Open/poly relationships with "BPD" partners

[vortex of confusion]

Yes, are other addictions in the DSM also, like drug/alchool?

Yes, the DSM 5 that was recently published includes alcoholism and drug use along with other addictions. There was a lot of discussion about whether or not to include sex addiction. As of now, the American Psychological Association does not officially list sex addiction, which means that it is not an officially recognized disorder.

The fact that other addictions are well defined and well accepted makes it that much more difficult for a person that is a sex addict. How many guys joke about having a high sex drive and being addicted to sex? Also, if a person is an alcoholic, he/she can tell other people without that much shame being involved. Yes, it can be embarassing to tell people that you are an addict but when topics such as sex are involved, it becomes a very uncomfortable, if not completely shameful experience.

I never bother to check that much about the DSM. For me it's the compulsivity and the suffering that comes with it. I think about it as a condition someone has. Not a disorder in itself. It's not the same than say when people are conscenting to have an open relationship but are still mature enough emotionally to maintain a good intimacy. I don't have much experience with non-monogamy, so I could not extend on this. But the suffering of a SA and their partner is real. That I know for sure.

Yes, it is very real and I worry that bring up sex addiction in a conversation about non monogamy could be very misleading. Non-monogamy is about way more than just sex. Some people may get involved with non-monogamy for sexual reasons. For me, it has been more about emotional intimacy. It allows me to get some of my needs met without putting extra pressure on my husband. I worry about his side of things because he has problems with intimacy. It is a conversation that he and I have been having and trying to figure out how it is all going to fit together without jeopardizing his sobriety.

I see what you mean. That's a good example of objectivisation. When you as a person doesn't seem to be enough, it's time to put some boundaries. You seem to have handled it strongly for yourself.

A lot of people would choose to end the marriage or the relationship. I choose to find creative alternatives as long as my husband continues to work on his recovery and continues to work on treating me better. In all honesty, I don't think I will ever be enough for my husband and I am trying to find a way to be okay with that by focusing on us being friends so that we can be effective coparents to our children. Frankly, navigating all of this seems less daunting than trying to navigate the legal system and having to deal with custody issues and dividing up assets. As long as there is NO abuse and things don't backslide too much or too often, then I am going to try to work with what I have.

My SO one time said to me that she was in love with an ideal woman in her mind. It was food for thoughts... Now she says that her addiction is a part of her BPD, like one of the manifestations of it. Sometimes I think it's a way for her to deal with her anger, loneliness, boredom, difficult emotions.

A lot of people with BPD have addictions due to lack of impulse control. I have no idea if my husband is truly BPD. I have made mention of different possibilities to him. He seems to think that all of his behaviors are related to his addiction. He blames everything on his sex addiction and seems to think that if he can get that under control then everything will be all better. I tried to gently point out his obsessive and compulsive tendencies across the board but he seemed to tie it all back to his sex addiction. I don't understand that reasoning but I am not going to press him further on the issue.

My husband has admitted that nothing is ever enough for him. He can't seem to get enough of anything.

[PLEASE - NO RUN MESSAGES]

PLEASE - NO RUN MESSAGES This is a high level discussion board for solving ongoing, day-to-day relationship conflicts. Members may appear frustrated but they are here for constructive solutions to problems. This is not a place for relationship "stay" or "leave" discussions. Please read the specific guidelines for this group.

[braveSun]

He seems to think that all of his behaviors are related to his addiction. He blames everything on his sex addiction and seems to think that if he can get that under control then everything will be all better. I tried to gently point out his obsessive and compulsive tendencies across the board but he seemed to tie it all back to his sex addiction. I don't understand that reasoning but I am not going to press him further on the issue.

My husband has admitted that nothing is ever enough for him. He can't seem to get enough of anything.

It looks like there is this approach to work on the symptoms of the addiction by bringing up a concept of the whole person responsible to live his/her values. Shame has to do with our sense of self-efficacy. Thus the importance of manifesting our values. By owning our values, we become more responsible for our behavior and we find deeper connection with our true self. The idea is to get to core motivation.

