377 - Polyam Beginners, Healthy Boundaries, and Ethical Hierarchy

Full transcript available

This week’s Q&A

For this week’s episode, some of our listener questions we discuss include:

• What was the biggest challenge in your polyam journey, and how did you overcome it?

• What are some good steps to reconnect after initiating a break in the relationship?

• Any advice for someone looking to explore other polyam sites away from the safe harbor that the Multiamory Discord has become?

• How can one be a good beginner? What are some red flags or warning signs you see many fledgling polyam folk brush past or ignore?

• When de-escalating or transitioning relationships to one with less closeness and frequency, do you have any tips for adjusting your expectations or managing hurt feelings?

• How to set healthy and ethical boundaries within the context of a highly entangled, mutually desired lifelong commitment. Specifically, boundaries that don’t look like “veto power” or interference in other relationships, but also don’t just come down to “walking away” in the presence of incompatible strong preferences (not needs).

• How do you know the difference between genuine third party trauma or if emotions are being used to force a certain result? How do you spot this before becoming invested?

Make sure you give the full episode a listen to hear what we have to say on these discussion topics!

Transcript

This document may contain small transcription errors. If you find one please let us know at info@multiamory.com and we will fix it ASAP.

Jase: On this episode of The Multiamory Podcast, we're going to be answering some more listener questions, getting into topics like how to manage boundaries without them becoming ultimatums, can hierarchical relationships be healthy? How do you be a good polyamory beginner? How to reconnect after taking a break. Lots of great questions to discuss today. If you have a question that you would like us to talk about on this show, become one of our patrons at patreon.com/multiamory, and then add your questions and comments in our special monthly Q&A Episode posts.

Emily: Just right off the bat, somebody asked a question about us.

Dedeker: Oh, wow.

Emily: I know, I think we talk about ourselves quite a lot on this show, but not getting necessarily into the nitty gritty as much as other shows do.

Dedeker: I just did an interview on Billy Procida's Show and he goes, "We don't know anything about you three, we want all the--"

Emily: I don't know about that. With some of the past episodes, and I'm crying on every frickin episode. It's a rough time now. This one asks, what was the biggest challenge in your poly journey, and how did you overcome it? I know this is more personal but definitely helpful, goodness.

Jase: Then a smiley face.

Dedeker: Then a smiley face. I'm scared to answer this question because I feel like if I point to something as my biggest challenge, the universe is going to hear that it's going to be like, "I can do you one better."

Emily: It's going to be like, "Maybe you need to work on that some more or something."

Dedeker: Oh, yes. Just boy oh boy. I can start though, I can start and maybe the universal will be kind with whatever curveball it throws me next. I would say if I think about my poly journey or think about at least the time when I was learning the most, or things were the most formative for me, I really do think one of the most challenging parts for me was the first time I was in a non-monogamous relationship, where there were other important relationships as well in the picture.

As in for several years, when I was first exploring non-monogamy and polyamory there was always a very clear distinction that if I was dating someone, either I would be the most important person in their life, or I was very strictly casual, and they had other important people in their life. I guess not just hierarchy, but very extreme hierarchy of whether or not it was "a serious relationship" or "a casual relationship". For me, the first time I was in a "serious relationship" with someone who also had other emotionally intense or emotionally entangled or emotionally important relationships, I think that just like really threw me for a loop of just trying to understand that.

This was even after having read all the books and totally understanding what I wanted to get out of polyamory and in theory, understanding how it functions, but I think as far as deconstructing my own monogamous programming, or the ways that I felt about myself, or what makes me important to someone that was probably the biggest hurdle to get over for me.

Jase: Gosh, that's a good one. I think the one that comes up for me right now, and I don't know if I would have thought of this as my biggest challenge at the time, but looking back, I think this is part of it is that there was some unlearning at first that I wasn't even aware that I hadn't done or that it needed to be done, and that was specifically guilt and shame about more casual relationships and feeling like I went into a lot of relationships with this assumption that the more serious and entangled they are, the better they are or the better I can feel about them.

It led to me doing a lot of over-committing to relationships, and then disappointing people by not having the resources to sustain that, or by maybe misrepresenting the kind of relationship that I thought we were going to have or that I thought I should have, or that was expected of me. I think that caused hurt for other people and for myself as well. Then I guess combining that then with that early polyamory thing of, "I'm available to date anybody all the time," just massively combined that problem of over-committing myself. I'd say that there were some things that at the time did not even occur to me that that's why I might be doing those things or that that was baggage to unlearn. It was just, "Oh, these are facts. This is just how the world works." That's how I approached it.

Emily: There's an amplification I think of things that you already need to be working on in your daily life that perhaps come to light, even more, when you're entering into a new relationship structure. For instance, one of my big things that I do is compare myself to other people, and when you have more people that are potentially in with your partners that you may be comparing yourself to them even more than if they were just exes or friends of your partner or whatever.

I think when I was first in non-monogamy with Jase, anyone that you would date I would probably compare myself to them and it would be challenging for me to think about all the ways in which I was not as good as they were. I did that a lot I think with Josh too when we were non-monogamous.

Jase: With his other partners or with him?

Emily: With his other partners. I would compare myself to them, essentially, and I think I did the same thing with you. That's interesting that probably it just amplifies things that you already need to be working on and put some neon sign on that a little bit more.

Dedeker: Neon sign for sure. That's interesting. You sparked a memory for me of, I think relatively early on in my own polyamorous journey, I would definitely do the comparison thing, but it would be more the flavor of, "Oh, this must be what my partner actually wants, what they're seeking in that person." I think that's a holdover from monogamy as well. When I was in monogamous relationships anytime a partner would express interest or attraction to any other person, real or imaginary--

Jase: Like a character from a movie or something?

Dedeker: Yes, or even a celebrity, something totally inaccessible, I would have that narrative of, "Oh, this is what they actually want and they're super disappointed by being with me, and so I need to try to find ways to fill that gap to make myself more like this thing that they want." Which I suppose is similar to what you're expressing, but it's almost like a slightly different flavor.

