Love's progress

[vaneramos]

More than three years ago I began to think of myself as polyamorous. My ideals about relationships had changed. I didn't want to possess or be possessed by anyone. I didn't like putting rules or limits on love. It was something to be given away, and might express itself in different ways with different people.

This was an academic conclusion, because I had no romantic ties at the time. In fact I had doubts about ever falling in love or having a relationship again.

The idea prepared me well for meeting djjo, bitterlawngnome and danthered. I did not immediately expect to find a place in their family, but from the beginning felt open to whatever might transpire. I met them on July 4, 2003, and by October Danny and I had developed strong feelings for one another, with support from his partner, Bill, and their circle of friends.

For two years the idea of polyamory still felt academic for me personally. Danny was unlike anyone I had dated before, a quiet and steady presence in my life. I've come to think of him as my anchor. I could imagine falling in love again, and that the object of this affection would be different from him and fill a distinct role in my life. But the idea seemed impractical, as if my heart were too fragile to open up more. Danny's household remained an essential part of my life, and I had other friends and sexual partners, but the relationships always stopped short of romantic love, whatever that is.

Nevertheless, it has happened during the past year, not once but twice. Adding to the surprise, it has happened in distance relationships, something I formerly avoided. This too comes thanks to Danny; without his nearness I would not have been open to these geographical distances.

Stephen and Connor are much different from one another and Danny. Each moves me in unique ways.

The chances of being able to spend more than a little holiday time with these two men in the future seems slight, but that doesn't scare me the way I thought it would. I'm happy to let my feelings be what they are, and let my lovers' feelings be what they are. While I'm at home in Guelph or Toronto, it's as if part of me has gone to live (or dream) in Atlanta, and part in Phoenix. I am moved by the hope of seeing them again. Sometimes these feelings are intense and I must face them alone.

But I don't feel torn by that. In fact it heightens my understanding of various qualities of love toward other friends I cherish (Elisabeth or Ziggy, for instance), even for my daughters. It is a richness of heart. Enriched by those I love, I am grateful.

And all this, thanks to LiveJournal.

Comments

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's because travel is almost impossible for me, but I've never been thrilled by the idea of distance relationships. I would prefer that these men lived a lot closer. But this is not an ideal world. I suppose polyamory, for me, means acknowledging that perfect love is a fairy tale, and allowing love to happen in situations that don't fit the paradigm.

I think it's rare for love to be completely reciprocal. What I mean by that is, two people might care a lot about each other, but experience those feelings differently, or it might fit differently into their lives. For example, Danny is the primary romantic relationship in my life, but if I had expected the same priority from him, it wouldn't have worked. Even in an emotionally and sexually exclusive relationship, I don't imagine the two individuals will normally experience it the same way. This phenomenon leads to infinite disappointments, because people usually expect to receive back what they give, rather than being open to receiving something different. I hope this doesn't come across as useless, condescending advice about disappointment in love; I'm just writing, and thinking.

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

This strikes me as very true. Of course, as with anything, there are all kinds of extremes. An opposite extreme, where folks expect so little of compatability, reciprocation, and dreaminess (hopefully with minimal projection!) that there is an almost congenital cynicism, a lowered energy placed into relationships, a sad truncation to possibly shared joy. I'm afraid it's another one of those situations where it's like the light thrill of riding a bike, striking a balance. To my mind, that is.

I just try to keep in mind now that love -- while nourishing and supportive and momentous and serious -- should first be fun. :)

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I wonder if I expect too little of love. But remembering my past relationships, I recall my high expectations were frequently toxic. I don't know where that part of me went, but I'm happy to be free of it.

Fun is nourishment, companionship, spontaneity and openness.

And inspiration. Danny and Stephen have each inspired some poems. Connor's visit inspired the series of drawings I've done recently, though I'm still at a loss to explain how.

To an artist/writer, inspiration is the most potent magic, the best kind of fun. Do you think?

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

I guess my reactions to my possibly similar experiences are different. I have always had high expectations; I love it when people have them of me. It charges me. My fault in earlier relationships has not been in having high expectations but in not articulating them honestly and clearly and lovingly enough to my potential partners.

And when I say I have expectations, they're usually general and few. Nothing like a gauntlet. More like parameters to plug into. :)

And I'll tell you what one of the most important ones is: this inspiraion you mention. I don't demand it. But I do find that my dearest partners and I have always mutually inspired one another, turned new knobs and uncloaked new lights, encountered different animals. It's a cornerstone of my personal definition of love.

