[Causa Mortis]

Situation:

Person A has a huge circle of friends, including opposite sex friends. Person A likes going out 4-5 times per week, and parties frequently and pretty hard.

Person B has a small circle of friends, virtually all of whom are of the opposite sex, about half of whom Partner B has slept with in the past but has no romantic connection with.

Strong feelings on both sides, and an exclusivity discussion. Person A maintains all elements of former social life, and wants to hang out less frequently than Person B. Person B was fine with this, but resumed hanging out with opposite sex friends once A started going out without B.

A throws a huge fit that B spends any time with opposite sex friends.

B feels like a double standard exists, A says than going out to bars and clubs alone and hanging out solo with opposite sex friends isn't the same if you have slept with those friends. B feels like they're behaving pretty reasonably, A thinks they're nuts and is insinuating a breakup if B continues to see opposite sex friends.

This is at 3 months of dating and one month of exclusivity.

[Philanthropist]

I think they're both being highly self-centered, are refusing to see each other's point of view, and obviously don't care about each other that much.

[mieu]

Just curious, not rhetorical, how does A know that B slept with those people?

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by mieu To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Just curious, not rhetorical, how does A know that B slept with those people?

They're both so obviously immature, selfish and not ready to be in a serious relationship anyway that I hardly think that matters at this point.


When you get a partnership of two people yelling 'I don't want you having those friends! It upsets me. I don't care what you need. But my friends are my friends, don't you dictate who I can spend my time with', neither of them deserve a serious or caring partner.

[Distance]

The opening post is all about two insecure individuals and the unnecessary drama they create. Much ado about nothing.

[Selene]

*fails to notice elephant in the room*

It appears to me that A's doubts are not unfounded, hence A is the less unreasonable of the two.

[Latro]

Nitpick: for reduction of verbosity, you could just say "I" instead of person B and, say, "Alice" instead of person A. It's pretty obvious which is which.

On-topic: did you guys talk about how the two of you felt about one going out without the other between the time you became exclusive and the first time going out without the other after becoming exclusive? I can see there being jealousy on one side or both if this wasn't talked about. It's probably unreasonable to expect trust about something like this based only on words when you've only been together a short time.

In short: she's wrong (narrowing in only on what you actually said in the OP, and ignoring everything else you've said on this forum), but what have you done to show her that she's wrong? Telling her is not enough early in a relationship.

Also, this sounds like a nasty relationship on both sides.


Generalizing the topic a little bit, based on what the poster below me said: is there really a broad *expectation* that heterosexual/homosexual people early in relationships will not hang out one-on-one with the opposite/same sex? If so, the heterosexual side of that sounds like a driving force behind the relative lack of platonic relationships between heterosexual men and heterosexual women, which is rather disturbing to me. If this expectation is there, how does it work with bisexuals?

[notabugiswear]

I talked about this with my boyfriend, we had the same discussion. Technically he was person B, and although as person A - I never party, or go out much for that matter - I was thoroughly concerned.

It's a matter of trust. Especially in an early relationship, the volatility of it all is at a peak. One-on-ones with the opposite sex is just completely out of the question. Not only does it put stress on A, but can also put a lot of unnecessary stress on whoever B wants to see/talk to. Even if no real romantic interest exists, the possibility is very real to A, and it will lead to a situation much like this.

B should restrain his/herself to group activities that involve A.

A should grow up and learn to take on the responsibilities of a relationship. If A is unwilling to compromise, then the aforementioned double standard truly does exist. Partying is unacceptable alone, especially when certain substances are involved that can intoxicate A and cause situations out of his/her control.

I'm actually curious to see what the other INTJs post.

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by Latro To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It's probably unreasonable to expect trust about something like this based only on words when you've only been together a short time.

I think this is the problem with so many romantic relationships. Both go into it expecting to get 'everything they deserve' from it, without actually stopping to ask why anyone would want to be with them. Instead of asking 'what do I have to offer?' and 'how can I make my partner happy', they place demands on the other person, as if they have a right to walk into someone's life and tip everything upside down.

Of course, it's important to establish your own boundaries and what you want from a partner, but this should be done before entering a relationship.

If either of the two aforementioned cared about the well being of the other, they would have both already dropped the offending friends and it wouldn't be an issue.

[Causa Mortis]

	Originally Posted by mieu To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Just curious, not rhetorical, how does A know that B slept with those people?

A asked, B told

---------- Post added 03-16-2012 at 01:48 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	When you get a partnership of two people yelling 'I don't want you having those friends! It upsets me. I don't care what you need. But my friends are my friends, don't you dictate who I can spend my time with', neither of them deserve a serious or caring partner.

A fair point.

