Am I in the wrong?

[Faye]

Am I in the wrong for wanting an exclusive relationship? People will make the case that having a girlfriend implies ownership, and even more so with marriage, and that instead we should be free to do what we want with our bodies instead of allowing our partners to own us.

For example, think of how much relationship drama is caused by and ended over cheating? Is it the case that there is something in our nature that makes us want multiple partners? Is it also the case that cheating doesn't really hurt anyone other than their emotional expectation that occurs as a result of the feeling they own you, that you are exclusively theirs? Is it really the fault of the person who was 'cheated' on for being hurt for being cheated on?

Also, are exclusive relationships, and marriage, unreasonable, even merely capitalist, institutions? You could argue marriage provides for the exploitation of women, and historically even more so.


I've always idolized and desired an exclusive relationship. Part of the reason is out of fear of STDs. Another reason is out of the fear of not being good enough; why else would they go to someone unless I was not good enough for them in some way? So someone might say that my fear is selfish and unreasonable, that as long as they use protection it is fine, and that not feeling good enough is just my problem. I also think that it is not really a loving relationship unless it is exclusive; you can't lavish your love equally on two different people. Someone will get the short end of the stick. Ultimately, I think that all open relationships do is give some people the guise of being cared for and loved without the reality, and as they realize this it destroys them. It can only work for people who don't care much for love and care mostly for sex.

 

[Praefect]

You are most certainly not in the wrong for wanting an exclusive relationship, and neither a relationship nor marriage implies ownership. Neither imply anything. The meaning a relationship has to you, wether it is exploitive or not, is the meaning that you give it. And if you want a relationship to be about ownership, it will be, and if you want it to be about partnership, it will be that. Monogamy is not inherently anything. Maybe it is exploitive for 6 out of 10 people, even then, do you think you are one of the 6, or one of the 4?

I understand where this ownership thought comes from, and I've always, ironically enough, had a huge problem with that line of thought. People should be free to do what they want and what is good for them, and not be stuck within a dysfunctional relationship because of external pressures, simply because they are married. And most certainly, people shouldn't treat others like property. There is no trust in that. There is no trust in forbidding someone to see a friend because one doesn't like the nature of their relationship. Jealousy and insecurity is something I equate with the type of relationship that implies this type of insidious ownership, and these types of relationships are not rare. With cheating, it is the dishonesty, the lies, and the betrayal of trust that hurt, so no, it is in no way the fault of the person who was cheated on for being hurt. They have every right in the world to be hurt.

But, there are also those relationships that are based on partnership. When you find the right one, neither she nor you will want anyone else and suddenly... well, I was always against the concept of marriage. For the longest time. Why, I asked myself, would I do that to myself? I saw it as a prison, as a trap, a formality, not a reflection of partnership, but then you meet the right one, and you see this bright future ahead of you that you want to share with just this one special person, and suddenly marriage becomes a thought that is incredibly attractive. One that rings as wonderful deep down to your core. Now I would love to get married, but I can't, because she already is

What a relationship is, what it becomes, and what it means, that is ultimately up to you.

You are wrong about some preconceptions about poly though. But that's ok. It's not an uncommon view to have, and if it rings true for you, it probably is true for you. But it's not true for everyone. Nobody in our triad gets the short end of the stick, and what is of value to us is certainly not the sex. Love is not a finite resource. If it was about lust and not love my life would be a hell of a lot easier.

 

[Faye]

You are most certainly not in the wrong for wanting an exclusive relationship, and neither a relationship nor marriage implies ownership. Neither imply anything. The meaning a relationship has to you, wether it is exploitive or not, is the meaning that you give it. And if you want a relationship to be about ownership, it will be, and if you want it to be about partnership, it will be that. Monogamy is not inherently anything. Maybe it is exploitive for 6 out of 10 people, even then, do you think you are one of the 6, or one of the 4?