Essentially, a lot of the BPD issues can be tied to a feeling of 'not being good enough to keep love'. IMO that has to do with the human need to keep and grow an intimate bound with a partner. This is a human need for everybody, but for BPD (I am simplifying), this need can get in the way.

By focusing on what the person can do to empower him/herself, than the person can move from shame to guilt to responsibility, at least in a sense of reaching out to one's values and starting to apply them. Including finding solidarity with peer buddies and sponsors to stop the compulsivity. More core self-esteem, less need to cope with rejection, more hope for healthy relationships. This can help a lot of issues if the SA fully embraces the path. It also helps the sufferer to accept responsibility for recovery, and embrace further treatment. 

Also, people might want to think of an addiction being less dramatic than a PD. But that depends. It might appear like a more 'normal looking' approach. Well, in my partners of SA group, it was not uncommon for people to discover that there were other issues under the addiction, like BD, BPD and NPD.

Because with my SO she first went in SA therapy and she eventually got a diagnosis and learned about her BPD, she developped a sense of structure/direction. Accountability is a strong point of SA therapy. I think it has helped her with her more difficult work for her PD later. It depends on the person.

[Grey Kitty]

Yes, it is very real and I worry that bring up sex addiction in a conversation about non monogamy could be very misleading. Non-monogamy is about way more than just sex. Some people may get involved with non-monogamy for sexual reasons. For me, it has been more about emotional intimacy. It allows me to get some of my needs met without putting extra pressure on my husband. I worry about his side of things because he has problems with intimacy.

 Reading this, I do realize one thing that you might find 1/4 teaspoon of comfort in.

You have intimacy needs that your husband isn't capable of meeting today... .and do get some of them met in your other r/s.

Your husband has serious intimacy issues, and cannot sustain much intimacy with you. He's seeking other relationships. If/when he does start them... .if there is any real intimacy involved in them, he will not be able to sustain intimacy there either, and will probably do something to blow up that relationship in short order.

In other words... .0.001% chance that he is going to have the fulfilling intimate relationship you have dreamed of having with him... .with another woman... .no matter how much he chases after it!

[Bloomer]

I'd like to sort of refocus on the non-monogamy and move away from the topic of addiction. But I do hope you will all share your thoughts on rs needs and non-monogamy vs monogamy. :-)

I don't really want to use non-monogamy as a way of meeting my core emotional needs, though I understand the logic that leads couples to explore this and it makes sense. However, for me, if my primary partner isn't meeting my core needs in the rs then I need to look at our rs not seek additional rs. I know one person can't meet EVERY need I have but it is up to me to determine what is a core value that would like met in the rs.

There was a time when I thought that non-monogamy could be that sort of outlet when we had a third partner but after time I realized I was feeling dissatisfied with H. In that context, having other rs helped to build resentment. I saw another person giving me the core things I needed from my primary partner and thought, why isn't he doing this for me? So, I think a certain amount of caution should be used when evaluating the reasons WHY we engage in non-monogamy.

[braveSun]

if my primary partner isn't meeting my core needs in the rs then I need to look at our rs not seek additional rs.

it is up to me to determine what is a core value that would like met in the rs.

I'm like that too.

There was a time when I thought that non-monogamy could be that sort of outlet when we had a third partner but after time I realized I was feeling dissatisfied with H. In that context, having other rs helped to build resentment. I saw another person giving me the core things I needed from my primary partner and thought, why isn't he doing this for me?

I thank you for this Bloomer. It is something that I felt sensitive to, (for my own difficult reasons), because I came to this from the perspective that my boundary of fidelity and monogamy was not respected, and as such, I needed to ask on this board if this, indeed, is something that staying partners of pwBPD have been:

a) requiring

b) successful with their boundaries

c) And, for how long have you waited, without having your sexual needs met, for your partner wBPD to come around (if you did go that road)?

 

So, I think a certain amount of caution should be used when evaluating the reasons WHY we engage in non-monogamy.

I have to agree on this.

---

If my question is not appropriate for this thread, is it possible to have a moderator moving it to a new thread? Or should I open another thread for this?

[slimmiller]

I reckon this thread must have some folks scrathing their head at this whole different world of thinking that is completely incomprensible to them     

You know I am sure you are right... .

