We Don't Agree On Everything

I've just figured out that there are people who read here and assume that, because we are involved in this Master/slave dynamic, we always agree with one another -- on everything. I realize that there are some who believe that Master and I were "speaking with one voice" on the subject of polyamory when we wrote the Polyamory Observations #13 and #14 posts. It seems that some people, reading the two posts, believed that I was "on the same wavelength" and had just sort of picked up where He left off... It just isn't so.


There are plenty of places that Master and I would do things differently if we were each operating independently. I'd likely leave the television and the radio off much of the time. He never is awake without one or the other or sometimes both playing wherever He is. I'd always arrive early for whatever function or appointment I was heading for, He honestly believes that only "peons" need to be on time. I'm likely to never understand why it is that He cannot leave the house without something on the order of 20 knives on His person -- and as to the necessity of sunglasses, well let's not get started on that one. If the world ran my way, it is unlikely that there would be used toothpicks, dental floss, empty soda cans, and crumpled tissues lying everywhere waiting for the slave to gather them up and dispose of them... I could go on.


To me, the fact that He and I don't always agree on everything seems crystal clear, but obviously, not everyone gets it. It is, I imagine a misunderstanding about the nature of how He and I do M/s. It is really simple actually -- Master is always right. Even when He's completely wrong. I don't have to agree with Him on things. I sometimes don't. He still gets to do it His way. And there are times when that makes me absolutely nuts. I fuss and carry on and agonize over it all, and it changes nothing at all. Polyamory is particularly prone to that happening. He and I just don't experience it, understand it, or see it the same way.


When it comes to polyamory, He likes it. He is in love with the very idea of polyamory. He gets all wound up and waxes eloquent about it as a sort of philosophical notion, and He really does harbor some sort of "dream" about a giant poly family full of a whole lot of willing butts for Him to spank.


I am much more inclined to call "bullshit" -- especially when someone gives me that syrupy, sappy, "more love makes more love" line. It's possible. It does happen. We're living proof, but I happen to think that our family is pretty amazing, and not at all the norm (assuming that there even is such a thing in the world of polyamory).


So, while Master is going on and on about the wonders of polyamory, and all the joys it brings, I am in my head working my way through all sorts of counterpoints that I know make no difference to anyone but me. Lest anyone ever again doubt that I am utterly pathetic at embracing the sort of free-wheeling poly ethic that is becoming fashionable these days, here is a peek inside what I "really think." Obviously, my views do not represent those of "The Management."


I think that, if we in the poly community were going to be entirely honest, we'd simply note that, generally speaking, "more love makes more sex" for some, and a whole lot less of everything else for others. Not always, of course, but a lot of the time. A very cursory read across a few poly lists will give you a very clear picture of the myriad men and women in so-called poly relationships who are sidelined watching their partners get "more" while they get way less. It is not at all unusual. The truth is that not everyone falls in love in the same way, with the same ease, and not everyone has the same kind of opportunities to create "more" relationships.

Further, there is a very simple, practical reality that when you add more relationships to your life (regardless of the nature of those relationships), you have less time and less energy for any single one of them. It is not possible to divide limited resources among a larger and larger demand, and not have anyone ever experience shortages. Our household accommodates that reality. But it exists. There is the necessity for sharing time. For sharing energy. For working at making sure that, at least some of the time, everyone gets what they need. Even Master probably doesn't always have things exactly the way He might want it. There is continual balancing. If there were "more" members, that reality would become even more pronounced. More give and take required -- more balancing to do -- more frequent and or more severe shortages of time and attention.


One of the comparisons that often gets used in talking about multiple loving relationships is that of a parent loving more than one child. Master likes that one. "We love each of our children, no matter how many there are. We don't insist that we have to choose one, and send the others away..." So goes the argument. I think that particular image has great appeal for my Dear Master who spent His childhood as an "only" child. He never got to experience the shift in affection and attention that the older children live through as younger siblings arrive one after the other. There is less parental energy with each additional child, and while (as it was in my family) elder siblings might fill in the gaps to a degree, it isn't the same thing.


How individuals adapt to poly relatedness depends on a wide variety of factors. Clearly, there is the question of compatibility. T and I are usually pretty good together; we like each other and we generally see things in much the same way. We are relatively mature and stable and we don't poke at each other or rub each other's fur backwards (at least not very often). I would bet the farm and the first born that there are not a dozen women on the planet that I'd feel as comfortable with or mesh with as closely. All the other three billion or so women on the planet might be perfectly lovely, but I am not interested in living with any of them -- or having much at all to do with them if you want to know the truth. It's just the fact. I am a natural born loner and introvert. I really don't enjoy people that much. Having lots of folks around wears me out. It isn't fun; it is an irritant and it exhausts me.

I like relationships that go deep. I like time spent; long, slow conversations that meander and pause and resume again. I like to know more and more and more about a partner as time goes on. I invest everything in relationship. I understand that there is no reasonable ground for expecting someone to be "all" for another person. That is, in poly parlance, placing too heavy a burden on a single love. In far-flung poly webs and pods, it seems very common for people to have a group of loves that are analogous to a varied wardrobe -- this one for one occasion, and that other for something else, while still another is reserved for other moments and moods. Segmented loving. Compartmentalized intimacy. In those circumstances, no one is "all" for anyone, and no one ever gets access to "all" of anyone. Its all very avant garde, but it makes me sad.

That is the way I tend to think about poly. It is a unique and alternative way of living and loving, and it can work well for some people. I just think that the visions that people have of being able to juggle almost unlimited numbers of intimate relationships in a magic wonderland where everything is wonderful and everyone is happy and fulfilled all the time is pretty seriously deluded. I'd buy that it is possible, if everyone buys in, to manage a whole bunch of relatively shallow, casual linkages, but that precludes being fully available for something more significant.

He won't agree, and life will be the way He sees it. That is where the M/s comes in. Whatever I might think or wish for in this realm may be acknowledged, but it won't change the decisions that will be made. Whatever I would wish, the expectation is that I'll welcome, support, embrace, and make space for whoever might be called into our family.

swan