Veto Happens
The relationship veto is a controversial topic in polyamory circles. Libby talks about what vetoes are, how they can happen without being called a veto, and how they aren't always a bad thing.
Transcript
The reason why I'm pointing out all of these things is because you can say you're being a good poly person by not having a veto and not telling your partner what to do. But if some of these things are at play for you, you actually have the power and the ability to veto somebody without explicitly having a veto. And it can still a really crummy situation for everybody involved.
All right. Today, we're going to talk about veto. So what is a Veto? So a Veto is within the polyamorous context, rather than the political context, the ability of one of your partners to tell you that you have to break up with another one of your partners. So basically giving someone else power to determine with which relationships you can be in and which relationships you can't be in. And an interesting thing about veto is, well, nowadays vetos are pretty strongly frowned upon as like a thing that you just shouldn't do. And I'm gonna go into that, but what's interesting is vetos used to be something that was fairly accepted as a practice in polyamorous communities. And I think that's when polyamory was still a new thing, like the word, not the actual practice, like non-monogamy and polyamory has existed for centuries and centuries, but as a, as a modern cult practice when it was newer people I think were very hierarchical, like a hierarchical polyamorous structure was the norm.
And so you had a couple who were primary to each other, and then you'd have people who were secondary and the primary couple, the primary partners each would have veto power over the secondary partners of their partners. And, you know, obviously then you can see the veto has its roots. The idea that one relationship is more important than another relationship. And that's really the point of a Vito is to protect the preexisting established relationship. And usually that's like the primary relationship. It often will show up in hierarchical or couple centric, polyamorous dynamics, and it still shows up to this day. I think there are still a lot of people who either practice a veto explicitly or implicitly. And I wanna also add that the veto is also common in monogamy, not in a romantic partner sense, but in the sense that I think a lot of monogamous couples feel like it's okay to veto things like friends or outside activities, or even a job that someone might want.
That there's really this idea within the monogamous context of relationship, that anything that might impact you, that your partner does, you have a right to tell them whether they can or not. Now, as I mentioned, vetos are at this moment, pretty widely considered to be a not good thing to do within the polyamory community, but let's look at why that is. Well, first of all, a veto is just rooted in the idea that you have some kind of right to control what your partner does outside of your relationship with them. And a lot of ideals that polyamory is rooted in is that we all have agency and that we all should be empowered to make the best decisions for us, and that nobody has a right to control anybody else. And I actually think that's a good value to have relationship in general that you don't have a right to control anybody else.
Another problem with the veto is that essentially by asking someone to end another relationship, you're asking them to hurt someone else to hurt themselves too, because they might be happy in that relationship for you. And oftentimes the way I've seen it play out it's because the person who wants the veto is feeling jealous or uncomfortable or challenged in some way by that other relationship. And so the way that they try to feel safe is by again, exerting that control over that relationship, been asking it to end. And, you know, that's also kind of rooted in these, you know, outdated beliefs that we like own our partner, that we have a right to tell them what to do, and that we have a right to always feel safe and comfortable in our relationships, et cetera. And another thing about a Veto is, is that it's often kind of seen as this fail safe in an established relationship.
There's this feeling that, you know, if a partner ever gets too scared or if things ever get too dicey, well, if the veto is there, then it's a way to feel safe. It's a way to feel like, you know you get proof that you're the most important person to your partner or that you will always be prioritized over others. If you know that you can at any time just veto the other relationship. And another problem with the veto is just, it's rooted in this idea that some people are more important than others and that some relationships are more important than others. And that doesn't mean that I'm telling you not to prioritize relationships, because I think it's inevitable that we're gonna do that. And I'm not saying all hierarchy is bad, but if you have it kind of baked in by having a veto agreement, be part of your relationship, I think that you're setting the secondary partners to feel disposable, to feel just inherently insecure because they know that if they push too hard or step out too far, or have too many needs or whatever, that they could just lose their relationship with their partner.
And I think that's pretty harmful while I'm in agreement with the consensus that veto agreements are not great things to have in polyamorous relationships. I do wanna say that vetos happen all the time, and that doesn't mean anybody did anything wrong. And I wanna talk about that because I think we don't talk about that enough. And so the first thing I wanna talk about is how a veto can happen without a veto actually intentionally happening. So some examples of what I'm talking about health, let's say a potential new partner has an STI status that makes the established partner uncomfortable for some reason, or maybe it makes them want to change the barrier practices with their partner. So let's say, you know, the established couple has a barrier free sexual relationship. And then one of the people in that relationship wanna start up a new sexual relationship with an outside partner.
