SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Perhaps you see it so because you cannot imagine it being any other way. It's very difficult to see things from a perspective that you haven't experienced, because it's so easy to say that it must be a certain way, or that you would feel a certain way. But you never really know until you're there.

I agree, but I think that's as true in the poly world as it is in monogamy. You've been extremely lucky so far, and that's created a belief that your happy marriage will always be safe, no matter what dynamics it encounters through polyamory. That's just another version of saying that "it must be a certain way, or that you would feel a certain way." But you never really know until you're there.

You are madly and reciprocally in love with two men who get along great with each other and your kid. I'm happy that's working for you, and I'm not saying that you haven't been supportive of whatever lesser relationships they're involved in. But the real trick of polyamory is when your partners find someone that they love enough to put everything at risk. I wonder what happens when the person they get serious about doesn't have motivations that are as pure as the ones your partner ascribes to them, and they refuse to see that because they're deep in the fog of that new relationship energy. So you raise concerns, and you're told to stay in your lane, because their relationship is private to them and not about you. You're left where any gaslighted monogamous person is, wondering what is really going on and what risk your marriage is facing.

The reason that "Not Just Friends" resonated for me is that it is the path that my A followed. I really, truly did not believe that I was mentally or emotionally capable of betraying my BH (who was my BF at the time). I struggled like hell against the attraction I felt for OM, but I thought I could resist it. When I realized that it was something I really wanted to explore, I was open with my BF about that and got his permission to date OM casually. So as far as that went, there was no secrecy, and nothing I should have to apologize for -- but that doesn't mean that those feelings didn't hurt my BF. And as it turns out, his trust in me was totally misplaced. As my feelings escalated, I was shit at maintaining our rules and my own boundaries. I went from honest and open to a total liar, and the way I was able to do that was by lying first and foremost to myself. I told myself that OM and I could stay in our lane, and I mentally broadened that lane, because I knew that open communication with BF would result in having to put on the brakes.

After the PA ended, I wanted to stay "just friends" with OM. This was, in my mind, what I owed him for making him feel important to me and then breaking his heart. My BF was crushed by this because I had taken the rules we established -- that our relationship was safe and protected -- and thrown them out the window. The term "EA" here is especially vague, because I did enforce some boundaries on our interactions. OM and I did not talk at all about anything physical that happened between us, we did not engage in sexting, we never discussed restarting the A. A transcript of those calls would have read like two platonic friends with a deep affection for each other. But I allowed him to send subtle messages -- a mixtape full of songs about broken hearts, clues in an online role play game -- that fed me with ongoing ego kibble. Again, I didn't see what my BF saw, the risk to our primary relationship, because I didn't want to see it.

And I realize that if we were polyamorous, I could have explored this relationship without guilt, but that doesn't mean it would have been safe for my primary. Unless you have no rules, it's possible for those rules to be broken, especially under the influence of an outside person who is a skilled manipulator. Or even just an honest person who doesn't know that they are going to want something contrary to those rules, until suddenly, one day, they realize that they do.

I have experienced these things firsthand, as the cheater, and I am not nearly so sanguine as you that both men in your life can and will manage their own emotions and choose people who don't deeply complicate your life. You know them and I do not, so I assume you'll disagree. "Perhaps you see it so because you cannot imagine it being any other way. It's very difficult to see things from a perspective that you haven't experienced, because it's so easy to say that it must be a certain way, or that you would feel a certain way. But you never really know until you're there."

Somewhere in NJF, Glass sets out 3 requirements for an EA: intimacy with ap, secrets, and sexual tension. I think that definition would amount to betrayal even of a non-monogamous relationship.

When you are polyamorous and wish to have two deeply entwined loving relationships, you'll find that the love and bonding in your heart multiplies the same way.

IIRC from almost 50 years ago, that was the argument of the Open Marriage school.

Robert Heinlein preached love of all for all in Stranger in a Strange Land, although he seemed to believe most people were not ready for that yet. Nice dream, though, I agree.

W & I read and discussed Open Marriage, and concluded it wasn't for us. (That was one of the reasons I was able to reject evidence of the A.)