B initiated several conversations with A about how uncomfortable they were with frequently going out prior to the exclusivity conversation. A politely told B to stop being needy. A the initiated the exclusivity conversation, B never imagined that this would continue, partying has since accelerated on A's part, B resumed friendships with opposite sex friends, A flips out.

[Latro]

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	If either of the two aforementioned cared about the well being of the other, they would have both already dropped the offending friends and it wouldn't be an issue.

I agree with everything you said except this, because I don't think this is fair either. If you were dating someone just fairly recently (let's say within the last 6 months) and are on a friendly basis with them now, OK. I think they can probably understand if you give them a call and say that you won't be seeing them for a little while because you just started seeing someone exclusively. If you're actually friends now, they'll be happy for you and will be excited to see you again a little later in your relationship (or, if it ends quickly, after you break up). If you're not actually friends, you'll probably have a fight and stop being friends, in which case it was just as well.

But what about someone you haven't been dating in the last 6 months? I don't think it's reasonable for you to be expected to stop hanging out with someone like that. On the other hand I don't think it's reasonable for someone to trust you not to have romantic feelings for them just because you said so when you've only been exclusive for a month. So you just have to be reasonable about it. Talk to them about it, make sure they know what you have to say about it, and then (in my naive "honesty is the best policy" world) ask them how they feel about it. If they don't like it, it doesn't have to turn into a nasty conflict; just reschedule and have them come along next time.

[Phaze228]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The opening post is all about two insecure individuals and the unnecessary drama they create. Much ado about nothing.

That's also a summary of every relationship.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by Phaze228 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That's also a summary of every relationship.

Pretty much which is why for about a year, I refused to date. My current relationship has no silly drama. It's beyond lovely to be with someone who doesn't get stupid.

[Lofwyr]

Assuming B was open about the nature of their relationship with the opposite-sex friends AND has shown enough trust in A to accept their party-centric behavior in an exclusive relationship, then I think A is being unreasonable and showing serious signs of insecurity.

The idea that B's behavior is MORE unacceptable than A's is ludicrous. Men and women are absolutely able to have non-sexual, platonic friendships. They are, in fact, quite healthy and enriching. Those who demonstrate serious issues with these kinds of friendships tend to have personal problems at the root of those issues as opposed to any legitimate complaint that the friendships are in bad faith.

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist
	If either of the two aforementioned cared about the well being of the other, they would have both already dropped the offending friends and it wouldn't be an issue.

I think this is the opposite of healthy relationship behavior. It's the mindset of people who are determined to enter into extremely co-dependent relationships. The kind that often don't go the distance and end with both parties worse off. You go into a relationship with the idea that it can be great because both people involved are strong, healthy people as individuals. Why in the world would you attack the things that make them strong, healthy individuals in order to try and make the relationship stronger? That's like saying you build a good house by first putting giant holes in its foundation...

[Muse]

These two individuals are too caught up in what they want to pursue what they could both have.

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	B initiated several conversations with A about how uncomfortable they were with frequently going out prior to the exclusivity conversation. A politely told B to stop being needy.

A is dismissive of B's emotions.

A doesn't care about what makes B comfortable. Having fun is higher on the list of A's priorities than not hurting B.

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	A the initiated the exclusivity conversation, B never imagined that this would continue,

B shouldn't have agreed to become exclusive with A, given the above.

	Originally Posted by Causa Mortis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	partying has since accelerated on A's part, B resumed friendships with opposite sex friends, A flips out.

Again, A is selfish. B doesn't seem too deeply invested in the relationship either, which is probably a good thing.

[Causa Mortis]

	Originally Posted by Muse To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	These two individuals are too caught up in what they want to pursue what they could both have.

B is pretty clear about whats wanted, and the tone is "ready when you are, not hanging out at home while you go to singles bars though"

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by Latro To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	But what about someone you haven't been dating in the last 6 months? I don't think it's reasonable for you to be expected to stop hanging out with someone like that. On the other hand I don't think it's reasonable for someone to trust you not to have romantic feelings for them just because you said so when you've only been exclusive for a month.

The bottom line is this: if you really care about someone you will be willing to stop hanging out with friends who make them uncomfortable.

If you don't really care about them, then you shouldn't be in an exclusive relationship anyway.

Originally Posted by Lofwyr To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think this is the opposite of healthy relationship behavior. It's the mindset of people who are determined to enter into extremely co-dependent relationships. The kind that often don't go the distance and end with both parties worse off. You go into a relationship with the idea that it can be great because both people involved are strong, healthy people as individuals. Why in the world would you attack the things that make them strong, healthy individuals in order to try and make the relationship stronger? That's like saying you build a good house by first putting giant holes in its foundation...

So your idea of a healthy relationship is actively engaging in behavior that is hurtful to your mate?

Don't know about anyone else here, but I could never bring myself to hurt my husband on purpose. Hurting him would cause me unbearable emotional pain, even if it was unintentional. Hell, I'd rather be bored for the rest of my life than see him hurt. He could never bring himself to hurt me either. But then, that's probably because we actually love each other.