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

I am an excellent reciprocator! ;)

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

This is an absolutely beautiful post, Brother. Something about its peaceful intensity reaches me. Which is not an easy thing to do on this subject.

I feel that I suffered right smart in the name of polyamory in a former relationship. For myself, I know that an understanding of what forms romantic love might take for me (if theyd do) is not fully formed and -- rightly so -- cannot yet. So, I don't discount a future relationship for myself that an outsider might call "polyamory," but I am trying to be more aware of what I need from a relationship and require it, to remain open to one's coming along, and to guard against the kind of emotional dis-affection that has been my personal experience with politically polyamorist fellas. I want to keep my focus on the relationship itself and what I need from it/him ... one at a time, please. :)

I guess there's no urgency to working it out for me since I have no current lover or clear one on the horizon. Still, I feel a need to think this kind of thing through as much as possible so I'm not negatively addled next time my heart is hit good.

To that end, I am really curious as to how you would characterize romantic love. Can you give me an idea?

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

What a good question!

You know, I have long disparaged infatuation. I did considerable research on the chemistry of love, and even wrote an essay on it. So I can tell you how it works! If you don't want to read all of it, I'll give a synopsis afterward.

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/living_with_nature/89006

Please ignore the dedication on that essay! ;-)

Romantic love consists of a series of biochemical reactions, beginning with infatuation, which alters our neorochemistry. Infatuation doesn't last long, but under the right circumstances it gives way to more enduring hormonal and neurochemical responses that secure a relationship for a certain period of time. After a certain number of months or years, even those fade, so if we want our relationships to endure, we better have a strong foundation based on something besides emotions.

I didn't go through an intense infatuation with Danny. We didn't see much of each other for the first couple of months, and weren't expecting anything to happen, so the feelings developed later (at least for me) and took us by surprise. By then we knew each other, and I had an easy, comfortable feeling around him, rather than the breathless restlessness I've associated with infatuation in the past. That madness always seemed to draw me to people who were so wrong for me. I equated it with madness and stupidity. I thought everyone would be so much happier if they could let it happen the way it did for Danny and me. But I was prejudiced.

Really, love is madness. It's an unusual state of mind we needed in our animal past to propogate the species. So it's natural, but rather than overcoming it, we need to work with it.

A friend recently said, "Madness is when we do the same thing over and over again, and expect a different outcome." That's certainly true of the tragedies of love.

I've opened myself to the intensity of infatuation, because this time I'm coming at it from a different position. Maybe I can even entertain the magnetism of opposites. Because ultimately, I don't need these relationships to work. My happiness and sanity aren't staked on it, at least not the way they used to be. I don't feel vulnerable or dependent, just willing to take a risk.

I can certainly appreciate where you're at, because I've been in a similar place. I thought I would never love again. Actually, it's probably important to accept that our lives can be whole and meaningful without love. I found a purpose apart from relationships, and that undoubtedly put me on a better footing from which to have one.

The thing I receive and most appreciate from my relationships now is companionship. That is enough.

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

I very much appreciate your scientific observations about romantic love; there's something comforting about that kind of perspective to me, even though I am something of a science-poo-poo-er and stay to the emotional-literary-artistic-social-philosophical definitions that fit my disposition more. :)

I've opened myself to the intensity of infatuation. I think this is a valuable position. I doubt if anyone ever really knows if they're ready for such a shift, for such a position. But I think being "open" to it is all that's required to have it be a positive and fulfilling experience, of whatever kind, and I find your thinking on this absolutely beautiful.

I've actually passed from the place where I am convinced I won't be in a relationship again. I have to say I love easily, even now. But the chances of finding loves that match pleasingly, that draw your curiosities into each other, is just that: a chance. I can only say that, even though I feel capable of love, I can't say whether the chance to exercise it in a relationship will come along or not. And I am the sort who can still dream about one now and then, while still enjoying other happinesses.

I am, admittedly -- must be the Pisces moon -- a hearty dreamer. :)

Thank you so much for reflecting on this with me, dear fella!

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

Political polyamory can be rather toxic if it doesn't reflect what's in someone's heart as well. It's an easy term to throw around, it has a certain anti-mainstream romance to it, it's nice to ponder if one is attracted to the freedom of having lots of love around, or even just lots of sex.