In any case, we both believed that we couldn't create an 'equal' Open M. That is, we believed that one person in multiple relationships would inevitably treat one partner as primary, which is contrary to our conception of M 'partnership' and contrary to the principles of Open M. (It apparently works for others, and I'm happy for them; it just wouldn't work for me.)

That played out in the A in a way that I had never considered. The ap got most of my W's attention and energy because of the urgency of her demands (she constantly threatened to kill herself). In that sense she was primary.

But I was the base on which my W rested. She has said she wanted her relationship with ow to be as good as ours was. In that sense, I was primary. Fucking crazy, fucking outrageous, fucking enraging, fucking devastating, fucking I don't have a word that says what I want to say, but there it is.

At least in our case, there was no 'equal,' and both ow and I were devastated. I take some satisfaction in ow's devastation.

*****

How many people are secure enough to be happy in a poly relationship? I'm not, and I feel pretty secure.

I wonder how many people live polu because they don't think they can get the object of their affections to agree to monogamy....

IOW, I can see people choosing poly from strength, but I would bet that some portion of poly people want to be monogamous.

*****

A question for you, PST1: Are you the center of 2 dyads, or are you in a triad? How do you think you' feel about the one you are not in?

sissoon, I wouldn't express it quite that way but absolutely I see people in relationships where one person wants to open and the other is lukewarm about it and that seems like a major warning bell. I'm a big believer in that only a joyous yes is consent, not a manipulated or coerced yes. But I think that people have to realize for themselves that no other person is worth hurting yourself in a way that you are no longer true to your own needs (not wants). Setting healthy boundaries for yourself is so important.

A question for you, PST1: Are you the center of 2 dyads, or are you in a triad? How do you think you' feel about the one you are not in?

I'm the centre of a V (two dyads). My partners are friends but not romantically involved.

I'm thrilled that they are friends because it means we can hang out as a threesome. We have dinner together at least once a week, then I have separate dates with each of them since each relationship needs its own space.

It's not that I've never dealt with my loves having other partners though, if that's what you're actually asking. My husband went through a breakup of a 7 year partner before we got married. I thought the relationship was toxic but it wasn't my relationship so I chose to keep myself away from it rather than try to end it. I think veto is just as toxic because of the effects it has on a relationship (which is why I think that being controlling ultimately doesn't work anyway- it sabotages intimacy when partners feel that they don't have free choice).

Hierarchy in polyamory is a really loaded conversation even among polys, and it's very polarizing. I do think that there is an enormous difference between prescriptive hierarchy ("you can only get this sliver of time because you are secondary and my other partner's needs will always come first") or descriptive hierarchy ("I have legal and life entanglements with this partner, so if an issue arises involving this, I will need to attend to that even if we have a date. But otherwise the relationships will be treated fairly on their own merits"). Equality and fairness are two entirely different concepts anyway. If I don't like chocolate ice cream, it's not unfair for me to want a slushie instead even if that's not equal.

There are a lot of strictly hierarchical polys who do have primary/secondary relationships. The only time it tends to play out well is married people with other married people, because then they actually want it like that- the second relationship is expected to be a benefit and not take up too many resources in either marriage. But it is definitely self limiting, which works for some and not for others.

I enjoyed Heinlein's book, but I don't think that kind of unstructured living works for me, either. I like having a life partner and building shared dreams together. We just leave ourselves open to possibly changing the dreams.

BSR- actually, I don't believe that my partners will always choose people who won't complicate my life :) That's not reality. Life is messy and if you expect people to fit into neat little boxes, I've found that they stay about as well as kittens do. My husband's ex partner was certainly a complication- but it was one where I was able to grow and become a better person as a result. I'm actually very proud of the choices I made then because it also allowed my husband the opportunity to see for himself that his relationship was a toxic place without him resenting or blaming me. And so he chose to end it knowing that he had full freedom to continue if he chose to.