I understand where this ownership thought comes from, and I've always, ironically enough, had a huge problem with that line of thought. People should be free to do what they want and what is good for them, and not be stuck within a dysfunctional relationship because of external pressures, simply because they are married. And most certainly, people shouldn't treat others like property. There is no trust in that. There is no trust in forbidding someone to see a friend because one doesn't like the nature of their relationship. Jealousy and insecurity is something I equate with the type of relationship that implies this type of insidious ownership, and these types of relationships are not rare. With cheating, it is the dishonesty, the lies, and the betrayal of trust that hurt, so no, it is in no way the fault of the person who was cheated on for being hurt. They have every right in the world to be hurt.

But, there are also those relationships that are based on partnership. When you find the right one, neither she nor you will want anyone else and suddenly... well, I was always against the concept of marriage. For the longest time. Why, I asked myself, would I do that to myself? I saw it as a prison, as a trap, a formality, not a reflection of partnership, but then you meet the right one, and you see this bright future ahead of you that you want to share with just this one special person, and suddenly marriage becomes a thought that is incredibly attractive. One that rings as wonderful deep down to your core. Now I would love to get married, but I can't, because she already is

What if she doesn't see it that way? Are you saying that the right person will make the desires for others go away? Or are you saying that the right person will be one who doesn't desire others?

What a relationship is, what it becomes, and what it means, that is ultimately up to you.

and her. and society.

You are wrong about some preconceptions about poly though. But that's ok. It's not an uncommon view to have, and if it rings true for you, it probably is true for you. But it's not true for everyone. Nobody in our triad gets the short end of the stick, and what is of value to us is certainly not the sex. Love is not a finite resource. If it was about lust and not love my life would be a hell of a lot easier.

Time is a finite resource, and love is constrained by the limits of time; therefore, love is a finite resource. It might just be that I am greedy or I too easily imagine myself being excluded in any love triangle or circle, but to me it seems like people who would accept that situation don't care about love as much as others in that they don't desire it as much. It might work for them, but I can't imagine it working for me.

 

[Soulful]

Short answer: No.

Long answer (I hope I interpreted the intent of your post correctly):

No one can tell you what you need. People may try to, and the arguments fly left, right, center, and backwards, and at the end of the day no one has the answer for an entire population because there are none.

Follow your heart, stop analyzing beyond a certain degree, and trust yourself to know that you are accurately reading your needs and that they are valid.

I think your tendency to analyze could be dis-serving you in this context. Does it matter, for example, whether or not marriage exploits women if you are going to have an empowering, respectful, and love-filled relationship with your spouse? For all you know, it could be the kind of relationship that will serve as a model to those around you for what is possible, what others can aspire to, and proof that marriage does not have to be exploitative. After all, at the end of the day it's not so much the title you bear but how you live your life that determines what issues and beliefs you associate yourself with and the mark you make on this world.

Let yourself be. If you know this is what you truly desire - if you have taken time to examine your beliefs, thoughts, and feelings about this as well as your core needs, then why not accept yourself as you are in this moment? You might find peace in doing so.

Also, you are valid in what you need and desire. It doesn't matter, for example, that some people aren't worried about STIs and feel sufficiently comfortable practicing safe sex. It is YOUR body and you have every right to take the precautions you wish to take. That's not selfish in the negative sense of the word, that's your right! Not to mention your responsibility.

As a whole, humans have varying needs when it comes to being loved, sex, and the whole gamut of relationships and emotions. Saying that we should do X rather than A-Z is like saying everyone should only watch one TV show and be content with it, or study one subject in school and thrive on it, or read one type of book and be fulfilled, or... . I hope you get my point. Do what you need to do for you. And in case you read that and are worried about selfishness, what I am suggesting is NOT that you turn into a selfish prick (as if that were possible), but that you live YOUR life and give yourself the peace to do it. You're the only one who can.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[Praefect]

What if she doesn't see it that way? Are you saying that the right person will make the desires for others go away? Or are you saying that the right person will be one who doesn't desire others?

If she doesn't see with you eye to eye on something as fundamental as this than I honestly don't think she's the right one. If being with her under her terms makes you miserable, is that really what you want? The right one... it can be either or, really. I can only say how it was for me. I had the pick of the litter. The world was my oyster. And I chose wisely, but then I fell in love with that other woman and said fuck the litters and the oysters and what is smart, I never ever want anyone else other than her. Set sail for chaos.