Emily: Yes, that's interesting that you're like, "I need to figure out a way to become more of X." While I tend to just be like, "I'm not that and so I suck and blah blah blah," but yes, in terms of overcoming, that's an interesting question. I think that's still a work in progress in general, although I'm able to, I think, objectively more now, realize I have things that my partner finds interesting about me, or that my friends find interesting about me, or they're excited to be around me for whatever reason, and I just have to remind myself of that, that I'm in relationships of many different types of relationships with people that are really extraordinary and they like me for some reason, so that's cool.

Jase: We do like you for some reason, you're right.

Dedeker: No one can attest and say what those reasons are.

Emily: Yes, I totally understand, but here we are.

Jase: Oh gosh. I think just the unlearning for me was really learning to value my unstructured time for myself, and really prioritizing that, and we've talked about this for a long time on the show, but I think it's like I had to start realizing it was the thing to care about and talk about, and then my actual life and mind had to catch up to that idea of having some of that time and now I'm much more aware of it. Also now go into relationships with much more of this, "I'm not sure what this is going to be, and I'm okay with that." Let's talk more openly about it earlier on, instead of assuming that everyone wants the type of relationship that the TV shows and movies and stories and advice have all led me to think that they're going to want.

Dedeker: Let's move on to the next question which is what are some good steps to reconnect after initiating a break in the relationship? Unfortunately, this question, when we got it does not come with a ton of context, so we may have to make some assumptions here. I'm assuming by initiating a break, they're saying I initiated us taking a break, taking time apart. For some folks that can range everywhere from, "I’m going to go away for a week just to collect my thoughts and have some time apart," or, "I need a six-month break from this relationship."

Without that context, it's a little bit hard to answer the question. I think the first thing that comes to mind for me is when you are going to be the one to initiate a break or your partner is asking for a break. I do think it is important to put in a specific container around that so as in being clear about it's going to be two weeks or a month, and being clear about what happens in that container. Is it completely no contact? Is it I just need a break from sex in our relationship? Or I just need a break from living together with you for this period of time?

Whatever it is and then also being clear of when that break is over. Are we specifically making a plan to reconnect? What is going to be the purpose of that reconnect? Setting up some clear expectations. Is it I'm going to go travel by myself for a month, and let's not talk. Then when I come back, let's specifically sit down and see about rekindling our relationship. Or let's have a conversation where we specifically talk about repairing some things from the past now that we've had some time apart to percolate on it. Or is it more going to be about things got really, really heavy and really exhausting and so we're going to take a little break?

Then when we reconnect, the whole purpose of it is just to keep it light and fun. Just to go to an event together or go get dinner together and really just try to reconnect to some of the good parts before jumping back into processing. I think that's the first thing that would come into mind, which if you've already initiated the break and you haven't done this work, that answers maybe a little bit too late. If you can be clear about those things and set some expectations, I think that could help.

Jase: As far as the actual reconnecting goes though, in terms of steps for reconnecting. As Dedeker mentioned, it really varies depending on what the relationship was before and what the break was like. I think one of the keys there, at least for me, and maybe there's some value to going the opposite direction, but mine would be to try to ease back into it, especially if the break was because things were too intense in some way. Either we were having a lot of conflicts or just I was becoming too obsessive with this relationship and needed some space to recenter myself and find myself again.

Whichever of those it is, for me, it would be finding some ways to ease back into that to try to find that equilibrium again. Maybe hanging out in smaller containers, so say we'd get together and we would spend every moment of a whole weekend together. Now it's like, "Okay, let's get together for a few hours doing a specific thing, or having brunch together, or maybe we just have one sleepover a week," when we used to have four of them or--

Whatever it is for you of experimenting with what's a version of this that eases us back in? To also help keep some of that excitement rather than trying to dive all the way back in and overwhelming ourselves or getting back into the same conflicts we had before.

Emily: I did this recently with a friendship where I needed some space because both of us had said, or I guess participated in the friendship in ways that were harmful to one another. When I finally did come back together and hung out with them, I had to ask some clarifying questions about, "What are the things that were triggering to you in the past about when I said X, Y, or Z thing? What can I do to make sure that I don't say something that's harmful or what is something that you can do on the other end to perhaps not have a similar reaction in the future?"

I think asking those clarifying questions is really important, especially if you do want to try to get back to a place of reconnection and understand also that it may not look the same way that it once did. I think our friendships and our relationships are ever evolving. That's really okay if it doesn't go right back to we spend every waking moment together or five days a week together or whatever, but rather like Jase said let's ease back into it and figure out what this new normal is going to look like. We've changed these people. We understand perhaps there was hurt involved in either end and we need to move forward from that.

Jase: Our next question here is-- We all had a nice little chuckle about this one. That's any advice for someone looking to explore other polyamory sites like on Reddit, Twitch, Facebook, or wherever away from the safe harbor that the multiamory discord has become. I love it and I feel very much the same way about the multiamory discord that it's a place where you can expect a certain amount of, I guess respectfulness and kindness to each other that you can't always count on in more public communities. We're going to talk about this a little bit actually next week in our episode with Lola Phoenix.

We'll get into that maybe a little bit more. What would we say about this question about what can you do to prepare yourself or advice when you're trying to broaden the number of communities that you're part of?

Dedeker: This is a very big compliment, but I also felt I need to get out ahead of it and just be like, "Oh, we're not the only space for you to participate in. It's okay. You can always leave. You can join other spaces." We're not creating this narrative that like, “This is the only safe space to be. Everywhere else is going to be terrible.”

Jase: We appreciate you saying that.

Dedeker: Yes. We really appreciate that people have that experience, but just wanted to say that I feel we're not a cult, red flags, jump up sometimes to just make sure people know that.

Jase: I'm like one of us, one of us.