And that partner has, you know, an STI that makes that established partner uncomfortable and say, well, okay, you can sleep with that person. But then I want us to use barriers with each other. Well, the partner who is in that area list relationship may not want to go with barriers with their new partner. And so they may choose not to be in that relationship because of their partner's sexual health needs. And that could happen even if there's no actual STI, but if the, just the risk tolerance between the two different partners are really incompatible. And so one partner might say, Hey, that that person engages in a lot of risky sexual behavior. That's outside my comfort zone. So I don't wanna have sex with you as long as you're having sex with them, because I just don't trust that my sexual health is gonna be within my control or feel comfortable to me another place where an unintentional or non explicit veto can happen is around location.
So if let's say two partners are living together and one partner doesn't want their partner to bring additional partners to their shared home. And maybe that outside partner doesn't have a housing situation that is conducive to hosting dates, and they, neither of them have the money for like a hotel room. And so they're stuck having dates and sex in like a car or some other inconvenient place. And so if there's no real place for the partnership to exist in private, then that can effectively push the relationship to end just due to a lack of access to each other. Another way that a veto can happen unintentionally is with time. So if an established partner places, a lot of demands on their partner's time, such that they don't really have enough flexibility to successfully negotiate time with another partner, then that might mean the relationship can't exist.
There are also sometimes just incompatible ways of structuring time. So like if one partner does a lot of advanced planning and pre-scheduling, and the other partner tends to be more spontaneous or just maybe slower at planning and putting things on the calendar, then that can really limit that more spontaneous or slower relationship to the point that there just isn't enough time together or the kind of time together that they want for it to be satisfying. Especially if that more spontaneous partner feels like forced to make a lot of plans in order to see their partner, but planning just really isn't their jam. So that might just not work. There may be also incompatible time demands between partners, where the hinge is just stuck, kind of choosing two often and it's too stressful. And, you know, putting them in that place of choosing, and if there's a hierarchical structure and they feel like they always have to choose their more primary partner, then that can effectively veto the other partner.
Another thing that can happen is the more established partner just might be the one who is organizing a lot of significant events, maybe like family events, or what have you. And if they're scheduling it without including other partners in that planning that can end up preventing other partners from being included, and that can make them feel like they're not part of things. And that can effectively kind of veto that relationship through exclusion. Another way that people can get vetoed without an explicit veto is if the established partner creates relational consequences around things that happen with other partners that cause the relationship to become really stressful for the hinge partner. So an example of this would be if every time their hinge partner goes out on a date with their other partner, then they come home and they just get a super cold shoulder or an icy cold stare or explosive fighting or whatever, every time they go out, then yeah, maybe that established partner isn't vetoing there partner, but they sure are making it awfully difficult for that relationship to be enjoyable.
And for the hinge partner to feel like it's a good addition to their life. Another way that that can happen is if the established partner makes a lot of requests around what their partner does with their other partner, that don't feel negotiable, that don't feel like can say no, or can feel like there may be consequences. If the hinge partner doesn't agree to it. And that can make that relationship feel really controlled or limited by the requests of that established partner. And that can really prevent the other relationship from effectively thrive or feeling like it has its own breathing room and agency, another sort of way you can unintentionally or, you know, just not explicitly veto a relationship is through power dynamics. So let's say the established partner just has a lot of power in the relationship. Maybe they make more money, maybe they pay more of the rent, or maybe they own the house that both partners share rather than it being in both of their names.
Maybe one partner has a deeper support network socially, or has just more social capital in the community, et cetera. So they just are more powerful and so their needs take more sway. And so if that established partner has a lot of personal, empowerment and confidence, and it's just more comfortable making bold requests, the other partner might feel less sure about rocking the boat or taking risks. They may feel more easily pushed into things that don't feel right to them and have a harder time saying no to things. Even if the established partner might want them to push back. So they may, they might make these inappropriate requests around outside relationship. But if the power dynamics don't make it possible for the other partner to say no, then that can effectively make the hinge unable to stick up for their other relationship. And then it's just gonna end.
Another way that that can happen is if the established partner just has really high support needs that place, the hinge partner are in this caregiving role and feeling like that they're perpetually at their partners back in call, which doesn't really leave them available for an outside relationship. The reason why I'm pointing out all of these things is because you can say you're being a good poly person by not having a veto and not telling your partner what to do. But if some of these things are at play for you, you actually have the power and the ability to veto somebody without explicitly having a veto. And it can still be a really crummy situation for everybody involved. That being said, whether a veto is implicit or explicit, it is still at the end of the day on the hinge partner to set up the conditions where they can successfully have an outside relationship.
