Boundaries Outside of Dynamics

[Je****]

48 minutes ago, Chloebear said:

Completely agree. And you’d better be damn sure you have your facts in order first haha! I’ve told a couple of times…. It was the right thing to do in those instances, but it wasn’t easy and it was hurtful to them. It did allow them an informed choice though… others I’ve just let get on with it… or like I said encouraged the cheating partner to be honest. It depends on the circumstances and what you’re messing with and why. If you do it for personal gain, it’s not right but also it’ll probably backfire anyway.

Yeah, my only issue would be the authenticity of that "my partner doesn't want to know".

I would want to know of some proof that backs that up. If someone is genuine they won't mind. Someone hiding their intentions and deceiving, will often go down the offensive line of lashing back about not trusting etc. 

Tricky one.

[Deleted Member]

4 hours ago, spyder89 said:

Just food for thought

For sure, Spy. The app may not show it, but, I do have a response earlier in this thread disclosing that I was on the other side of a similar arrangement. My second Dom and I had a poly primary relationship. Since we were long distance and he had a high sex drive, I agreed to him maintaining and pursuing whatever sexual relationships he needed physically. I, personally, did not want involvement/details. But I also considered the other women and their doubts/need for assurance. I was happy to confirm with them while keeping limited contact. Our profiles were also linked on each other's accounts as well for verification.
So yeah, since I believe in treating people in general with basic human dignity, I think anyone involved in these situations should have their needs considered. And I do understand that some want no involvement. That should be respected just as much as one who needs verification.
I am also demisexual, so hookups and NSA can be emotionally damaging for me. I share all this to say, when someone pursues me for an open relationship, it is extremely off-putting and inconsiderate. If it were a poly relationship, then that would be different for me.
I am, however, curious to learn how people go about vetting partners without verification; especially, if they are in a relationship? Do they blindly trust someone at their word? If so, how do they deal with the risks it poses? If not, what is their vetting process for building trust when they cannot verify the relationship established?

[Deleted Member]

I also want to add that it's not appropriate for individuals to come into someone's Dynamic and tell them how to behave or change things around. Equally it's not okay for a dynamic to do the same to an individual. We all deserve respect and consideration, which I think comes with clear communication.

[sp****]

Are you saying that it is ok to contact someone who does not wish to know anything about a partners interactions because you are an individual and shouldn't be bound by anothers dynamic

[sp****]

And as to your second part jen gave some really good examples of ways to vet

[sp****]

3 hours ago, Jeneral_Whore said:

I really get what you are saying here. It's very valid. 

 

Brings me down the thinking route of a few different things.

 

1. Did the individual tell her their partner was ok with it, and she sought that clarification? People sometimes do this, as you can't always take someone's word as gospel, but genuine people don't mind.

Even if it's just, I am speaking to "such n such" I hope this is ok, and if not, I won't intrude?!"

2. Yes the approacher is indeed genuine, and their partner is aware but has told them not to make them aware of any meetings etc they have. But this is where it gets complicated. The person may be telling the truth, but in order to KNOW you're doing right by someone it's always good to have that confirmed, and in approaching the other  half it is courteous and good intent to make sure they're well being is met, but it does also risk, them being made aware of something they don't want to know.

I think in cases like that, for me, I would ask a part of a couple, if just them, and they told me their partner doesn't want to know anything, I would ask that person for proof.

For example, IF I was an approacher and someone asked proof from me that my partner was ok with things, I'd try to show them something along the lines of...

 

Me: Hey so us being open, I just want to check that you still don't want to know details of things I do should I meet someone else, or has that changed?

Partner: Yes I would rather not know, thanks for checking in. 

 OR

Me:  Hey so us being open, I just want to check that you still don't want to know details of things I do should I meet someone else, or has that changed?

Partner: Yeh I don't want to know details but if I need to vouch for you or anything, I will.

OR

Partner: Yes no details but make me aware of who so I am informed, thanks.

 

 

All different ways to be discreet but show transparency.

In case you missed this sweet

[sp****]

Here's the thing I am going to say if you want transparency and they don't want that or you don't want to take them at their word that their partner wants no knowledge of anything then simply don't be involved with them in any kinda way

[sp****]

You have a right to any boundaries you want to set but as you also said an individual doesn't have a right to change a persons already set dynamic

[sp****]

If you were to contact a partner of someone who approaches you and they say their partner wants no knowledge of it there is the risk that you just violated that persons dynamic protocols you can set the boundary of just not dealing with something like that that is the only way to truly not have to worry about it for those people you simply tell them not interested and you want no more contact and if necessary block them

[sp****]

Yes there is the possibility that it could be the other way and you are exposing them as cheaters but you gotta stop and think is it worth it is it worth any drama that might come

[Je****]

2 hours ago, 165Sw33t said:

I am, however, curious to learn how people go about vetting partners without verification; especially, if they are in a relationship? Do they blindly trust someone at their word? If so, how do they deal with the risks it poses? If not, what is their vetting process for building trust when they cannot verify the relationship established?