Deep freedom requires deep responsibility, however ... to ourselves and to others. Polyamory only highlights that. It's not something to attempt lightly. Joyfully, hopefully, cautiously, lovingly, yes, but not lightly.

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

Thank you, Pete. Your words very usually make such sense to me. And it's the experience of folks like you ... and Van here ... that remind me in my most hurt and distrustful moments that this kind of relationship is really possible ... with all sincerity and attendance.

Political polyamory -- I am just now realizing -- is what bothers me primarily. Often, these people seem -- to me -- to be fixated on a number (whether one or more), and I've just decided that I prefer to focus on the relationship itself. If it ends up being sexually open or "polyamorous" or monogamous or any other variation is something built between me and that person I next enter a relationship with. I don't see polyamory or monogamy (for myself, anymore) as an identity but as an option for action that arises out of an emotional collaboration with someone I love. That fine-tuning has made a difference to me.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Some further comments here, upon reflection:

I'm not a particularly political creature, apart from striving to express myself genuinely. That's bound to make some people uncomfortable, and frequently makes me uncomfortable.

(I hope that didn't sound defensive.)

For me this is all about remaining open to the possibilities of adventure or discovery in any relationship. I'm suspicious of people who describe themselves as emotionally monogamous while fucking whomever they want. I'm not averse to the adventure of casual or anonymous sex itself; I just can't see the benefit of compartmentalizing sex from emotion as a rule.

I find my sexual relationships becoming fewer and richer. This post marks my willingness to invest myself more (and take risks) with people I care about.

[ink-ling.livejournal.com]

(I hope that didn't sound defensive.) I hope I haven't come across at any point in these discussions as offensive. I hope you understand I have been in admiration of your choices and thoughts on this subject. I am merely trying to sort out what was a problem for me and what still has the potential to be good. Just a personal reflection. Hope I haven't been unclear.

My own thinking on politics: There are different kinds. My own interests lean towards writing/art and living by example in a radical home, by intentional community. Otherwise, I am not much of an "activist" at this point in my life, and I am fine with that.

When I say "political polyamorist", I am referring to a sort that seems to be more concerned with being seen as a rebel or righteous sort than they are concerned with the quality of the relationship itself.

I think I am very close to your thinking on this subject in that -- where there are situations where I can enjoy casual or anonymous sex, definitely -- I recognize that, for me, sex is always emotional in some way or another and I very much like being able to share it deeply with someone I -- as you say -- care about.

Thank you, again, for this discussion, Van. It's helped put a focus on so much I've been working through in the past year.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

No, you didn't come across as offensive. This is a complicated topic, though, and I'm happy if I could provide some illumination. One of these days, I'd like to read (or hear) about your intentional community, and thoughts on it. Community is essential, but for me always difficult to attain.

[leafshimmer.livejournal.com]

"And in the end, the love you take
Is equal to the love you make."

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

I agree, it's all about what we make.

[eloquentwthrage.livejournal.com]

Mmmm... yummy entry. Thanks for giving us a taste!

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

You're very welcome!

[daisydumont.livejournal.com]

what a beautiful photo! i'm glad you've arrived at this place, van, where you feel comfortable loving as you want to love.

me, i'm so obsessive that i'm not sure i could handle polyamory, though i've considered it. the point isn't likely to come up ever in RL, but i have thought about it. (i'm sure my obsessiveness isn't a healthy way to be.)

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

One of my doubts about polyamory was that I "couldn't handle it." I thought my difficulty with relationships would only be compounded where more than two people were involved. That hasn't been the case. Mostly what has changed is, I'm not expecting perfection, so my expectations of people are more reasonable. For me personally, this feels a lot more natural. But you have had a close, enduring relationship, so undoubtedly that feels more natural to you.

[dakoopst.livejournal.com]

Absolute beauty of a post, Van.

Love is a strange thing sometimes that shuns all our attempts to tame it.

And for that, I am extremely thankful.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

You inspire me, and I don't want you to have to read between the lines to know that I love you.

[apel.livejournal.com]

Beautiful! I love the feeling of giving with an open hand that I get from this. Thanks for sharing it.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

It wasn't easy to get around to writing this one. Thank you for your words.

boxes

[ubermunkey.livejournal.com]

I have a thing for boxes. I like them, they make me feel good, they give me a sense of rightness and boundaries.