I have been reading and following some of the discussion here on the very subject. Its all rather new to me. During the implosion of my marriage to my ex, I considered it very seriously for the sake of keeping the family structure in place for the sake of the kids. We even got very close but her issues thwarted two budding sexual relationship for me because both the parties were off limits to me (her words) once she realized the women wanted to be with me and were ok with the situation. Plus they were both aquantices of hers.  Long story and I cant even say that I was really ok with it but rather open to the idea and wanted to explore it. She already had my replacement and was already sleeping with him and at this point I knew about it. But she could still not actually let me be with someone else because of her jealously issues. So in short I agree that it takes trust and repect for any sort of poly relationship to work and BPDs are simply not able to do that even in a strictly mono relationship.

Fast forward a few years, I have discovered my DOM side and have been exploring that a bit (off topic I know) and see a very common thread with many that are into the 'lifestyle' exhibit very BPD tendencies. In other words while I recognize many PD behaviours now that I didnt used to, I see them very blatantly in some practicing lifestylers.

So while I dont have much productive input in the topic here due to lack of experience, I love the conversations. Thank You for all of you brave souls that are experienced and willing to share what those experiences were

[vortex of confusion]

I don't really want to use non-monogamy as a way of meeting my core emotional needs, though I understand the logic that leads couples to explore this and it makes sense. However, for me, if my primary partner isn't meeting my core needs in the rs then I need to look at our rs not seek additional rs. I know one person can't meet EVERY need I have but it is up to me to determine what is a core value that would like met in the rs.

I am not using non-monogamy as a way to meet core emotional needs. I hardly ever see my lover and we go through periods where we don't talk much. I am not sure how to explain it but I don't think it is a situation where he is meeting any core emotional needs. It is possible but I am not sure how given our level of interaction. It is something fun on the side that makes me feel good. Most of my focus is still on how to create peace at home.

There was a time when I thought that non-monogamy could be that sort of outlet when we had a third partner but after time I realized I was feeling dissatisfied with H. In that context, having other rs helped to build resentment. I saw another person giving me the core things I needed from my primary partner and thought, why isn't he doing this for me? So, I think a certain amount of caution should be used when evaluating the reasons WHY we engage in non-monogamy.

I could see where resentments might build if you were wanting to find a lover that was kind of a replacement to your spouse. I was with a guy that was very similar to my husband for a brief time. I noticed that there were resentments there because he was too much like my husband in too many ways. That did not work at all.

Since my lover and my husband are two very different people from two very different worlds, I don't really have the problem of wondering "why can't my husband do this or be like this." My husband is a geeky gamer guy that is uber intellectual and a bit prissy and is very beta. My lover is the rugged biker type that is a pretty typical alpha male. He is very DOM and I am very submissive with him. I like that but I am not sure that I could be in a relationship like that full time. 

[Grey Kitty]

I'd like to sort of refocus on the non-monogamy and move away from the topic of addiction. But I do hope you will all share your thoughts on rs needs and non-monogamy vs monogamy. :-)

I dunno... .I think my take is that if there is a PROBLEM in one r/s, you are only going to make a bigger mess by adding another r/s to the mix. You won't fix a problem that way. Best case you will hide a problem.

Getting NEEDS met by additional relationship(s) sounds reasonable, but I'm not sure how healthy it is. Probably depends a lot on the r/s and the needs involved.

I see the ideal reason for/benefit of polyamoury to be having different relationships with different people, all of which stand on their own, each in its own way. (And if all my r/s were this good, I never would have found these forums  )

[vortex of confusion]

I see the ideal reason for/benefit of polyamoury to be having different relationships with different people, all of which stand on their own, each in its own way. (And if all my r/s were this good, I never would have found these forums  )

Yeah, I have had the question of: If my primary relationship was that good, why the heck would I want or need any other relationship?

But then, if that were truly the case, why do people have multiple friendships with multiple people? Having a bunch of friends is not necessarily indicative that there is a problem in one or more friendships. How many friends do people typically have?

Hmmm. . .that leads me to wonder what the difference is between romantic relationships and friendships that lead people to want and expect ONE romantic relationship. Is it due to societal pressure/expectations or is it due to something else?