Dedeker: The thing that always freaking gets under my skin. Anytime I'm posting literally anywhere else, it does not have to be about polyamory. I don't know, for instance, I'll post on a subreddit that's about the Japanese language where I'm like, "Oh, I'm looking for this particular resource for this particular aspect of Japanese language learning. These have been my frustrations or this is the backstory." Always what frustrates me is no one else uses the triforce of communication. What that means is everything you get back is going to be everything from people giving advice when you didn't want advice.

Or people critiquing, "Oh, well, why are you frustrated with that? I don't think you should be frustrated with that particular part." To people who just want to make a random joke or people who want to answer complete the wrong question. I think we've grown used to, oh, this is just part of being on the internet. I know that's the big thing that always frustrates me is people outside our little multiamory bubble don't always, first of all, know what the triforce is or expect to use it. Or even think about, "Oh, what is this person actually looking for or maybe I should make sure that I tailor my response to actually meet that.

If I don't have that response, then I'm going to shut the fuck up." No one does that. I guess that would be my first piece of advice is using your best one-sided triforce of communication skills. What that means is maybe to the best of your ability being very clear of like, "Hey, this is what's going on." I'm not really looking for advice or feedback from people, I'm just looking to hear that it's reasonable for you to feel this way, or I want to hear from other people who've been in the same situations or things like that." That it may just require a little bit more effort to really clearly lay out what it is that you're looking for from the community or from that particular post. Also knowing that people may still completely ignore that and brush right past that.

Emily: I am shocked. Sometimes when we get in spaces that we're not used to like our little insular communities, like our Facebook group or discord, or even Los Angeles at large for me. Because I live and interact with a lot of people who are very open and loving and caring and not necessarily going to be bigoted about my relationships or what kind of person I am or how I sound or any of those things.

It is shocking at times to get in spaces or hear from people that automatically may assume things about you, or just put you down in a certain way. I guess I would say that it’ll be aware that is potentially out there and in ways that you can shield yourself from that, even if that is-- For instance, we were on the Mark Groves Podcast a couple of weeks ago, and somebody said something rude about my voice, and I was able to talk to Jase and Dedeker about it and get back to earth a little bit more because I immediately wanted to lash out and I did a little bit, but not as much as I potentially could have.

It was great to have a support system and even, have some of our lovely listeners come to my aid as well. Things like that, just realize that that's out there and to have a support system and those places where you do feel safe is important as well.

Jase: Absolutely, I think there's definitely a mental shift that needs to happen. At least I've experienced this for myself, depending on what community I'm in, and where I'm posting something of how much I can let myself be vulnerable to the responses, right? With a friend, it's like, "Hey, I'm looking for your advice in this situation." Your friend says to you, "Actually, I think you might be being shitty in this situation. Maybe the advice you think you want is actually not the right advice."

I'm going to take that very seriously. I'm really going to think about that even if it's upsetting. Whereas if I get that same response on, Reddit, R/Polyamory I need to go into that situation, not being as open to that. That's a bummer. It is something to just change your expectations of I know that the people who are here, especially in very public, very large type things like Reddit, where there's no one's helping really police this, some subreddits are better than others.

It's just so huge, and it's open to anyone, and anyone can just create a new anonymous profile just to be a jerk to you if they want. Changing those expectations and going in just realizing that that's the case and that there are good people there and trying to ignore they're not as good ones, and just let it go. Really resist the urge to get into fights with strangers on the internet, because you're not doing anyone any good least of all yourself. It might feel good, right in that moment. Ultimately, it's just not and it's not what you actually came there for.

It's not fostering community, which is what you want. I know that's easier said than done. That would be my advice. Just be aware, when you switch communities to have sort of a moment of okay, "I'm entering the multiamory discord. I'm going to act a certain way. Okay, now I'm entering Reddit, or Twitch, I'm going to have a slightly different expectation or something like that."

Emily: This next question is a two-parter. The first is how to be a good beginner. I'm assuming that this means in polyamory or in polyamorous spaces, like when you're just starting out, in terms of changing maybe from monogamy to non-monogamy. Then also what are some red flags or warning signs you see many fledgling poly folk brush past or ignore?

Jase: Woof. That's a fun one. That's a fun one. How to be a good beginner. I feel like how to be a good beginner where I would start is just realizing that no one person has all of the answers has all the truth. It's important to get a variety of different opinions and to think critically about all of them, whether those are ones you get from us on this show, in various online communities, in the books you read.

There's probably good stuff in them it's not just, "Oh, well, if I just find someone with experience, they'll give me all the answers." It's different from, learning a very particular skill, like, I don't know, wood carving or something, maybe there's some universally accepted techniques. Even in that, there's probably not just one way to do it. Right. Being open to that and having more conversations with more people and not just the ones you're dating. Just to get a sense of what people are thinking about, what people are doing, what struggles people are having, what's working well for them, that kind of stuff.

Dedeker: I would say understand that the people who you are entering into relationships with are also people and that you're probably going to fuck up at times. That is understandable, but as much as you can, especially if you're moving from a monogamous space to a non-monogamous one with an already established partner, to realize that these other people that you're getting into relationships with, have values and they need love and care and respect and don't just toss them to the wayside when something gets challenging.

I think I definitely have had times, especially right at the beginning, because I see discomfort in a partner maybe that I live with, or that I already had an established relationship with that that discomfort would color my expectations or decisions about, somebody knew that I was dating, and it would cause me to not treat that person in a way that they deserved. That to me is something that I feel like I see a lot. That's something to really be aware of, and make sure that you're being mindful of that possibility.

Dedeker: Yes, I want to dovetail off of that, that reminder that the other people that you're interfacing with are people, they are human beings, because I think that this can apply also if you're the beginner in the sense of you're a beginner to the experience of your partner dating other people, and you're a beginner to the sense of having metamours that remember that your new metamours are people also.

