I need some relationship advice. I suggested 125% but my wife won't budge from 10%. Is this normal? How did it go when you had this conversation with your romantic partner?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Why are you the voice of my insecurities? :p

Clearly it's because I'm another dedicated player for the polycule tabletop game.

Not sure where that 75% number is coming from?

[–] monko@lemmy.zip 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, I didn't mean to poke at your anxieties! I was remarking on the arbitrary nature of the original post.

While you're probably right that Eliezer is open to dating poly people, the post in question definitely appears to take a monogamous stance—that is, the question of whether to exchange one person for another of "higher value."

Saying that you're cool if

one my partners meets someone else they want to date at least as much as me, they do

is different from

I'd trade up if I found somebody 10%/25%/125% better than you

which is what the original post said.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My partners bring a lot to our relationships. I find it a lot harder to understand what they see in me.

My sense is that he is talking about the modal relationship in our society, that is mono, and in which my understanding is that people often (I would say at least 10% of the time?) do in fact have the "trading up" nature. That being the case, I think it's better for the participants in a relationship to be aware of that, and at what threshold to expect it? Having a moderately awkward discussion early on seems better than the heartbreak later.

This is coming from a very ask / tell culture perspective. I'm autistic enough (diagnosed, not slang / common use) that guess culture / relationships as imperfect information games is a distinctly negative experience. I don't find any "magic" in not considering bad outcomes or pretending that potential futures don't exist (the "happily ever after" expectation) or in leaving things unsaid.

[–] monko@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call 10% of the time "often," but let's entertain the idea that it's a popular concept regardless. We'll say 100% of people are like this. And they're constantly trying to trade up. What does that look like? Would most relationships be based on mutual trust and compassion, or would they be cynical cycles of mercenary evaluation?

Meanwhile, though you seem very rational, even the most rational person isn't free from their subjective experience or perception. It begs the question: how much do you trust your partners' assessment of you, or themselves, to stay the same for years to come? I can promise it will not. In this paradigm of value-over-commitment, all relationships (even poly ones) are doomed to fail.

When you make a proper commitment to someone (or multiple someones), you're not shirking the negative possibilities by leaving your "trade-up threshold" unsaid. You're saying, "I accept the good with the bad."

And no, I'm not saying people should stick with an abusive partner or someone they don't like or love. I'm saying that the "trade-up" model is an oversimplified view that places the onus of being "good enough" on another person while shedding the fundamental responsibilities of growing both as individuals and together.

Sure, "happily ever after" is a fantasy, but working toward a lifelong partnership isn't—unless, of course, you've got one foot out the door from day one.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If things change, either internally or interpersonally, and people do change, then I'd rather be able to have an open discussion in those cases as well. I'm into my seventh year with my primary, and I don't foresee things breaking down in a hurry. Still, if being with me was bringing him more suffering than satisfaction, I'd want to know that. It may be that things can be improved within the relationship, although they likely won't without communication. It may also be that things can be improved within the relationship, in which case I'd prefer to know that. I want my partners to be happy, and while there would be an emotional hit to learn that they would be happier without me, I value them being happy more than I value trying to maintain a relationship that is a drag. Like fish, once the relationship is dead I think it's better to get rid of it before it starts to stink. I don't think that a relationship that doesn't make the people in it happy is worth maintaining for the sake of maintaining it.

[–] monko@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

All I'm saying is, much like using a litany of addons for World of Warcraft, that it's possible to optimize yourself out of happiness. I don't trust myself (or anyone else) enough to say what "percent" better someone would need to be to ditch a long-standing partnership, and anyone who does is probably a narcissist.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I still kind of miss DBM, since I raid on FFXIV these days.

I would expect a narcissist to be completely incapable of making such an evaluation to any degree of accuracy; the kind of self honesty it would require seems foreign to my understanding of the narcissistic mind. Is it possible you were thinking of sociopathy here?

[–] monko@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yeah, I feel that. I tried to find a happy middle ground with my add-ons, but the reality is that the game evolved with the expectation that (at mid-to-high levels of play) you use them. That sucks the fun out of it for me when I know the game itself is pushing me to plug in extra crunchy stuff. Sometimes I just wanna be a cool panda monk. And just hanging in Goldshire isn't really the experience I want, either.

In regards to ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder), one of its hallmarks is challenges in starting or maintaining relationships. Doesn't mean they don't have them, just that they're really really bad at beginning and keeping them. Meanwhile, those with ASPD are unlikely to consider the viewpoint of another person due to their impaired empathy and struggle to acknowledge others' inner lives. I don't think a sufferer would even consider having a conversation about this with another person.

Narcissistic personality disorder, on the other hand, often includes the pursuit of higher status by getting close to those with desirable attributes or characteristics. Unlike those with ASPD, people with NPD don't display an impaired ability to empathize or consider others' mental states (though they do struggle with relating to anyone else's experiences).

A narcissist would have zero qualms in telling someone the conditions under which they would abandon them; it would reinforce their (perceived) superior value and demonstrate their power over the other person. Of course, I doubt they would love hearing their partner's evaluation of them, and this would probably be a mostly one-sided conversation (as I imagine it often is in real life, should it happen).

But yeah, I think it's safe to say that if you're a climber who thinks so highly of yourself that you can put hard and fast digits on your loved ones, you're at least a pre-narcissist.

[–] odigo2020@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's from the image post.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Ah, the last section. Not incredibly relevant to my post?

On the whole I don't really model an average of the polycule as a general thing. If dating someone I'm not currently would make me happier I talk to my partners about the possibility of a relationship. Thus far this has never gone in an either / or direction; it doing so would be a significant reduction in expected happiness.

Unrelatedly, that paragraph drove my autocorrect / suggester absolutely stupid. It kept trying to shove "def" into the last sentence, and suggesting other nonsense.