I see you mean the Gamechanger, though. That's certainly a concept that's been discussed all over the internet. No one can ever insulate themselves from the Gamechanger, whatever or whoever that may be. It's part of life, and we can't control all the possibilities in life. Absolutely- either of my partners could meet someone or find something that changes them in a fundamental way that alters who they are. For that matter, I could meet one myself. I don't think NRE has anything to do with this, though- experienced poly people are well aware of the effects of NRE and know better than to make life decisions in the middle of it. But the Gamechanger is quite real and when that happens, all you can do is make a decision to either go along with the change if it works for you, or otherwise to wish your partner well. Because it would be a pretty awful thing to hold your partner back from a change or a desire that obviously resonates so much to them, right? Then it would be selfish to try and control and keep them.

I'm still a romantic at heart who believes in lifetime relationships but I accept that truly, there is nothing we can actually do in a healthy way to ensure that a relationship does last forever. We can stay connected and communicate and be emotionally and physically intimate- but I would never want my partner to stay with me if they could be happier elsewhere- how could I live with being that person?

I'm tired, so I'm likely not expressing myself clearly. I also see some of my words being twisted previously. I haven't read Esther Perel, but when I talk about personal growth it's certainly not condoning affairs. Again, I live my life in such a way that consent is paramount above all. My point is merely that when something makes us uncomfortable, we should take time to think about why we actually feel that way. Do some self examination and see if the problem is that we have a need going unmet and so we respond a certain way, or if the actual thing is really a problem that needs addressing. For example, if my husband had a hobby that had him going out 3 nights a week, and I was feeling upset and wanted to say that he needs to cut that back. First of all, I wouldn't do that anyway because I would tell him how I felt rather than trying to impose a limit on him. But what I'd do is take time to see why I feel this way. Am I lacking quality time with him and what I really should be saying is, can we plan a regular date night? Do I need to find a hobby I enjoy to take up some of my evenings? Or is the problem that say I have to do all the childcare when he's away and so I'm feeling resentful? It's so much easier to deal with the actual issue rather than the symptom, which is my frontline feelings. Feelings are emotional weather and they do pass- issues will remain.

I don't know what you mean by "emotionally intimate". Can you explain? Do you mean a close, warm connection and feeling toward another? Or, do you mean romantic, private?

I've never thought of my friendships being intimate. I associate intimacy with romance and sex. I don't feel intimate with a friend who I talk to about my hopes and dreams. I guess I might feel more intimate if I were sharing a traumatic event.

coco, I think of a friendship as emotionally intimate if this is a person that I feel comfortable telling my secrets to. If they are someone that I feel that I can go to when I have things I need to talk about. Someone who I feel close and deeply connected to. It doesn't have any element of romance for me- I put those kind of relationships in another category. Think of the kind of person you'd ask to stand up for you in a wedding. Someone you can tell your fears and private hopes and dreams. They aren't just a regular friend, are they? Those are the people that I go to coffee with and maybe chat about the day to day but they aren't involved in my life on the same level. The men I've been friends with for 25 years aren't coffee buddies but there is nothing sexual or romantic there, either. Who are the people that you feel like you can truly be yourself with, without the mask that most people wear in polite society? Those are the friendships I mean. But I also don't think they are a threat to marriages either, even monogamous ones.

coco- your differentiation between rules and boundaries is spot on, in my opinion. I don't believe in making rules for partners. I get to decide what is healthy for me. But if it's not actually about ME, then I think that calling it a boundary is just whitewashing that it's in fact a rule. Like if I told my husband that he couldn't spend 3 nights a week at his hobby, that's not a boundary, even if I said, I'm not comfortable with that. Because what if it was 2 nights at the hobby and 1 night working late, for example? It's not dealing with the actual issue, it's just a rule.

I feel like you’re trying oversimplify this, or something.

landclark, I might be. It seems that a PA is pretty clear cut and defined but this is nebulous, right? I'm curious what people think because of the lack of definition, personally. And as I said before, I'm still hurting over the way my friend handled a situation 10 years ago. I would call our friendship emotionally intimate per my definition above, but not romantic.

How many posts do you see where the BS starts making rules that the WS can't even have opposite sex friendships anymore? That's one reason why I posted this- to try and figure out where that dividing line is, and why people think that is a good idea. PAs are pretty clear cut, but EAs are not- and I do think some people are much happier without their spouse having even just close friendships.

