Quote:
Originally Posted by avid  One thing I value, and which I think is intrinsic to poly, is the fact that I don't have to get every need met through one person. |
Which is what we see too. I think one of the big problems in marriages as we know them today is that so many buy into the fairytale idea of "happily ever after" and that one person can be, should be all you ever need. When that bubble is burst, they look outside their relationship for what is missing in their relationship, then eventually replace partner A with partner B. Then maybe a few years down the road do the same again. Serial monogamy.
We discovered that Mrs. WS having a boyfriend wasn't threatening to our relationship, but actually added to it. He did fulfill emotional needs in her that I didn't because I'm just not the kind of person that is sensitive to those things. Mainly, he was more the caveman type and I'm more the intellectual. She needs both to feel fulfilled, and I can't fulfill the caveman role for her, I just don't know how. Mrs. WS was very happy during that period.
This is why I especially love the comment in the article about the "starvation" model of loving, how so many feel that there is only so much love and that if you love two people that each will only get half as much. I always try to explain it as loving two children, you don't love one less because you have another. In the big picture you love them both equally. In the smaller picture you love them differently because they are different people you love those individualities about them, too. It's a big concept for many to get their minds around, I know it was for us when we started swinging, then it happened and it was like a light turned on and "Hey! this makes so much sense!"