FundamentallyDom wrote:
I've got a story I saw recently that might help. A wife gets up for work before her husband each day and has a coffee while she gets ready. She's in a rush and leaves the coffee out. It really winds the husband up because by the time he then gets up the milk is warm and it he is then left with warm milk on his cereal which he hates.
Every so often he brings it up with his wife explaining how much it irritates him. Each time she apologises and says she'll try to remember not to leave the milk out. Over time it becomes a major issue in the relationship.
Most people at this point start to take sides, "it's only a small ask for the wife to change her behaviour not to have a negative impact on the husband, why wouldn't she" or "Why should she have to change her behaviour for him?"
Almost no one steps in and says well why don't you just buy a second carton of milk? She can have her carton, he can have his. Yes she might be wasting most of a carton by leaving it out. She'd do that anyway, does it matter more than the relationship?
I don't know if there's a second carton of milk option for the two of you here, but at the moment the relationship is in a very damaging downward spiral. You feel annoyed that your sub needs the relationship to change from the state it was in at the start of the relationship. Your sub went in hoping and probably believing that they could be happy in a monogamous relationship but has realised that's not the case. As often happens in conflict each side is getting defensive and angry and upset. That makes you both focus on the problem and you each start to push the other away for fear of getting hurt.
The first thing to do is to sit down with them and recognise the pain and the downward spiral. The longer it goes on the more both sides will prioritise their needs over the relationship. Come at it with a wanting to find a solution approach. If they will do the same then you have a good chance. Even if you can't find a solution, at least you can recognise an inability to get over the incompatibility and part of good terms before one side or the other does something that will make a very messy break up.
Leaving on good terms also lets you both cool off and, if someone finds the second carton of milk option lets you open that conversation again without a tonne of toxic baggage.
I'm a big advocate that relationships work when both sides put the other person's needs and wellbeing first and fail when either side stops doing that. Sometimes the other person's needs are to not be with you and while that's very painful you can't try to hold them for your own happiness when that is the case.
i disagreed with the notion of "putting the other person's needs and well being first..." on my first read, but find myself sort of agreeing as i re-read and you conclude at ending a relationship that does not work. i'd submit that is better determined before entering a relationship vs after the fact, but relationship is not always that neat and clean, eh? We learn so much about our selves and relationship in relationship.
As i mention in my first post, i think the problem/s with this relationship are because the conflict was pre-existing prior to commitment. i.e., one is wired mono, one is wired poly. The proverbial round peg in a square hole... it might kinda fit, but there will always be gaps.
To me, the question is about the "wiring." The notion of "always putting the other persons needs and well being first" is one i was raised with in a religious culture, and one i tried to adhere to for much of my life. It was the core principle of that cultures idea of "love." i think where it falls apart is the principle makes no distinction between desire and need. i may desire tea, but i need water. i can compromise, or put the other first, when it comes to tea- without harm to self. i cannot compromise on the water without self harm. i may want milk, but may need mono/poly. Again, to me, the crux is determining our wants from our needs. i think we can compromise on what we want, but not on who we are or what we need. i believe that's where self knowledge, and requiring compatibility as an important ingredient to sustainable relationship, comes into play.
i think emotional stuff is trickier to nail down, but i am a big advocate of introspection and knowing ones core needs (vs wants) before attempting a relationship. Again, i know it's not always that neat and clean, but these two did seemed to know that one was mono and the other poly before they entered into relationship? I think the fail is actually in the notion that one can deny their needs and put anothers first? i can compromise on tacos vs pizza (or "milk"), that's a want. If we are both putting each others wants first, we will likely reach a compromise where we trade off and every other week have tacos or pizza.
When it comes to "needs," i believe the time to put the other persons needs first, is before entering into a committed relationship.