But it’s a matter of semantics....I don’t make rules for my husband to follow. I create boundaries for me. My husband can have a hundred female friends...I just won’t be married to him anymore, because after dday, that’s not acceptable to me.

Our whole relationship he worked with attractive women that he considered “work friends” but he never socialized with. The very first female friend he decided to socialize with in our 20 year relationship became a blatant EA. I told him post dday - you went 20 years without a female friend and you showed me what can happen when you get one. If I’m to remain in this marriage after the hell I experienced, I will not suffer the trauma of enduring another further female friendship.

My husband gets to decide if my boundary is acceptable to him. The day he meets a female whose friendship means more than me and our marriage - then I know his needs usurp my need for safety, comfort and healing.

How many posts do you see where the BS starts making rules that the WS can't even have opposite sex friendships anymore?

Right, because they’ve proven that they can’t maintain healthy boundaries with members of the opposite sex. My WH even flirted with his cousin, FFS. He called a woman at work queen and tried to win her over by buying her snacks. He has proven time and time again that he can’t maintain a non romantic/non sexually driven relationship with another woman. So yeah; no friends of the opposite sex is my boundary. If he doesn’t like it, he can divorce me and have all the female friends he wants. Call me controlling, I don’t really care. When he can learn to adult maybe I will change my mind.

[This message edited by landclark at 3:28 PM, December 22nd (Sunday)]

Because it would be a pretty awful thing to hold your partner back from a change or a desire that obviously resonates so much to them, right? Then it would be selfish to try and control and keep them.

I think this is one fundamental difference between the philosophies of polyamory and monogamy. I don't see the expectation that my H will honor his commitment to me as trying to "control" him, even if it means giving up something he would otherwise want. Marriage, to me, means that we agreed what we have together is worth making individual sacrifices.

And that's why I am really not cut out for polyamory. To me, it's deeply illogical if you are really invested in the survival of the relationship. Let's say my partner and I always wanted a Ming vase. We worked hard, saved carefully, and finally bought our dream piece of art. The thing is 500 years old, so clearly it has some structural integrity, but nonetheless, it's fragile. My partner and I have to establish rules to protect it. Neither of us wants to lock it in a vault, where it would be safe but also unseen and unenjoyed. We decide that we'll have it on display in our home under carefully controlled conditions. No one is getting anywhere near it who either of us thinks is going to be any threat whatsoever to its fragility.

To me, that's not controlling. It's sensible. We're not taking it out clubbing and leaving it sitting on the edge of the bar. And if my partner brings someone in who says, "C'mon, babe, don't be such a spoilsport, let me hold it," and it gets broken because he thought he knew better and could handle the situation, then he is absolutely not getting a hug from me and a teary eyed kiss, wishing them well.

I say this, again, as a wayward who actually did control my BH through lies and TT. That was a genuine violation of his autonomy. Expecting that we both honor and protect our marriage, and avoid situations that could weaken that promise, is entirely different and reasonable, IMO.

Because it would be a pretty awful thing to hold your partner back from a change or a desire that obviously resonates so much to them, right? Then it would be selfish to try and control and keep them.

Are you talking about another woman here? Because I fail to see how not wanting my husband to run off with another woman is in any way selfish. What, I’m just supposed to be like “oh cool, I wish you both the very best”, otherwise I’m controlling and selfish?

Again, I come back to you really don’t care how people define an EA. You just want to make the point that it’s not really a thing, and that everybody should just be open to everything because otherwise we are controlling and selfish, and look at me and my evolved self. Even bringing up the fact that BS’s are uncomfortable with opposite sex relationships after they’ve been cheated on shows that you really just don’t care, or are just choosing not to get it.

Thanks for the explanations, PST1, the ones in this thread and in others.

I'm living a life that's different from yours, and I'm not looking for a change, but I really enjoy gathering new info.

While the poly lifestyle is certainly not for everyone (you think monogamy is work... polyamory is certainly more), the openness and communication that it requires and encourages is something that any couple can learn from and improve with.

Previous threads have debated the "When Harry Met Sally" question of whether men and women can be friends. I have some dear friends of the opposite sex that I have never been attracted to... indeed it's different. And if there's attraction... it is about boundaries But even while your sex organs shouldn't preclude you from a friendship certainly as was pointed out, that's not possible for some who can't create or keep a boundary.