And yes, it also depends on her. It's supposed to be a partnership, after all. On society, not so much. You can't let expectations be a point of pressure for you. What is important is what you want, and that what you want, what you need, and what she wants and needs, that these things match.

Time is a finite resource, and love is constrained by the limits of time; therefore, love is a finite resource. It might just be that I am greedy or I too easily imagine myself being excluded in any love triangle or circle, but to me it seems like people who would accept that situation don't care about love as much as others in that they don't desire it as much. It might work for them, but I can't imagine it working for me.

It's not the case, but I know it's hard to understand, and I don't seek to convert anyone. I know it's not for everyone, and that's ok.

As long as you think you have a handle on what does and doesn't work for you.

 

[Trifoilum]

How wrong is it to ask for loyalty, fidelity, and faith?

Granted, different strokes for different people. Some people want to be as free as they are. Some people want their soulmates to come and stay until the end of time. Both are fine in their own rights.

 

[Nixie]

How wrong is it to ask for loyalty, fidelity, and faith?

Granted, different strokes for different people. Some people want to be as free as they are. Some people want their soulmates to come and stay until the end of time. Both are fine in their own rights.

Short answers -not to discount the other answers - are often the best.

 

[Diana]

I don't think you are wrong at all.

 

[RecklessDreamer]

You are most certainly NOT wrong for wanting one person. In fact, most people I know want the same thing. Just because not everyone wants the same thing you want doesn't make your desires any less valid than theirs.

 

[Billy]

If she doesnt want it, she doesnt want it,she might be immature still. You can try to wait that out or move on.

 

[Questingpoet]

Nope, you are not wrong at all. This is what the majority (a small majority perhaps) of people want. Particularly with INFJ's, we desire the intense, close one-on-one connections as opposed to having more shallow relationships. Sounds like you are just being true to yourself...carry on Dragon.

 

[Faye]

That you all for being so supportive.

A couple things made me feel this way. The first was a girl who I have talked a little bit about in my blog, although I haven't really talked about the full extent of my interaction with her. The other things are just how people in general endorse these kinds of relationships (people I know and have met who practice them) and also I just read The Second Sex and to be honest I don't agree with it. It seems to provide the kind of ideological framework necessary for accepting this kind of thing, and some very intelligent people enjoy these kinds of relationships, but I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing to be in an exclusive relationship or even get married. There is a lot I could say about that.

The point is that just because these people (the girl who asked me, authors, and maybe some friends) are all significantly more intelligent than I am (I'm not joking), but I still do not think that it makes these views okay.


I feel like what used to be dating has been eroded by various forces, polyamory being one of them. I know that is not fair to the people for whom polyamory works, but my problem is that all of these people that I have met personally seem to think it is something that should apply to everyone.

Of course it will never be as bad as straight hook-ups, it can become a manifestation of that I think (which is not to say polyamory necessarily is).

Mostly, I'm just lonely.

 

[Trifoilum]

Sometimes it differs from the first place; what they're seeking. Love is an elusive word; what consists love to them ?

There is a difference in result between people who wanted sex and affection and power and money and fun and such. And in chasing them. Some people settled with playing hard until they met the right person. Others chose to wait. Others distanced themselves from it all. Each have their own positive, negative, and most importantly; way of dealing with them. It won't be the same.

Some people just don't know that. (thus how they seem to unconsciously demand you to follow THEIR way)

 

[Forest Dweller]

No, you're not wrong. It has nothing to do with politics, sociology, or change. My personal experience with people who have either wanted this in a relationship with me or others has been negative. It's usually that they're ambivalent or just not that into the people they're with and are marking time until the relationship ends. In short, they're bs'ing rather than embracing an alternative.

I think these things CAN be pulled off well. However, I'd think, especially for the subset of people who would choose to seek out cyber-companionship with a group of fellow INFJ oddballs doing the same, that the overwhelming craving to share one's deep soul with another person would get in the way, at least while that relationship is built and solidified.

I would say that in my life, the times when I'd think that openness (to romantic/sexual invovlement with others) would be workable have been only those times when my partners and I were at our closest and most intimate. Most of the time, the relational act of allowing vulnerability makes these things too tough to navigate.