[Latro]

Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The bottom line is this: if you really care about someone you will be willing to stop hanging out with friends who make them uncomfortable. If you don't really care about them, then you shouldn't be in an exclusive relationship anyway. So your idea of a healthy relationship is actively engaging in behavior that is hurtful to your mate? Don't know about anyone else here, but I could never bring myself to hurt my husband on purpose. Hurting him would cause me unbearable emotional pain, even if it was unintentional. Hell, I'd rather be bored for the rest of my life than see him hurt. He could never bring himself to hurt me either. But then, that's probably because we actually love each other.

You're jumping to extremes. The way you described it, you were talking about dropping friends that offended your significant other when you've been exclusive for a month. Simply going on with it when they've told you that it hurts them is the opposite extreme. The healthy balance involves not losing your platonic relationships while still not offending your significant other while they simultaneously respect your boundaries (to within reason). It's delicate but at the same time extremely simple. IMO it gets nasty when people enter into an exclusive relationship with nothing else to suggest that they should trust one another. IMO you shouldn't enter into an exclusive relationship until you ALREADY trust one another, at which point pretty much this entire discussion is a moot point until someone violates that trust (which afaict hasn't happened in the original situation).

[Muse]

	Originally Posted by Latro To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	IMO it gets nasty when people enter into an exclusive relationship with nothing else to suggest that they should trust one another. IMO you shouldn't enter into an exclusive relationship until you ALREADY trust one another, at which point pretty much this entire discussion is a moot point until someone violates that trust (which afaict hasn't happened in the original situation).

With this in mind, it almost sounds like you guys don't know each other well enough yet. Or one of you needs to know the other more first.

[reckful]

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The bottom line is this: if you really care about someone you will be willing to stop hanging out with friends who make them uncomfortable.

Wow. I couldn't disagree with this more. Anyone who thinks they should be able to dictate to their SO who their SO's friends are doesn't deserve to have an SO. This is a classic boundaries situation, and not an each-side-has-a-reasonable-point-of-view situation.

Person A should either decide she trusts Person B not to cheat or leave Person B. Staying with Person B but nixing opposite-sex friends because she doesn't trust him should not be an option. And the fact that Person B has slept with some of these women in the past (when it didn't involve cheating) doesn't change that. If Person B wanted to cheat on Person A, Person B could certainly do it completely behind Person A's back and not even tell Person A he was seeing the other woman as friends. Again, Person B is either trustworthy or he isn't, and Person A should leave him if she thinks she can't trust him.

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by reckful To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Anyone who thinks they should be able to dictate to their SO who their SO's friends are doesn't deserve to have an SO.

That's what I'm trying to say. The SO shouldn't (and shouldn't have to) dictate.

Why should the SO be put in the situation where the have to ask? It should have already happened in the first instance.

[Latro]

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That's what I'm trying to say. The SO shouldn't (and shouldn't have to) dictate. Why should the SO be put in the situation where the have to ask? It should have already happened in the first instance.

We were talking about how to influence matters so that the SO doesn't feel the need to, as well as what the SO is and isn't justified in feeling.

That said, it sounds like we're mostly on the same page, but I still disagree with you on one point: I do not think that the SO is ever in the right to make decisions about something like with whom their partner is friends. In my view you are exclusive only if you trust each other, and it is a mistake to declare exclusivity when you don't. If you do trust each other, all this discussion of with whom one is friends is irrelevant: you trust them to keep it platonic (or within whatever bounds your relationship has) and vice versa. If that trust weakens without actually being violated, you have to talk about it, or things are going to go downhill fast. If that trust is violated then of course you end the relationship if that's feasible. (When ending it isn't feasible pretty much everything I've said in this thread falls apart on its face.)

[Zephyranthes]

Neither of you should be hanging out with previous relationships of any sort, after you've gone exclusive. It's disrespectful and untrustworthy. Any form of "back up" when you are in a relationship is viewed badly. If you have any female friends who you both share no romantic interest in with each other, and wouldn't date even if you were single, it's fine, but any interest from either party is bad. Past exes and flings are viewed as threats by either gender, and it's a fairly valid complaint.

I am not however, saying that once you go exclusive, you should spend 24/7 with each other, just that you should be able to trust each other when you are apart to not stab either person in the back, but not everyone is that trusting or has that much integrity to not screw around when out of sight.

I'm going to guess she's in her early 20s and a barfly, or she just likes male attention too much. If you are looking for long term, i'd bail now, something about it all just strikes me as off. This was a bit more difficult to read than I thought, I lack some details from you and my knowledge here seems insufficient to decipher this properly.

[IndustrialSX]

I would think both of them are dumbasses and not deal with them