Post d-day my WS and I have made it a point to talk about ANY attraction/interaction. "Met a women at a conference, was really attracted to her..." "A hot guy at Crossfit was checking out my ass today." It's actually been a great thing to be able to talk about it totally matter of fact without feeling judged or to be driven to secrecy. Because that's how these things go from Just Friends to Not.

[This message edited by hdybrh at 10:25 AM, December 23rd (Monday)]

Again, I come back to you really don’t care how people define an EA. You just want to make the point that it’s not really a thing, and that everybody should just be open to everything because otherwise we are controlling and selfish, and look at me and my evolved self. Even bringing up the fact that BS’s are uncomfortable with opposite sex relationships after they’ve been cheated on shows that you really just don’t care, or are just choosing not to get it.

That is not what I'm saying, and I think you may be reading more into my words than what is there. I'm interested in hearing what people think about the elements that constitute an EA and what differentiates it from merely an emotionally intimate friendship, because I think that if this is such a gray area that it's important to define it. It sounds like it's entirely possible that two spouses could have very different definitions, and neither is wrong.

I think this is one fundamental difference between the philosophies of polyamory and monogamy. I don't see the expectation that my H will honor his commitment to me as trying to "control" him, even if it means giving up something he would otherwise want. Marriage, to me, means that we agreed what we have together is worth making individual sacrifices.

BSR, the difference there for me is whether it's just a thing my partner wants or if it happens to be Gamechanger level. Because often when you make sacrifices, there is some level of resentment. If my partner needed to go a different path in his life for whatever reason (another person, another life path incompatible with mine) then I would never want to hold him back from that. I want him to be happy, and if that means one day we go our separate ways, then I hope I can still wish him all the best. Just because people develop incompatibility at some point doesn't mean that all the rest has to be wasted time, right?

The point I was trying to make in a roundabout way is that if my partner is giving something up for our relationship and he's made that decision himself and he's comfortable with it, then that's fantastic. But if it becomes something where he really doesn't want to give it up? There's going to be damage regardless. There are always consequences even if they aren't readily seen. So he has to decide what he really wants and make that choice on his own. A coerced choice is not a freely made choice.

And this way I know, and he knows, every single day, that we are together because we want to be. That we choose to be. He's not still in this relationship because he feels stuck, or worried he can't find anyone else, or anything like that.

Because while I do believe that "the relationship" is more than the sum of its parts, and it has its own needs over and above the people involved... preserving the relationship just for the sake of the relationship is a bad idea. A relationship serves a function, and if it's not serving its function, then why preserve it?

It's not quite the way it sounds, because I can see my words being dismissed as not committed. But that's not how it works either. We've gone through some really awful life situations together- times when both of us agree either of us would have been totally valid to walk. But we chose to stay together because we are very compatible partners. We keep putting in that work to grow together rather than apart.

Right, because they’ve proven that they can’t maintain healthy boundaries with members of the opposite sex. My WH even flirted with his cousin, FFS. He called a woman at work queen and tried to win her over by buying her snacks. He has proven time and time again that he can’t maintain a non romantic/non sexually driven relationship with another woman. So yeah; no friends of the opposite sex is my boundary. If he doesn’t like it, he can divorce me and have all the female friends he wants. Call me controlling, I don’t really care. When he can learn to adult maybe I will change my mind.

I hear that and I understand the reaction. I just honestly can't imagine staying in a relationship with someone who would require that level of restriction to behave like an adult when there's a whole world full of people out there. But life decisions are never straightforward and I respect that people have to decide what works for them.

But it’s a matter of semantics....I don’t make rules for my husband to follow.

Absolutely not. That is not a boundary because it's not about you. It's about your husband, therefore it's a rule.

So much I want to respond to. I hope I get it all.

Think of the kind of person you'd ask to stand up for you in a wedding.

No one. I chose my stepsister because I had to have someone. If I hadn't needed anyone, I wouldn't have had anyone. Honestly, that kind of thing means nothing to me.

Someone you can tell your fears and private hopes and dreams.

That would be my (fc)H.