I think that's the big one where there can often be a shift of, if there's something about this situation that makes me uncomfortable, or if I feel slighted in some way that for a lot of people-- I'm not entirely sure why this is but for a lot of people, it becomes easier to shift the ire and the blame and the ill will away from what my partner is doing and onto what my metamour is doing, or what I perceive my metamour to be doing or not doing.

Especially if that's also in a context where I don't know my metamour very well, I haven't really met with them, or I haven't had a chance to actually get to know them. It's really easy to project onto them all these negative traits. I feel like I see a lot of people out the gate hopping there. I do think that maybe part of being a good beginner is, some of it may be taking stock of like, "Okay if something's upsetting me and bothering me, is that an internal issue? Is it an external issue? If it's external, is it really about what my metamour is doing? Or is there some way that my partner is not standing up in the way that I'm expecting, or not helping me feel safe in some particular way?"

Again, I think this topic can get so broad, and so deep really quickly, and without particular context, it's hard to answer. To speak to the second half of the question about some red flags or warning signs that you see fledgling poly folk brush past or ignore. Probably the biggest one is dating someone who's already told you quite clearly they are not interested in non-monogamy. Or they don't think that they could do that. Or maybe dating someone who at first was like, "Yes, sure, I could try that." Then after a few weeks or a few months, then they're like, "No, this really doesn't work for me," but still kind of insisting on pushing it forward and just really bulldogging it and insisting that it's going to work. That's probably the big one.

Some of that I think, can be chalked up to NRE, to just really falling for someone and especially if you haven't fallen for someone or been an NRE in several years. It's all very, very new for you and very intense along with this new intense experience of being polyamorous and like all these feelings that-- Yes, I don't know, I just see people really get into some not-great situations because of that.

Jase: Yes, yes, the NRE thing can really blind you, especially if you're not used to it. To be honest, I think, also just be a little bit gentle with yourself. Because it's a little bit like you're a teenager just starting to date again, in that while you have experience now in your life, having done some dating, it's sort of like going back to not having experience. Because you don't quite have the same level of lived experience.

I sort of have a sense of what has worked for me and what hasn't. In non-monogamy, you don't have that when you're starting out and that you don't have a ton of role models or examples of it either, is to just realize that there is a little bit of a learning curve and to not expect that, "Oh, yes, I'm going to find my lifelong living quad, triad, whatever right away. That if I don't do that I'm failing somehow," just be a little bit gentle with yourself and realize, there's some learning that you can't just be told or learn from a book that comes from just experience and getting to know yourself better and figuring out how you like to do relationships in this different way.

Emily: Now we're going to take a quick break to talk about some of the ways in which you can support our show. We have some lovely sponsors that help us out to continue to bring the show to you all for free. You can check those out as well as check out our Patreon community which includes Discord and Facebook, which is something that we just talked about if you want to get involved in some amazing communities.

Jase: We're back. All right, this next one I'm going to admit is a little complicated to try to summarize and put it into a nice succinct question here. I'm just going to give you the rough gist of this. This person started a relationship, had been seeing someone for about eight months and they saw each other pretty regularly like once a week or so had a lot of NRE feelings like that but then the other person fell out of that NRE a little bit, was a little less interested in polyamory and more seems to be looking for a friend that's occasionally a friend with benefits. Something a lot more maybe we'd hook up once or twice a month or something but less serious.

The question asker is wished they could have a more entangled, more committed-type relationship with this person, and they're having a hard time managing their own expectations and disappointment and upset and hurt over this change. I guess I'll start there with the question is tips for adjusting expectations or managing hurt feelings with this kind of a situation.

Dedeker: When you're de-escalating or transitioning a relationship.

Jase: Yes. I think what's worth noting though is that sometimes we've talked about this with long term. You've been married for 10 years and you're de-escalating in some way. This is more, we're still in that calibrate-y NRE, getting to know each other that's about eight months in. I think it's a little bit different of nuance but that idea of deescalating and how to manage those expectations and hurt feelings.

Dedeker: When I read the backstory for this one, it struck me that I don't know if this person was my client, I feel like I would tell them it's okay to take some space and some time. In their backstory, they did clarify that like, "Oh yes normally we tell people, "Go to a contact for a while and then come back to it and you don't have to make it that dramatic necessarily. It doesn't have to be like, "Oh, I can't even talk to you for six months or whatever it is," but it sounds like this person was rightfully disappointed and hurt by the fact that this other person didn't want the same type of relationship. It sounds like they're trying to adjust to the relationship that's at the level that this other person wants but there's still this hurt and resentment and anger.

I don't feel like that's going to resolve on its own, just continuing to still see this person. If they're not going to be able to offer you what it is that you're hoping for that doesn't mean that you'll never accept that or never be okay with that. It doesn't mean you can never be in a relationship of some kind with this person but I do think it is okay to take that time and space and to grieve.

To drop the G word of grief again, may sound dramatic for this situation where these people were only seeing each other for a few months but I don't think that that's hyperbole. When you got those feelings and had the NRE and were really hoping for something with this person, it's hurtful for that to be taken away. Maybe the person didn't promise anything or didn't necessarily mean to lead you on, but like the impact was that it was still really hurtful. I think that it's okay to still honor that and give yourself some time or some space, whatever is appropriate for you to be able to let that pass through you and to work that out.

Emily: I just want to acknowledge the very real sense of longing that may be going on with this person and like you said, Dedeker, the grieving or mourning of the relationship that once was but now no longer is in that fashion. I think when I was transitioning away from being both of your romantic partners into non-romantic I had to go through that experience as well even though it was more mutual than this sounds like, it definitely is still a challenging thing for your body and your brain and all of the synapses that we're firing once upon a time telling you that this is a romantic relationship or this type of romantic relationship and now it's something else.

I think repetition and being able to do those things over and over again or be in a situation that is more potentially friends or friends with benefits as opposed to the situation that you used to be in. That simply is just time and repetition and changing what once was in your body and brain. It took me years. It took me years. There it is.

