interviewed
people who've been legally married for 40 years and in a relationship with a second
partner for 20.
Secondly, successful polyamorous partners communicate relentlessly, Holmes said:
"They communicate to death." It's the only way to ensure that everyone's needs are
met and no one is feeling jealous or left out in a relationship that involves many people.
Myth #4: Polyamory is exhausting
The monogamists in the crowd may be shaking their heads. Isn't all that communication
and negotiation exhausting? It's true that polyamorous relationships take lots of time,
said Elizabeth Sheff, a legal consultant and former Georgia State University professor
who is writing a book on polyamorous families. "Even if you're able to hang out together,
giving four relationships the amount of care and feeding and maintenance they need can be
a full-time job," Sheff told LiveScience.
But people who thrive in polyamory seem to love that job, Holmes said.
Polyamorous people report feeling energized by their multiple relationships and say that
good feelings in one translate to good feelings in others. "I had someone describe to me
that love breeds more feelings of love," Holmes said.
Myth #5: Polyamory is bad for the kids
One big question about polyamory is how it affects families with children.
The answer to that is not entirely clear — there have been no large-scale, long-term
studies on the outcomes of kids growing up with polyamorous parents.
But some early research is suggesting that polyamory doesn't have to have a bad impact
on the kids. Sheff has interviewed more than 100 members of polyamorous families,
including about two dozen children of polyamorous parents ranging in age from
5 to 17 years old.
Parents list some disadvantages of the polyamorous lifestyle for their kids, namely stigma
from the outside world and the danger of a child becoming attached to a partner who might
later leave the arrangement, a risk most tried to ameliorate by being extremely cautious
about introducing partners to their children. For their part, kids in the 5- to 8-year-old range
were rarely aware that their families were different from the norm, Sheff found.
They thought about their parents' boyfriends and girlfriends as they related to themselves,
not as they related to mom or dad.
"A 6-year-old may not think of someone as mommy's girlfriend, but think of that person
as 'the one who brings Legos' or 'the one who takes me out to ice cream,'" Sheff said.
From ages 9 to 12, kids became more aware of their families as different, but mostly
said it was easy to stay "closeted," because people tend to mistake polyamorous
arrangements as blended families or other relics of modern relationship complexity.
The teens in the 13- to 17-year-old crowd tended to take a more in-your-face approach,
Sheff said, "an approach of, 'If you think this is wrong you're going to have to prove it to
me. My family is fine.'"
Some teens indicated that they'd consider polyamory for themselves; others weren't
interested at all. Both parents and kids saw advantages to the polyamorous lifestyle
as well. For parents, having more than two adults on hand to help with child-rearing
could be a lifesaver. Kids also reported liking having multiple adults whom they trusted
though they complained that with so much supervision, they couldn't get away with anything.
Children also spoke of the advantages of growing up knowing they could make their own
decisions about how to build their families.
The results are likely somewhat optimistic, Sheff said, as dysfunctional families are
usually less likely to volunteer for studies. But the lack of widespread trauma among
the children of polyamorous families suggests that polyamory is not, by definition,
terrible for kids.
"One of the main things this does indicate to me is that these families can be really good
places to raise children," Sheff said. "Not necessarily that all of them, definitionally, are,
but that they may be, depending on how families work it out."
http://www.livescience.com/27125-5-myths-about-polyamory.html