I have friends that I meet for coffee. We talk about serious life stuff. I don't tell them my secrets. I have friends I've had for years with whom I keep in touch. My soulmate was a girlfriend I made 15 years ago when we lived in Hawaii. We haven't seen each other in 3 or 4 years. We move around a lot, military, so I don't have time to develop really close, deep friendships like you describe. It takes a lot for me to trust another person that much.

I have one other girlfriend who I went to when I found out my fch had cheated. Although we've gotten together a few times for vacations in a group, we are mostly online friends. We've been friends for 12(?) years now. She doesn't know all my secrets. I don't feel the need to tell someone else all my secrets.

I would definitely be uncomfortable if my fch had a girlfriend like that. Friends, absolutely! But, a girlfriend that he shared all of his secrets, thoughts, feelings, hopes, and dreams with, some of which he kept from me? Nope.

How many people are secure enough to be happy in a poly relationship?

I consider myself quite secure. I would not be comfortable in a poly or open relationship. I don't think it always has to do with feeling secure. I'm selfish. I don't like to share. I'm also lazy. I don't want to put in the work involved in maintaining more than one relationship.

if it's not actually about ME, then I think that calling it a boundary is just whitewashing that it's in fact a rule. Like if I told my husband that he couldn't spend 3 nights a week at his hobby, that's not a boundary,

Your example is not of a boundary. It's a rule. A rule is when you say something has to be a certain way. My fch has a rule that the kids are not allowed to eat in the living room. He tells them they cannot. He makes them go back to the dining table if they bring food or drinks into the living room. That is a rule. A rule is used to control others.

The boundary around the hobby would've something like, "It is not ok with me that you spend 3 nights a week away from home. I want you here with me. If you choose to continue to go out that often, I don't want to be in this relationship."

He still gets to decide what he wants to do. He can decide having you is more important than doing his hobby 3 nights a week and come up with a plan that works for both of you. Or, he can decide doing his hobby is more important, in which case you can exit the relationship.

I haven't made any rules for my fch. I tell him when I don't like things. He does his best to accommodate me. There was a time when he was getting up before the rest of us did and going on a run. The kids would invariably wake up before he got back. I was exhausted. I told him that I needed him to be home when they woke up. I needed his help with them in the early mornings. I am not a morning person. He did his best to get home earlier. I didn't tell him he couldn't go running anymore.

Now, I have never told him that he can't have women friends. M not ok with him having private, secret women friends. I told him just yesterday that I thought he needed to socialize more and have friends. He said he doesn't want to. I'm his best friend. He has no desire to socialize with other people. 🤷‍♀️

What you consider healthy for you is not always healthy for others, just like what others may consider unhealthy or a pathology in them may not be a problem with you.

Because it would be a pretty awful thing to hold your partner back from a change or a desire that obviously resonates so much to them, right? Then it would be selfish to try and control and keep them.

Yes and no. If you both willingly enter into a monogamous M, it is not selfish to expect your partner to not allow themselves to get so attached to another person that they want to leave you. That's part of the agreement or promise you make when you enter into a monogamous marriage, to forsake all others (although that wasn't specifically in our vows, we both understand it was implicit in our commitment).

There will always be other people who have the potential to pull us away from our partners. We have to make the decision every time that our M and our family and our commitment is more important than another person.

Of course, if my fch really wanted to go, I couldn't make him stay. I wouldn't want him to stay with me if he didn't want to. However, I wouldn't necessarily just rollover and say, "I'm so happy for you. Go on and have another life. Don't worry about me and the kids."

I just honestly can't imagine staying in a relationship with someone who would require that level of restriction to behave like an adult when there's a whole world full of people out there.

And again, you’re implying that it’s simply being controlling. If my WH doesn’t like it, he is welcome to leave, but my boundary is a direct result of his actions.

As far as understanding an EA, people have given you plenty of information, yet you keep defaulting to people are just being overly controlling.

I just honestly can't imagine staying in a relationship with someone who would require that level of restriction to behave like an adult when there's a whole world full of people out there.

There is certainly truth in that overrestricting can hamper R.

Right after d-day, you're damn entitled to inspect and question EVERYTHING you want as a condition of R. But over time if your goal is staying together, trust has to be rebuilt. Some are right to say it can never be rebuilt totally, but you need to get to a functional, happy non-paranoid state after a matter of years, or what's the point.

Often you'll see it said you need to "AFFAIR PROOF" your marriage. Good luck. Especially through restrictions... Many of us can attest that it's impossible because we felt our marriages were and then they weren't. . and while a WS may not have earned total freedom from oversight or skepticism, they better be taking steps to restore trust of it's not worth it. And as it relates to this topic being aware of their fallibility to fall into another EA or PA.

There are models that work best for others... monogamy or non-monogamy, married or unmarried, and within each especially the non-traditional models, there are (or should be) rules to follow that are determined on a couple by couple basis. There's no magic design for each couple that works... you navigate it together to determine what works or you find another. But as many of us lived, the real issue is around "this is not what I signed up for," after many years, when they choice of model was made for you, not in tandem with your shared happiness and success in mind.

I'm interested in hearing what people think about the elements that constitute an EA and what differentiates it from merely an emotionally intimate friendship, because I think that if this is such a gray area that it's important to define it

Here's the problem and why you dont understand imo.

My husband and I are in a monogamous marriage. Thus neither of us should be having "emotionally intimate friendships".

My husband is who I confide in.

My husband is who knows all of my wants, desires and dreams.

My husband is who I can share my most intimate thoughts and feelings.

He and I made the commitment to eachother to be life long partners. We DID vow to forsake all others.

I have a few really close male friends.

None of them know the details I have shared with my husband. Nor should they. Those things are for my husband only. That's what monogamy is all about. Hes not just my husband. Hes my best friend.

Now my husband stepped outside of our marriage to share his deepest feelings and desires with other woman (specifically ow2). Way before they fucked like bunnies he was sharing more with her than he was with me. He gave away what was only supposed to be for me. That started as an EA and progressed to a LTPA. (Long term physical affair).

Edited to add that my male friendships arent less than because they dont include the intimate things I share with my husband.

[This message edited by DragnHeart at 1:04 PM, December 23rd (Monday)]

If my WH doesn’t like it, he is welcome to leave

And, that's the crux of it. He is not being controlled. He has the option and ability to leave. Why does he choose to stay if he's being controlled so much?

At some point in R, you have to get to where you don't feel the need to constantly check up on your CP. Your CP needs to do the work necessary for you to feel safe and be able to trust again. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean that you loosen any 9f your boundaries.

Thank you, Dragnheart, for saying essentially the same thing I did. You said it better. In a monogamous relationship, you shouldn't be having emotionally intimate relationships with other people who you might be attracted to.

I can't think of any reason for wanting to talk to a man about my sexual experiences or desires unless I wanted to have me with him. What would be the point?

My husband and I are in a monogamous marriage. Thus neither of us should be having "emotionally intimate friendships".

That's the bit I don't understand. Why not?

Do you view your friendships with female friends as emotionally intimate? Or gay men? Is it only because you might become physically attracted to someone?

I don't know. I've always been the kind of person who wants authenticity with others. I want those deep connections because I think relationships in general (not specifically romantic or sexual ones) are where we truly find the joys in life. Just people being real with one another. That doesn't have to be about sex or romantic love at all.

So I know I have a different definition of "friends" than my husband does. He considers a lot of people his friends. I think of mine more as a series of concentric circles. If you're not in my first few inner rings, I probably think of you as an acquaintance. But if you're in one of my inner rings, I probably put quite a lot of emotional investment and energy into the friendship, because again I think that those close connections are what is most important to me in life, aside from my DS.

I don't see how that kind of connection can be damaging to a marriage. I do see how secrecy and lies, no matter what the topic, are incredibly destructive and I think that would be a problem. I think that cybersex with a real person would certainly cross the boundaries of a monogamous relationship. But it seems like there is a real gray area as to when an intimate friendship crosses the line, and it seems that's when the other issues are coming into play.

I can't think of any reason for wanting to talk to a man about my sexual experiences or desires unless I wanted to have me with him. What would be the point?