Dedeker: I also have a personal experience with someone where would I call them my ex? I don't know. There was definitely like a de-escalation in the relationship that was really hurtful. They were the ones who initiated it. I felt really hurt and betrayed and took some time. It was definitely much more of a very clear like, "I need to have a period of no contact. "Then I, gosh, how long ago? How long was it after that? Maybe a few months, three or four months.

I don't know what it was. I thought like, "Oh, I'm over this now it'll be great. I can reconnect to this person and be friends because this person did still want to maintain a friendship. They were very honest about that and I just couldn't handle it at the time." Now I think I can be friends the way that this person wants to. Reached out to them and set up a video call and then the minute they got on the video call, I was like, "Oh shit, I'm still really fucking angry."

When Emily's talking about the nervous system thing, it's like yes there is still some stuff where your heart and your body takes longer than your brain does to make the switch with these things. It was really awkward video call because-

Jase: Oh God, oh gosh.

Dedeker: -I was still really angry. Just realized, "Oh no, I still have a lot of anger and resentment and ill will toward this person. I need to take more time." That was just the solution was I just needed more time and more space before I was ready for that.

Jase: I think it's hard because we tend to hold up this idea of being able to peacefully deescalate or to change our expectations as, oh, if you're an evolved person or an emotionally mature person you should just be able to do that and it can lead a lot to that guilt, that feeling of, "Oh, I'm failing. I just need to power through this. I just need to figure it out." I know we're sounding like a broken record but I'm going to say the same thing of just that if it makes you mad and you're frustrated, take the break, take the time.

It could be-- I've had situations where we'll take a break for a month or two or something and then when we reconnect, it's like, "Okay, cool. I can appreciate this and enjoy the occasional hookup where the friendship or whatever it is. This is cool. I just needed truly some time to just get that out of my mind first." Then there's other ones where no, it's needed more time. I have had those situations where we've then reconnected maybe even a couple of years later. It's like, "Oh, now this is really cool and we have this nice shared history that's now nice and not painful. It's--

Emily: I've done that and that has been really cool after the fact it's like, "Oh yes, this is fun."

Jase: We had different things we wanted but we've had enough time to change. That doesn't just feel like we're trying to fall back into that same thing. Or you have also had the situation like Dedeker mentioned, but even several years later where it's like, "Hey, let's reconnect and see how this goes." Within half an hour, we got into a fight over text messages. It was just, "Okay, there's a reason why we stopped doing this before and this just isn't going to work."

A different situation but I guess I would just say that you're not winning if you make this work and it's disappointing either way. Maybe that disappointment's going to be less by just having this end now and maybe you can come back to it in the future but not try to force it, it's just hard. I don't think it'll help either of you really.

Dedeker: These next three questions are all about the same topic. There are some slightly different nuances within each of these questions but what I'm going to do is I'm going to read all three of these questions and then go just to have a discussion.

Emily: We can go back and maybe flush out some backstory as we need as we're going but sure let's get the whole context here.

Dedeker: The broad umbrella topic is everyone's favorite hierarchy and Veto. Emily, what's your air horn?

Jase: That was manic air horn.

Dedeker: I'm going to read the questions. Question number one. How do you set healthy and ethical boundaries within the context of a highly entangled, mutually desired, lifelong commitment, specifically boundaries that don't look like Veto power or interference in other relationships but also don't just come down to walking away in the presence of incompatible strong preferences?

Question number two. This person says a second for pocket Veto issues. How do the difference between genuine third-party trauma or if someone's emotions are being used to force a certain result? How do you spot this before becoming invested? Then, they include a little bit of a caveat here. If I was in my partner's shoes, I'd be so conflicted. As a hinge, how do you balance autonomy and not wanting to continually harm your existing partner, but also to not allow poorly-managed motions to be used as a de facto veto? Then, question number three. Third vote for the idea of ethical hierarchy.

To be honest, I'm a little frustrated by the idea that seems to be prevalent among consensual non-monogamy thought leaders right now that non-hierarchical polyam is the best way, most ethical way, et cetera. If one is going to raise children with a partner, invest in a home, and plan your life with them as your anchor or nested person, centering or prioritizing that relationship makes perfect sense to me. I do feel like we've talked about hierarchy quite a bit on this show, and veto quite a bit on this show, but I know my thoughts about that have definitely shifted and changed quite a bit over the years.

Maybe not completely drastically to opposite ends of the spectrum, but they have changed for sure. What do you all have to say about this? How do we-- ding, ding, ding. Begin, start, go, do the discussion, do the thing.

Jase: I do think it's worth looking at these, because what I like about this is that they're getting into more specific situations based on each of these people's life experiences and challenges in their relationships. I think it is actually helpful to look at them one at a time and get into this and see what it's all about. What if we just start with this first one here, which is this idea of how do you make healthy boundaries within the context of this very entangled relationship, but that you don't want them to look like veto power and they talk about the thing with a boundary.

If it is truly a hard boundary for you, it has to be enforced by yourself, which might mean leaving that relationship if this boundary's getting crossed in order to protect yourself. They're saying, "But that feels like if my only way to enforce this is to walk away." That feels like an ultimatum or looks like veto power of saying, "Well, you can't do this or I leave." Essentially, like a veto with this ultimatum built into it. I think that is worth exploring a little bit. The first thing that comes to mind just to get this out the gate, is that something we mention a lot when we talk about boundaries is that in a good relationship, you will ideally almost never be bumping up against your boundaries.

If you're in a state where that's the issue, that these boundaries are constantly getting pushed against, you're already not in a good place. This relationship is not in a good place already. I would encourage you to maybe move away from thinking about boundaries as the way to express those preferences, or if they are boundaries, then this is a much more serious thing to be thinking about, and it's not about veto. It's about maybe you shouldn't be in this relationship even if that really sucks.

