imeeji_frontstage | important post-mistletoe questions

important post-mistletoe questions

Who: anyone
Where: on Dissonance
When: Day 74, midday

???: Here's a question, for anyone who wants to answer.
???: What do you think is the maximum number of people it's reasonable to be romantically involved with at the same time?
???: "One" is a perfectly good answer, for the record.

(Maki has changed her display name to be anonymous for the purposes of this post. Yeah.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Joker: ... depends on the people involved

???: Obviously.
???: That's why I said maximum.

Joker: well
Joker: i don't actually know a better answer?
Joker: it mostly depends on how willing partners are to allow for adjustments, things like that

???: There has to be a real limit somewhere, though.

Joker: there probably is for the individual person?
Joker: but I don't think there some "average normal" number or anything like that
Joker: since "average" and "normal" are myths to begin with...

???: But there has to be some individual person who can handle the most, right?

Joker: i mean... sure?
Joker: but why does that matter?
Joker: I guess I mean is: why quantify and worry about who can handle how many?
Joker: the point of relationships is to enjoy and appreciate them as they happen, right?
Joker: that's why the numbers vary so much from person to person

???: It matters because if there's a number that's patently impossible for anyone to try, then people can avoid just hurting everyone involved in the attempt.

Joker: implying that people in relationships never get hurt if they follow exact rules or something?
Joker: but there's no set number
Joker: because everyone's different and even one individual can change depending on a lot of factors
Joker: and emotions are rarely practical...

???: I didn't say anything about never getting hurt.
???: I don't think it's unreasonable to consider whether doing something is more likely to hurt someone than anything else before you do it.

Joker: it's not unreasonable
Joker: it just sounds like you should be talking this out with the people you're trying to avoid hurting
Joker: if you're actually concerned about hurting them
Joker: take it from someone who's messed it up a bunch: best way to avoid hurt is to just talk it out BEFORE, not AFTER

???: Obviously I wouldn't do anything without talking about it.
???: But maybe even talking about it would hurt them.

Joker: then i guess the real question is: what's more important to you?
Joker: being emotionally honest about yourself or keeping the peace?

???: Talking about emotions is one thing.
???: Talking about starting a relationship with someone else is more than that.

Joker: still doesn't change the question

???: It does, though.
???: Emotions are different than intentions.
???: You could tell them you like someone else, and that you might even enjoy being with them.
???: Or you can tell them that that's actually what you want to do. That you want to start spending some of your time on a new relationship with this other person.
???: You wouldn't say that second thing if you know doing that would hurt them, and you don't want to do that.
???: That's not being dishonest.

Joker: it's a little disingenuous, though?
Joker: if you're saying the first thing when the reality is the second thing, i mean...

???: But if you know it would only hurt them and you don't want to do that, the reality ISN'T the second thing.
???: Because you DON'T want to do it. Because it would hurt them.
???: You don't decide what you want to do while completely ignoring the feelings of the people you care about, right?

Joker: idk i'm a bit of an idiot and have made that sort of mistake before
Joker: lessons learned...
Joker: but i'm also not sure why you can't want something without someone's approval?
Joker: that's a bit thought-policey...
Joker: there is a difference between a want and an actual acting on a want, you know

???: It's not about approval or policing.
???: It's about thinking through the consequences of your actions.
???: You know how the other person feels in this scenario. So you can think about it and decide that whatever enjoyment you'd get out of it isn't worth the pain it would cause them.
???: If you don't care about their feelings enough for that to be worth it to you, you don't have to decide that, I guess. That just seems like a pretty terrible way to think about someone you're dating.
???: Look at it this way.
???: What if the person you were with had a bad phobia? For small spaces, let's say.
???: You wouldn't tell them, hey you know, I think it would be pretty hot if we were trapped together in an elevator for two hours, do you want to try that?
???: It doesn't matter how much you might enjoy that in theory. You wouldn't in that scenario, because they would be anxious and terrified.
???: It's not thought-policing to say that suggesting that to them is a bit cruel and thoughtless.

Joker: those are two entirely different scenarios
Joker: but i get what you're trying to say
Joker: when i have been thoughless, it was never because i didn't consider the other people's feelings
Joker: but there was a misplacement of consideration toward the wrong things for those people
Joker: in other words: i assumed a lot
Joker: ultimately, it sounds to me more like you're thinking of using potential hurt as an excuse to not have a difficult but necessary conversation with someone you care about
Joker: but admittedly, i don't know the situation, just what you've shared here

???: They're really not that different.
???: But it's true that all of that was assuming you UNDERSTAND the other person's feelings to start with.
???: To use the same example, just assuming they have a phobia and they wouldn't enjoy it would also be bad if you didn't actually know that for sure. Because then you're just deciding what they want without even having the conversation.
???: But my whole point is that there have to be some scenarios where it's not ambiguous. Where there's no way it could do anything but hurt them.

Joker: but then you're just assuming that the pain will be final
Joker: or won't ever end
Joker: or can't be worked through?
Joker: basically... if you were in the other person's shoes, would you rather know your partner's wants?
Joker: or would you want your partner to keep quiet and not rock the boat?

???: That obviously depends on the scenario.
???: For instance, if my partner were to tell me that they had twenty other people they wanted to have sex with, and they planned to do that, which meant that they'd only really be around for me once a month.
???: There's no way to "work through" that that would make me happy.
???: Just the fact that they thought that was a reasonable suggestion would probably be the breaking point.

Joker: I mean, good boundary setting there
Joker: but I was specifically meaning put your current situation into the scenario
Joker: just with your partner in your shoes and you in theirs
Joker: which would you rather they do: tell you? or keep quiet?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject