We got to Stacy's and long story short we ended up having a couple drinks and Stacy had to go to a study group and we were sort of forced to stay in her room because her roommate was pissy about us even being there so we were kind of hiding from her. We were just in Stacy's bedroom and got to cuddling and then kissing and it got to the point Ariel was trying to take off my pants but I stopped her and said I couldn't because I was so in love with Lara.Ariel was disappointed and I was confused and frustrated. Confused because I loved Ariel and really wanted to express that physically by having sex with her and making her feel good and my love, but I also didn't want to betray Lara's trust. But it really felt WRONG to not have sex with Ariel, even though I "knew" I was doing the "right" thing telling Ariel I couldn't do that to Lara. The next day on the way home, Ariel gave me a big hug as we were gassing up and she said she was glad we hadn't had sex because she wants it to be a beautiful thing when we do, and not tainted by something like betraying someone else's trust. So that felt nice. But still confusing how something that felt so right could possibly be wrong. Ariel dropped me off at my sister's and I was chatting with sis about it, and she said "Maybe you're polyamorous?" I just laughed and was like "yeah right, I'm not like that." But then after I left her house on the drive home it hit me that is literally what I was. Poly means "many" and amorous means "loving". I loved both these women in my life, deeply and truly. Since that day my life has never been the same and I am happy and grateful for all the love that has blossomed over the following years with many beautiful individuals that I have been blessed to engage with on more intimate levels.
Who’s Katherine Pierce?
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
This is the monogamous dogma, but it is a perspective, not an objective truth. If you have two children and you truly love your son, does that mean you wouldn't be open to loving your daughter unless there was something secretly missing in your relationship with your son and you didn't truly love him as much as you are pretending? This is the logic that monogamous dogma applies to romantic relationships. But it doesn't hold water, imho. Not to offend anyone who feels this way, I get it and I once thought this way as well. But I feel life has given me some amazing eye opening experiences and I cannot close my eyes having seen what love can develop into.
Well children is a whole different love , your own kids will love you no matter what , whether your a dead beat Dad or you are a loving Dad. , relationship love is a different ball game. To find a partner that wears your shoes like you wear theirs is hard to find , Love only grows when we remove selfishness for each other and sacrifice for each other , you will only do that to someone you are in love with, if you need someone else to fufill you then something is missing in that relationship, if you were married , picture your wife at home cleaning, making you dinner folding your clothes and you are out banging another girl , when you come home and look at your wife can you really tell your wife I love you? You would be a lying sack of shit knowing you were a piece of shit for cheating on her , your selfishness isn’t love
This is an interesting take that many people have also presented to me. That somehow romantic love is "different" but why, they can't really explain. It is illogical to me that what applies to relationships with friends, family, children, pets, and pretty much anything/anyone else you can imagine all fits into a certain pattern, yet when one discusses romantic relationships they want to say it's a totally "different ball game". As far as I can tell, the only thing different is the sexual/physical interaction. Which seems to confuse a lot of people and they all of a sudden can't make any logical sense anymore. Your statement about "... lying sack of shit... cheating..." makes an assumption about honesty and breaking rules. Which would apply to a monogamous person who needs to lie and cheat in order to have an extra relationship. But polyamory has a different, honest, approach, in which I am clear and forthright about my activities. (I tend do more dishes, laundry, cooking, cleaning and whatnot, by the way) The rules of a relationship are whatever you and your partner (s) agree on. There are many happy people out there who agree.
I appreciate your view of love, and would like to offer my own. I believe love is basically comprised of two things: Knowledge/understanding + acceptance/respect. I believe this definition of love applies to platonic relationships such as you have with a pet, child, family member or friend, as well as to romantic relationships which add the element of sexuality. Example: dogs and children are known to be extremely loving, that is because they accept/respect most everyone, gaze adoringly and interact enthusiastically. I think if one observes those they feel most intimate with and loved by, these elements of acceptance and understanding will also be close by. The "understanding" element is how love deepens over time. When we first meet someone, we don't really know them. Who they truly are is a mystery, but usually we give them the benefit of the doubt and place an "ideal" image in the areas which are a mystery until they are revealed. This is why new interactions are so easy usually. If one finds new interactions to be difficult, it may be the opposite is taking place if one is suspicious of others, placing a "nasty" image as a placeholder for the unknown.
To me, love is not about sacrifice and selflessness so much as it is about understanding and acceptance. Therefore, to truly love someone deeply and to have my love grow, I need to interact with them and pay attention to who they are. This means their actions as well as their words. The sexual element is about physical attraction, and wanting to add that element of physical pleasure to the relationship. Giving and receiving pleasure, the mutual enjoyment of building sexual tension and release. Much of what I hear you describing falls into what I would describe as attachment and possessive forms of love, which I feel are completely valid, but ironically more selfish and ego-based than the sort of unconditional and genuine love I am focused on creating. I don't require those I love to swear their allegiance and exclusivity in word or action, my love gives freedom rather than restriction.
Excellent point. Monogamous dogma relies on a (what I believe to be fallacious) "limited resource" view of love. That is to say, you only have so many "units" of love to give out at any given point in time. If you have 100(%) units, and give 50 to one person, you only have 50 left to distribute to others. Therefore, they argue, if you are giving 100(%), you have 0% left over. Any love you give to a new person is therefore going to subtract from what you are giving to your current 100%.This "logic" quickly falls apart if we simply look at an example of many of the other relationships we have in our lives. If one has more than one pet, children, siblings, parents, or friends, you can see that loving one individual does not deplete the love you have for another. While it is true that you can have a "favorite", that is completely normal (and many have guilt about things like loving one child more than another) and really does not necessarily have a direct correlation to the individuals involved.
Exactly, and thank you for sharing your response :-)