Dedeker: I feel like I want to jump in and maybe clarify what I think it is that you're getting at with the whole idea of in an ideal relationship, you're not bumping up against your boundaries, because I just had a big conversation about this when I was interviewed on Rachel Krantz's podcast a few weeks ago. That it doesn't mean that in a relationship no one's ever going to upset you. No one's going to step on your toes, that you that you're never going to have to defend yourself or anything like that. Of course, those things are going to happen. I think it's just that, ideally, this is a relationship of collaboration. If you're anticipating some trouble ahead or something that may be difficult or something that may be going against your values or something that you may struggle with, that you can collaborate with your partner, there's an open channel of communication.

We can talk this out first, as opposed to like, the first thing I do is figure out, "What's my boundary about this?" I think we like to think about boundaries as they're a little bit closer to the last line of defense, rather than the first thing out the gate. If you're in a relationship where there is no collaboration, and so what that means is my boundaries always have to be the first thing out the gate, that that may be something to look at and that could be a red flag. Does that make sense or does that track with what you're trying to say, Jase?

Jase: Yes. I guess, maybe to try to clarify that even a little bit further is not to say that things that you want and the things that are upsetting you are not valid, because absolutely they're valid. I think that when we talk about them as boundaries, things get a little tricky because, yes, a boundary is that this isn't negotiable. This is not flexible. This is when I leave or otherwise change my situation so that this boundary is not getting pushed up against. Maybe it's the thing that's bothering you is more of a strong preference. That doesn't mean that shouldn't be respected. It doesn't mean that your partner can ignore that then because it's just a preference.

I think it changes the way that we look at it and talk about it. Maybe the kinds of resources you would find because, yes, having it like, "Well, you need to do this thing, and if you don't do that thing, I leave," does feel a lot like you're trying to do some kind of veto power or interfere in other relationships or have some kind of ultimatum. Also, if you're really suffering, being in a relationship where whatever is happening, if it has to do with the partner that they're with or something, if you're really suffering because of that and your partner doesn't want to change that, there isn't really another way you can't just Zen your way past being bothered by that. At least, in my opinion.

Emily: I am thinking about some stuff that Lola Phoenix talked about in their book, which we'll get into next week with our interview with them. They talked a lot about how vetoes or boundaries that are maybe hyper-boundaried or something along those lines that a lot of the knee-jerk reaction to place these big barriers up in our relationships comes from an unmet need, or not getting something or seeing something that is occurring with somebody else that causes you to want to put a barrier or a boundary or something in place, or a veto or whatever it may be just to protect yourself, and that if you step back from that idea, that often what it is really is that you're not quite getting a need met in a way that perhaps you want or that you are hoping for.

I think that's where true communication really needs to come in and where these bigger questions need to get asked regarding, what is it that I want my relationship to look like? Are we able to have these highly entangled commitments while still providing what we need to one another and having multiple relationships, because that's a lot. There's a lot going on there. I'm sure-- I haven't been in a polyamorous relationship for a while, but to me, it seems a lot of people choose non-hierarchical polyamory because it is a little bit easier to not be putting up these big boundaries with one another, and instead allow for multiple parties to act in potentially a more egalitarian manner.

I think, yes, when you do have structures in place that don't necessarily call for that, I think there's some big questions and decisions that need to be made there in terms of what it is that you want your structure to look like and how is it possible or not to create the relationship that you want to have.

Jase: That's a great segue into the second of these three questions here, which is coming at it from the other side of, how do you know the difference between genuine third party trauma--? and what they mean by that is their metamour feeling traumatized by something about their relationship with the shared partner. Where's the balance between respecting those feelings, or feeling like those are being used to manipulate or to control or something like that? This one, I think, gets into, gosh, it gets into a tricky territory. If you imagine, I'm in a relationship with Dedeker and she's in a relationship with-- we'll call this person Tim.

Dedeker: Can we call it you and McGregor because-

Jase: Okay, you and McGregor.

Jase: -I am in a relationship with me and McGregor and I don't understand why you always forget that.

Emily: It's true.

Jase: You're right . She's in a relationship with you and McGregor--

Dedeker: We've been in a relationship for 15, upwards of 15 years now.

Emily: Is it Ewan as Obi-Wan or as Halston or-

Dedeker: It's Ewan McGregor himself.

Emily: -in Trainspotting.

Dedeker: Why would you--? No. I love him as he is, Emily.

Emily: Okay.

Dedeker: All his forms.

Emily: Okay, got it.

Jase: Oh my gosh, okay. Here's the situation. Clearly, Dedeker's relationship with you and McGregor is longer than her relationship with me. When I met Dedeker, she told me-- and I'm now putting names to these characters from this person's clarification here. She told me, "Hey, we don't live with each other," me and Ewan, "We don't live with each other and that we've each got full autonomy, no veto, but every time or very often when I'm having good times with Dedeker, I'm then hearing about you and being 'traumatized' by my relationship with Dedeker," and that he's really upset by this relationship for whatever reason. I don't know what that is and they didn't really clarify here. Then, the person saying that this has taken this big emotional toll on all three of us.

Clearly, this person who's feeling traumatized by our relationship, but then also Dedeker trying to mediate between us. Then, also me feeling this like guilt now, and that I can't have this relationship without feeling like I'm upsetting this other person. That's the situation here.

Dedeker: Gosh, it's weird putting myself in the middle of it like that, and Ewan McGregor involved.

Emily: You're like, "Well, sorry, Jase, so, sorry."

Dedeker: Sorry, Ewan comes first. That is hard. I do think that the fact that they drop in the word trauma makes it really tricky, because I do think a lot of us want to respect when someone is having a trauma response, and respect that especially if this person has some form of PTSD that's not always within their control and they can't always logic that away from themselves. However, also when I'm looking at that, when I look at that through the lens of the trauma work that I do with people, I'm like, "Well, if there's a trauma response going on, chances are there are either much earlier issues, much bigger issues or much different issues than just my partner's dating somebody else."

Now, I don't know. Maybe that is the trauma. My partner's dating somebody else. I don't want them to be dating somebody else at all. In which case, that's a more fundamental question about relationship structure stuff. If it's, "No, I'm totally bought into consensual non-monogamy and I want this, but there's something about when my partner spends time with this other person that brings up this response for me, then I just want to know more about that. Again, I feel like then it gets into other stuff. It could get into, like Emily was talking about, there's an unmet need here. There's been some past pain in this relationship.

There's been a past breach of trust or a past betrayal. Again, it's not to discount it. It's like that needs to be addressed and that needs to be looked at. I guess right now I'm bringing my coach brain to it because I'm always, as a coach, before people jump straight to need to veto or need to cut this person out, I'm trying to look at what's the actual pain here. Sure, it may be a situation where it's just so painful for you that you need to leave, or it's so painful for your partner that you're like, "This is not worth it. I don't want to put my partner through this pain and so I'm going to make the choice to do this."

Even that opens up a little bit of a can of worms, if it's hard to tell a person's motivation, like, "Did they do this genuinely out of their own heart? They wanted to end this relationship, or was it because their partner was making life at home so miserable for them that they just couldn't?" It starts to get, I think, messy and complicated and entangled really quickly.

Emily: It's hard for me to separate a veto, especially if we're talking about a veto in the context of saying, "Okay, I'm veto-ing this person and that means that you can't date them anymore." It's hard for me to separate that from a boundary, somebody breaching a boundary and then saying that you have to be punished essentially, or punishing your partner for breaching that boundary. To me, they feel a little bit one and the same, which is tough, I think, and probably why veto gets such a bad rep in non-monogamous circles.

Dedeker: You feel like it's punitive.

Emily: Yes, exactly. Like it is essentially a way in which to punish some party involved for doing something that you don't want. Geez, that really does sound like there's got to be some fundamental questions there. At the end of the day, you also can only change yourself and your own reaction to something. If this is the reaction that somebody else is having, you can have conversations with your partner about it, you can even have conversations with your metamour about it, but at the end of the day, the only person that you can change or do anything about is you. You can't change their actions. I think that is really challenging, but something to understand that you're not the only one involved here. As shitty as that is, I think, yes, at the end of the day, it has to be a collaboration between many people.

Dedeker: I'm glad that you brought up the punitive aspect. That's not always the case when people exercise some kind of veto power, but I will say like the cases that I see so frequently in my own client base is usually, it's like, "Yes, my partner and I, we're non-monogamous and then they went and dated somebody else. Then, they lied to me about what they were doing, or they chose to have unprotected sex when they said that they wouldn't." Or, they did something that was directly hurtful, and objectively hurtful. Usually, it's lying in some way or concealing doing something shitty like that. Then, now it is this weird thing of now I have this painful association with my partner in the context of this outside relationship did this really painful thing to me.

Now, it's the punitive part becomes-- part of it is punishment and part of it is just like, "I don't trust my partner with this person," or whatever it is. Those are really tricky situations to work through, because often people are really grappling with, "No, we are in a consensually non-monogamous relationship. I want this. I'm okay with my partner dating other people. It's just that they did this really shitty thing with this one person and it's really hard for me to get past that." From seeing that situation so many times, I can say I've not found a single one size fits all solution there.

Jase: Actually, that does go back to something that you mentioned in the first half of this episode, Dedeker, is this issue of if I'm putting this problem and the thing I'm trying to work out on my metamour's behavior, you might actually be missing the mark a little bit, because that's not a relationship that you are in directly, and so even if you did figure it out somehow, it wouldn't really make any difference because it's not your relationship. Especially in this situation, it sounds like they definitely don't have any kind of their own friendship or communication or anything like that. Maybe it'd be a little different if you did, maybe.

What I would encourage in this kind of situation is, it doesn't make the problem easy, but hopefully lets you focus your efforts a little more, is to focus on the behaviors of your partner and not your metamour, not their other partner. In this situation and depending on your situation, there could be different ways this could work out or not, but it's if, because of their other partner's actions, they're being shitty to you, like canceling on dates with you or not scheduling as many with you or something like that.

Even if you feel like the cause of that is the metamour, the person doing it is your partner, is that hinge. They're the one who's actually not treating you like you would like to be treated in this relationship, and that that's the relationship that you can actually talk to. Maybe they won't be willing to make that change, in which case, "Okay. My partner isn't willing to treat me with the kind of respect that I want in this relationship or they're not able to give me what I want in this relationship," regardless of why they're deciding to choose that. The fact is your relationship with this person is the one that's affected.

Or, in this case, and this one might be a little controversial. I could see people being upset by this idea, but maybe it's that, "Hey, partner, if this is going on in your other relationship, and you're still choosing to keep that, I need you to not tell me about that, because it's not my relationship and feeling this guilt and shame that I'm traumatizing your partner when really it's just your choice to date me that's supposedly traumatizing this person. I need you to manage that and find someone to talk to. I'm sorry that I can't be that for you, but you can't be putting this on me because it's a relationship I have no power to do anything about."

Again, how you negotiate that can really vary, but I would just really encourage you to focus on the actual relationship you do have and their behavior, and you may find you get a lot more effective conversations, instead of constantly wondering and pondering over this other person and trying to solve their problem that you really can't solve.

Dedeker: That's a good segue. Speaking of behavior, to talk about this question number three. Talking about ethical hierarchy, talking about how in a lot of the polyam community people just default to, "Oh, yes, non-hierarchical. That's the best way. That's the most ethical way." We've definitely been a voice that has contributed to that, for sure, in the past. Definitely want to take ownership of that. I think for myself now, after working with so many people and seeing so many people's relationships, I realized pretty quickly that I have seen people practice non-hierarchical polyamory in ways that are very unethical and very shitty to people involved. I've seen people practice very descriptive, clear hierarchy in ways that are very ethical and very kind and very compassionate. For me, I'm realizing now I get a little bit less hung up on what label are you putting on your relationship, especially now that this is a microculture thing where people think non-hierarchy equals good.