As Spyder quoted me above, those are ways that *I* would help reassure someone who wanted a kind of confirmation of my word. People unwilling to do this is a red flag for me. They can provide you with proof if genuine, without breaking any rules or confidentiality or boundaries with an existing partner.

 

This is how I would share my word and honesty, and expect the same in return.

I spoke to a guy on here once, a married guy, as a potential to date. We had videos calls and he always told me his wife was aware and consenting to our "time together". One day on the video call, she came home, greeted me and asked how things were. Completely relaxed, nothing tense or shocking for her. He was being true to his word. Sadly with distance that did not work out for he and I. 

If someone flat out refuses any kind of proof, dodges the question or even tells you don't go near their partner under any circumstance, for me, my gut would be screaming something was wrong. I would ask for proof and if denied that, I wouldn't be able to trust them and I would say thank you but I am done here until you can provide "XYZ". An honest person would. (If they still wanted to date me).

If someone was dating me and did not mention the other partner at all throughout our interactions and then I found out about them, I would probably tell them. Simply for the fact if they didn't make that partner known to me, they're probably keeping me a secret from them, and that person deserves better. Thankfully, I have not really come across that.

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, spyder89 said:

Are you saying that it is ok to contact someone who does not wish to know anything about a partners interactions because you are an individual and shouldn't be bound by anothers dynamic

No, I am not. My reference was more so saying "everyone  stay in your lane".

Before you can establish an intent to harm, you must establish that the outsider had knowledge of the boundaries that were violated. If dynamic boundaries were not discussed/disclosed, then the intent to harm cannot be founded because there is no fore-knowledge to support an "intention" in the first place.

The dynamic agreement only applies to those involved within the dynamic. Those who are on the outside should not be subjected to protocol or expectations they had no say in. This is taking consent away. Harm.

Also, consider, by not going straight to the source and getting verification, that, too, can be harmful and a consent ***. So, example, if someone spread a rumor that I liked fish and ate it everyday, would you 100% believe them? When does the other person's words become mine? I am the only one who can confirm my preferences. Otherwise, it is just hearsay. 

It is the responsibility of those in a dynamic to discuss and disclose what their protocols are when they are trying to involve others. Failing to do so leaves room for error and misunderstandings. Blame-shifting their lack of responsibility, then becomes controlling those outside of their dynamic...again, a consent ***.

I think the most frustrating part is being accused of causing harm when clearly the list of harmful behavior has already be done to me. My objective is to grow from this experience and avoid it all together through communal discussion.

[sp****]

I stand by my statement to set boundaries to avoid these people then that is the only way you avoid being bound by a dynamics structure that was in place prior to your involvement if someone has an open relationship that includes nondisclosure of any interactions then avoid it say you aren't interested what have you because if you get involved with something like that and then wanting to disclose information it leads to problems for everyone I'm sorry you think I'm saying you're causing harm that is not what I was saying with my comments I was saying if you involve yourself with someone who says they are open but their partner wants no knowledge of any interactions then you try to interact with them even for confirmation you are at that point causing harm so to avoid that set a boundary that avoids that and you solve that problem. That is just my two cents I'm done on this discussion

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, spyder89 said:

 

 

3 minutes ago, spyder89 said:

I stand by my statement to set boundaries to avoid these people then that is the only way you avoid being bound by a dynamics structure that was in place prior to your involvement if someone has an open relationship that includes nondisclosure of any interactions then avoid it say you aren't interested what have you because if you get involved with something like that and then wanting to disclose information it leads to problems for everyone I'm sorry you think I'm saying you're causing harm that is not what I was saying with my comments I was saying if you involve yourself with someone who says they are open but their partner wants no knowledge of any interactions then you try to interact with them even for confirmation you are at that point causing harm so to avoid that set a boundary that avoids that and you solve that problem. That is just my two cents I'm done on this discussion

But it needs to be acknowledged that none of these people who pursued me, mentioned they were in an open relationship. So it feels like your pushing an agenda that doesn't even apply. You're assuming I had foreknowledge when I repeatedly said I didn't. I don't know what else to tell you.

