watching from the sidelines

[ljgeoff]

Today is my day off. Whew. Have I mentioned lately how much I don't like my job?

Cheryl has sent Mike a couple of letters. He said he didn't care if I read them, and I am ashamed to say that I did. Last night the two of us wrote a letter to Cheryl, explaining how our relationship worked, and explaining what polyamory is to us.

She replied that she's not interested in polyamory, but does want to keep seeing Mike. Hmm, I dunno, but that sounds like polyamory to me. She said that, where Mike was concerned, her morals have "flown out the window", and that she doesn't care, she just wants a little happiness.

I'm struggling to find my place in this oncoming trainwreck. As a participant or just a concerned on-looker? I have to admit, there is that kind of grisly fascination of watching this happen.

I told Mike today that I think I'm just going to keep my nose out of it. I'll be happy to offer advice and another point of view, and I'll work with him on calender stuff and scheduling, but no more getting in and analyzing and trying to fix things.

Comments

[rivka.livejournal.com]

It sounds to me that, by saying that she's not interested in polyamory but just wants Mike, and also that her morals have flown out the window -

She's giving you fair warning that she intends to steal your husband, by whatever means seem like they'll work. If Mike goes ahead and establishes a relationship with her after reading that letter, I suspect she'll take that as proof that he's willing to be "stolen," and that he doesn't really love you.

Do you have any ability to stop this relationship from happening? Because it sounds like a train wreck in full-on approach, and I doubt you can be anywhere within the blast radius (to quickly mix metaphors) without being hurt.

[ljgeoff.livejournal.com]

<

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<do [...] happening?>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

<<Do you have any ability to stop this relationship from happening?>>

No. By agreement, the only relationships that I have vetoed involve my immediate family, (sisters and cousins), and people that I have to work with.

She does live 400 miles away, and I think that the distance will lessen the intensity of the relationship; Mike's talking about seeing her once a month.

I have to admit to a weird clinical curiosity of how this will play out. We are all in our early 40's. She was divorced from a really horrible marriage about four years ago; there was some physical and alot of psychological abuse. Since then, she hasn't let herself get emotionally close to anyone. No boyfriend (there have been four or five) has lasted longer than 4 months.

In her letter she wrote "I think I know you better than you know yourself". This was a red flag for me. If she thinks that Mike doesn't know himself, and is true to that knowledge, then she's in for a surprise.

As far as "stealing" my husband -- (shrug) Mike will always love me and I will always love Mike. If he chooses to go live with her, then he will. I will be sad. I will miss him. If it is possible/probable for Mike to leave me and go live with someone else, my vetoing this relationship would not change that. But the only way that Cheryl would accept Mike fully into her life would be if he was monogamous, and I really don't see that happening.

What I think will happen is that time will go by, and Cheryl and Mike will be happy, for a while, with how the relationship is working, and that at some point Cheryl will want more, and then one of them will have to make a choice.