Therefore, I'm just going to slap that on my relationship and put that on my dating profile and then it doesn't really matter what my behavior is. People just know that I'm practicing the good form of polyamory. I don't tend to get hung up on that as much, and I am just looking at the behavior. Like, how are you communicating things? How are you treating people? What efforts are you making to set up people's expectations as best as you can? I realize that's not always in our control.

Sometimes people bring in weird expectations about what kind of access to your time they're going to get. Or, what kind of access to what sort of relationship you're going to get, regardless of whether you've told them about whether you practice hierarchy or not. That's the thing that I'm looking at, is just like, are you being good? Are you giving people as much information as you possibly can so they can give informed consent into what they're getting involved with? Just like, are you taking care of people?

Also, are you making sure to just look at yourself and have awareness for why you're doing the things that you're doing? Why your relationship is structured in this particular way? Why are you choosing non-hierarchy, or why are you choosing hierarchy? That question isn't meant to be for the purpose of poking holes and saying, "Oh, look at that, because you're wrong." It's just being clear on why you're doing the things that you're doing and being able to take ownership of that and tell that to the other people that you're interacting with.

Jase: I think that the non-hierarchy movement, we could call it, came out of a place that made sense, because it was coming from a culture where even in non-monogamy, there was this clear uncontested assumption that whoever that primary partner is gets to dictate whatever they want about that other relationship, and that that's right. I think fighting back against that and pushing back against it, like a lot of people have done, including ourselves, makes a lot of sense.

It was this completely unchallenged, unquestioned idea that this person could just unilaterally make this decision and had no accountability for that themselves. Even though we've seen in real life it actually ends up hurting them a lot to do it, too, but that was the idea, that that needed to be protected at all costs. Then, to go along with what Dedeker was saying, if you think about this, I always like to make comparisons to other types of relationships. Say, I have a really good friend and I start hanging out with some new person.

My friend, for some reason, is just like, "I don't know. I don't like how you are when you're around this person." Or, like, "You have a lot less time for me in my time of need," or whatever it is. I might take that seriously and maybe not keep doing this new relationship or maybe change that new relationship, because possibly my friend sees something in me, in my behavior with this person that I'm not aware of right now, because I'm just excited about my new friend.

You take that seriously because this is someone I prioritize and someone who matters a lot to me and I have a lot of history with, and there's nothing wrong with that. In this situation, they give this example of, if you're going to raise a child with someone or invest in a home or plan your life, you do want to prioritize that person. I would say, "Yes, absolutely. That makes sense." If you're going to parent a child with someone, there's going to be some decisions you make prioritizing that person.

I would still argue that the difference between the old school way of approaching hierarchy is this, "You get control and veto just because," rather than, "I'm going to prioritize this relationship and I'm going to let my new partners know, "Hey, I have a kid with this person," or, "I own a home with this person and we've been together for 10 years. I'm going to prioritize this relationship, so don't expect me to just drop them for you."" You don't have to say it quite like that, but I think that's a reasonable thing to expect, and a reasonable thing that we would do in other relationships, too.

I'm not saying, oh, because of that, they get to dictate whatever they want for you. That's a new nuance and, yes, maybe we need to come up with some better ways of expressing this or some better terms.

Emily: There is an interesting unpacking of feeling as though one is entitled to somebody else's time just simply because they've been with them the longest or something along those lines. Now, again, yes, I agree that if you have children with this person, if you have a life with this person that's established or you live with them, things like that, then potentially you will feel as though, "Hey, my entanglement makes me feel as though I should be entitled to certain things within this relationship."

As Dedeker said, and I think as you said as well, Jase, you need to be clear with that with your other partners and really talk about your expectations in terms of what you want your other relationships to look like. Now, I also have met people who prefer being in relationships where they are not the primary, where they are more in a secondary role, because that's really all that they have the emotional bandwidth for, or what they want their life to look like in that way. I think seeking out those types of relationships maybe is something that would fare better for those who do want really strict specific hierarchy.

Jase: I was just thinking of another comparison would be with a job that it's, "Hey, I have a job where I travel every month." I'm gone two weeks out of the month, and if I'm going to start dating someone new, it's like, "Well, I--"

Emily: You have to know that, yes.

Jase: You have to know this, "I have this commitment to this job. I'm not just going to skip out on work because you want to see me that week or because you're having a breakdown or something like that." At the same time I also understand you might not like it all the time. Like, Dedeker and I, I am thinking of this because Dedeker and I just recently in our last RADAR had some conflicts about each of our different ways of approaching work. When it doesn't always fit perfectly and having to talk about, "Well, okay, this is what matters to me and this is why this. Okay, let's see if I can communicate to you differently about it and making adjustments around that."

I feel like it actually works as a pretty good metaphor for this type of thing, too. It's like, "Well, okay." It's not that you have to say, "Heck, yes, I'd love everything you're doing in that other relationship." Also, on the other extreme, it's not, "I don't like this, so you can't do it." Or, "I'm just going to make your life miserable for doing it," because that's not good either.

Again, I'm just trying to think of different ways to think about it, just to use as landmarks, or what makes sense, what feels reasonable in other circumstances, and then see how those apply here. Not as like, be all end all, this is the answer, because maybe people are shitty at dealing with their work, too, but just to give you some other ways to think about things.

Emily: Just because something is hierarchical or not doesn't mean that it's ethical or not. I think you said that, too.

Jase: That's great.

Dedeker: That's true. I think it requires a little more investigation-

Emily: Absolutely.

Dedeker: -beyond just someone telling you that there's hierarchy or there's not.

Emily: 100%.

Dedeker: That was a great discussion. I don't know if we answered any questions, but maybe that's not the point really to come-

Emily: What? .

Dedeker: -down hard and fast with a firm answer. I feel like we could have this same discussion every six months and be uncovering different nuances and different thoughts and different feelings about all of these things. However, do want to hear from all y'all listening. We're going to post this question in our Instagram stories this week. Do you think that some form of hierarchy can ever be ethical in a non-monogamous relationship?