[Deleted Member]

9 minutes ago, spyder89 said:

I stand by my statement to set boundaries to avoid these people then that is the only way you avoid being bound by a dynamics structure that was in place prior to your involvement if someone has an open relationship that includes nondisclosure of any interactions then avoid it say you aren't interested what have you because if you get involved with something like that and then wanting to disclose information it leads to problems for everyone I'm sorry you think I'm saying you're causing harm that is not what I was saying with my comments I was saying if you involve yourself with someone who says they are open but their partner wants no knowledge of any interactions then you try to interact with them even for confirmation you are at that point causing harm so to avoid that set a boundary that avoids that and you solve that problem. That is just my two cents I'm done on this discussion

I have in fact avoided many situations where the partner would not conform their relationship. I have that right but dynamics do not have a right to control me. This is the topic discussion. Whether they came first or last. Dynamics cannot take outsiders consent away 

2 hours ago, spyder89 said:

 

 

Edited July 26, 2023 by Deleted Member
Accidental copy and paste

[Deleted Member]

I'm  not sure if the entire thread has been read. It seems like some of these responses  are isolated and the context isn't being seen in it's entirety. 🥴 I'm hoping that's not the case bc I really don't want a misunderstanding. At the end of the day, we may not agree with each other and I hope we can still walk away with mutual kindness and respect for our diversity and individuality.

[Je****]

27 minutes ago, spyder89 said:

I stand by my statement to set boundaries to avoid these people then that is the only way you avoid being bound by a dynamics structure that was in place prior to your involvement if someone has an open relationship that includes nondisclosure of any interactions then avoid it say you aren't interested what have you because if you get involved with something like that and then wanting to disclose information it leads to problems for everyone I'm sorry you think I'm saying you're causing harm that is not what I was saying with my comments I was saying if you involve yourself with someone who says they are open but their partner wants no knowledge of any interactions then you try to interact with them even for confirmation you are at that point causing harm so to avoid that set a boundary that avoids that and you solve that problem. That is just my two cents I'm done on this discussion

took me so long to read this with no commas and full stops haha. 

[sp****]

Sorry my punctuation is not so good when I'm typing on the phone

[Je****]

2 minutes ago, spyder89 said:

Sorry my punctuation is not so good when I'm typing on the phone

I'm jesting, I read it all as one big long thing haha. Tc lovely xx

[Chloebear]

The thing is, there’s three sides to every story. Their side, your side and the truth. They aren’t here to express their side. Forums aren’t echo chambers, they’re for bouncing ideas. So there’s no reason that people shouldn’t offer a range of ideas, thereby contributing to wider understanding, not undermining anyone’s individual standing since we cannot know what actually happened in full.

[sp****]

25 minutes ago, 165Sw33t said:

I'm  not sure if the entire thread has been read. It seems like some of these responses  are isolated and the context isn't being seen in it's entirety. 🥴 I'm hoping that's not the case bc I really don't want a misunderstanding. At the end of the day, we may not agree with each other and I hope we can still walk away with mutual kindness and respect for our diversity and individuality.

I have read what I have seen on the app are there things missing I'm not sure my point is not targeted at whether you had foreknowledge or not if you didn't it is another matter but that is something else.

The thing that I am getting at is when you get involved with honestly anyone in a dynamic to some extent you do have to conform to some of the preset things in said dynamic but it is a give and take kinda thing as it is in any form of relationship.

Communication is going to be a key thing here. And so is compromise at least to an extent. You want transparency that is fine but my point was more geared toward the fact that if you come into a position where that transparency turns to problems you stated at one point that you ran into problems with you being transparent my question for you and I think someone else asked the same question did you inform the person you were going to contact their partner or did you just do it. Did you talk to them about your need for transparency or not. You keep stating that you feel a dynamic shouldn't control an outside individual and you are right to an extent. It shouldn't. But the question remains is there proper communication there or is neither side really truly communicating.

You said you had no foreknowledge why not was it that they had lied was it you not asking questions a combination.

I am not trying to upset you but I am asking questions to try to get you to think

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, Chloebear said:

The thing is, there’s three sides to every story. Their side, your side and the truth. They aren’t here to express their side. Forums aren’t echo chambers, they’re for bouncing ideas. So there’s no reason that people shouldn’t offer a range of ideas, thereby contributing to wider understanding, not undermining anyone’s individual standing since we cannot know what actually happened in full.

Exactly. I would like to continue keeping this objective as we started initially. I will say that I have read many echos in forum though. To each their own.

[Deleted Member]

I just want to make a general request, if you're making comments directly about "what I should do" can we please stop and change it into your opinion and perspective. It comes off extremely judgy and accusatory. I am happy to hear all perspectives even if I don't agree. 

[sp****]

My apologies if you felt it was pointed at you specifically everything I said is something I would tell anyone it is meant as a general thing for anyone well except for the last comment as that was in response to something you said pertained to you specifically but to be honest I would tell anyone what I said in any of my comments if not verbatim at least in the overall gist

[sp****]

I am just going to step away from this now