Boxes in the end though, end up containing me, rather then freeing me.

Their walls become prisons, usually of the self imposed variety.

Love was not meant for boxes. Sometimes it is absolute madness, sometimes it escapes boundaries, and definition. At the age of 37 and in a country that isn't yet my home, I learned these things. For that love and the learning my life is better.

this image turned out great
love
connor

ps truly a very moving entry

Re: boxes

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Once upon a time I closed myself in a box, too, believing I wouldn't love again. Sometimes we need the security of those arbitrary boundaries to feel ourselves over, figure out where Me ends and Other begins. I'm grateful for the circumstances that made it safe for me to start tearing off those cardboard sides. And grateful that you were here.

Love,
Van

[tim-e-bear.livejournal.com]

ooooooh - tooper woofiness!

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Hehe, and same to you, bud.

[tim-e-bear.livejournal.com]

Why, thank you. :)

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Breathtaking is a good word. I still feel my breath catch in my chest whenever I look at it. Many good memories attached to it. And I'm sure you can relate to that, too.

I'm already plotting to bring Steven Jackson to Guelph in September (with his complicity). It would be a good time for us to visit Kitchener, regardless of whether I see you before then.

[bear-left.livejournal.com]

What a stunningly beautiful post, & a mesmerizing photo as well. Thanks so very much for sharing this.

I wrestle with these questions -- indeed, your very words...

More than three years ago I began to think of myself as polyamorous. My ideals about relationships had changed. I didn't want to possess or be possessed by anyone. I didn't like putting rules or limits on love. It was something to be given away, and might express itself in different ways with different people.

This was an academic conclusion, because I had no romantic ties at the time. In fact I had doubts about ever falling in love or having a relationship again.

...apply to me in the here and now, especially as the later paragraph nails my current thinking/feeling on the head. But, in no small part also driven by my experiences on LiveJournal, I wonder if and how this will change for me as well. I greatly appreciate your opening up this window into your journey for me to see and ponder as my own future unfolds.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Wow, I'm really glad it was so meaningful for you. This post was extremely difficult for me to get around to writing, primarily because it's so personal and I dread to infringe on the privacy of those I care for. But it is imperative for me to write about my journey, and I'm pleased when it can illuminate that path for others.

[missprune.livejournal.com]

This seems like an illuminated way to be, but I think I couldn't do it. My heart is too small, or jealousy and possessiveness is too much a part of me. I guess it feels like there is not enough of me to go around even if possibilities like these were beckoning.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

You have one of the biggest hearts I know, and are already part of the encompassing love I describe. But the ways of expressing love are as diverse as the people who express them, and yours is equally valid. The passage I chose from your journal for my drawing is as essential to love (if not more so) as the eroticism and romanticism that qualifies these new relationships of mine.

[missprune.livejournal.com]

Thank you, Van. Your words are dear. I just wish my heart FELT bigger...

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Yes, I get that thought too, or at least one similar. As an introvert and poet, I must spend time loving from afar. At times I wish to be more engaged in life, but other times I remember to accept myself.

[osodecanela.livejournal.com]

Van, your words are elequent, moving and insightful, much like the man you gave me the priviledge of meeting and sharing time with this past weekend. The picture of you with Connor is stunningly beautiful; I look forward to the time when our paths may cross again.

And amen for LiveJournal! I am so grateful it permits me to continue to see you and hear your thoughts, though we remain 2500 miles apart.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Many thanks. I enjoyed our time together, too. The memory of our time in the park will always symbolize for me the simple pleasure of that day together.

[draco-kc.livejournal.com]

Very thoughtful entry. And I adore the photo -- it's wonderful!

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

That's high praise, coming from one of thoughtful writers I most admire, on the topics of sex and relationships. Many thanks.

And the photo really gets me, too.

Re: You sound like D.H. Lawrence.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

What a flattering comparison! And what an interesting passage.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

This is beautiful.

I remember the surprise of discovery you felt as you got to know Danny. I feel as though I've been given the privilege of watching love bloom in your life. The fact that it has taken root and begun to bloom again with others doesn't surprise me ... but it does make me feel good.

Your soul and heart have good judgment.

[vaneramos.livejournal.com]

Do you remember telling me about Stephen? You figured we would be a good sexual fit. And we were, from our first meeting in Montreal two years ago. Plug and socket. But that hardly begins to explain the way I've come to feel about him.