What's the difference in talking to a woman about sex if you don't want to have sex with her? I know I see women do that all the time with their female friends. I just don't see it any differently with men if they're friends. Sometimes we tell each other about new toys, or interesting things to try, or that awesome thing our partner did, etc. Talking about sex doesn't have to be sexual- there's a big difference in intent there.

I wonder if life just tends to come down to intent. Although they do say the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, eh?

[This message edited by PSTI at 1:59 PM, December 23rd (Monday)]

Define "intimate"

My male friendships again arent "less than" what I feel is appropriate for a friendship. Yet they are authentic and true and full as friends should be at that level. Just because I am not intimate in my discussion with them doesnt mean i am not being authentic. They do not have the level of intimacy my husband has because they are a FRIEND and he is MY HUSBAND.

My husband had an EA because he shared with another woman intimate details, desires, wants, feelings with her that he kept from ME!

And I can talk sex with anyone. It doesnt mean I want to have sex with them. I have had deep conversations with both male and female friends.

The difference is that I maintained my boundaries and didn't cross any lines that would lead to having feelings for or wanting a relationship with or being attracted to any of them.

Edited to add that I also never kept any of these conversations secret from my husband.

The only thing I have ever kept from him is who helped me catch him in the affair of ow2 and my investigative methods beyond what he figured out on his own.

[This message edited by DragnHeart at 2:48 PM, December 23rd (Monday)]

Really comes down to openness, boundaries and comfort level. Every relationship has rules. Every member of a relationship has a comfort level. One persons "no big deal" is another persons "deal breaker"

The Shirley Glass Quiz on page 2 wouldn't work for a polyamorous person...but even someone who isn't poly may have different comfort levels for their spouse than others with wide variation. EAs are a grey area but I do think that circumstances can make some PAs worse than others.

But regardless your spouse as stated should be your best friend, the person you want to confide it, go to first for everything important. If someone starts to threaten that position, it's a potential problem and you need to take action, at least sharing it with your spouse for a plan. But why can't you have emotionally intimate, non-sexual friendships with the opposite sex? Maybe some people can't...

Emotional Affair are these things to me, where I am not included or made aware of the following:

1) Exchanging sexual desires and wanting to perform sexual functions with each other

2) Exchanging ILYs, I miss you's, I can't wait to see you, I dream of you, I think of you constantly

3) Exchanging their futures with each other

4) Planning to see each other, making decisions on a future state, like having their own residence

5) Gifting money or something of value

6) Calling or talking with each other about frustrations that has not been made known to me about children, career or spouse

7) Sending naked pictures or naked videos to each other

I have been a tomboy as a child and am surrounded by men in my career. I have never wanted to be emotionally intimate with any males except my WH in the categories above.

And I have had many male friends who wanted to further our relationship into the boundaries of sexual, which I will not do. So, close male friendships are only at an arms distance as I have found that there is too much sexual tension for me to be completely comfortable with.

I have girlfriends whom I have known since I was a child, and we have wonderful emotional intimacy. That means, emotional support, honesty, and sharing of details without wanting to sleep with each other.

I am not interested in having sex with anyone else but my WH and I thought that is what he wanted too. And he admitted that is indeed what he wanted, but what it turns out he wanted was to be a cake eater.

WH was exclusively online cyber sex affair but it had elements of the emotional (see above) which I can not forgive, forget or dismiss.

And wrapped in an ugly filthy bow, is the lies and betrayal that encapsulates all of the above items.

“But it’s a matter of semantics....I don’t make rules for my husband to follow.”

Absolutely not. That is not a boundary because it's not about you. It's about your husband, therefore it's a rule.

I choose not to be married to a man who chooses to fraternize with the opposite sex after inflicting the pain of infidelity on my life. He is free to make that choice. The boundary IS about me. I will not tolerate an ounce of disrespect after the hard work I had to put into healing - in fact, I have zero tolerance for disrespect from anyone post dday.

Any boundary can be reworded into a rule - and vice versa. Our big blowup when I learned that the affair continued AND the true extent of it, my husband actually said “You can’t make me stop seeing her.” And I said “You’re right. You can’t make me stayed married to a man who’s courting a girlfriend. - we can only control ourselves.”