And if you, as a hinge partner have made an agreement to have a veto in your relationship, then that is something that you are agreeing to. You are agreeing to give your partner power over whether or not you can be in that relationship or not. And when your partner does veto a partner and you agree to break up with them, that is on you. And I also wanna say, ultimately, what you're doing is you're choosing to prioritize one relationship over the other. And you're allowed to do that. Oftentimes when you feel like you have to allow a Veto to be there, it's because your relationship is so entangled that you don't actually feel like you would be okay. If you're established partner said, I'm out of this situation, I'm gonna lead. And so you feel like you have to prioritize that relationship, which means you have to agree to a Vito.
And if that's your arrangement, there's nothing inherently wrong about that. It's okay to have a partnership that's important to you. It's okay to have a partnership where you're entwined in such a way that you don't feel like it's possible for you to break up, but that does inevitably create a power dynamic where a veto is always possible. Even if you don't explicitly have one. And it's important that if you're gonna enter into a relationship with any outside partner, that they be really fully informed of that. And it's important if you have an explicit veto agreement that of course you tell your partner about, but you also need to make them aware of these other power dynamics that are at play that would make all of these sneaky vetoes possible for them. You know, I don't think that every outside partner needs to feel like they're completely secure in a relationship with a partner who has a more, you know, nested or hierarchical situation.
Some P people really wanna date and just have fun. And they don't mind if the relationship goes away, but you don't wanna be inviting someone to create a secure, deep attachment with you when you know that your relational structure is set up such that that person actually does need to be expendable. And I'm going to go a little bit further here, and I'm going to say that everyone, everyone gets to have deal breakers of when a situation just doesn't work for them. Not all partners are going to be compatible with every other partner. Some people when they enter a relational ecosystem could actually be directly harmful and destructive to it. And I know for myself that there are certain people that if they were to date one of my partners and enter my relational ecosystem, that would be really challenging for me. And I may not be able to remain in that relational ecosystem, or the very least would have to really severely limit the amount of time and space that I shared with those people.
Now, if it were me, I probably wouldn't veto anybody. I would probably start by setting boundaries, but again, boundaries can also have limitations on the relationship. There was a peer period of time where someone, one of my partners was dating, was someone that I really needed to limit the amount of space that I was sharing with them. And so that meant that I didn't want them at the house when I was at the house. And that meant that my partner wasn't able to have them at the house as much, because they didn't wanna kick me out of my own house for them to be able to have them over. And, you know, I, I really needed this time and space away in order to feel okay and safe in my own home. And if that limited the other relationship to the point where it was distressing to both people that might effectively end the relationship because of something that I needed for my own wellbeing, would I have vetoed that person?
I mean, kind of, and I think that would've been okay. I have worked with clients whose partners have chosen partners that have been like horribly incompatible with them. And they've really struggled and their partners have struggled and I've had to remind them that sometimes certain combinations of people just don't work. It's just too hard on everyone and on the relational ecosystem. And that might mean that someone is stuck choosing and the partner that you co have with and have children with, et cetera, maybe the partner you choose to stay with because a lot of your wellbeing is tied up in that person. And again, I just don't think that's wrong. You get to decide about what's best for you and your life. And, you know, again, it's, it's really not cool to, you know, push someone out or say that someone doesn't work for you just because you don't wanna be uncomfortable, or just because you don't wanna be challenged.
And if you're trying to use setting boundaries or saying, I can't be in this relationship with this other person in as a way of trying to control them, then that's not okay, but you do have to figure out what you can accept and what you cannot accept. And no one is entitled to be in a relationship with you, not the incoming partner and not the established partner and the person who gets to decide if it all can work, is everyone involved, nobody should be required to remain in a situation that is harmful or overwhelming or destructive to them. And if you saying, Hey, I need to leave of this relationship. It can't work with me with this other person is gonna cause your partner to say, well, no, no, no, no. I'll end that relationship with them because I don't wanna lose you again, that can effectively cause a veto to happen, but that doesn't make you a bad guy here.
So if that is a situation that you're wondering, if you're in, you're staring down, whether or not the other relationship that your partner's in is potentially too harmful for you to remain in that relationship. And you know that if you say, I need to leave that your partner's probably gonna say, well, no, then I'll break up with that other person. And you're really worried. Well, if I don't wanna do that, just in a controlling way, I would ask yourself some questions, like how much harm and what kind of harm is this other relationship causing me? And maybe my other relationship and my relational ecosystem as a whole, what is my partner getting out of this relationship? Is it negatively impacting them and their capacity to be in relat with me, are there other negative impacts? So let's say I'm a person who is in recovery for alcoholism, and my partner doesn't drink around me.
But then when they start this new relationship, they are drinking more around their other partner. And that alcohol is kind of making its way more into our home, which is really unsafe for me as a recovering alcolic. Maybe they are drinking more, maybe they're even coming home drunk and that's just not good for my mental health and wellbeing to be around that. Another example I can think of is if the relationship just really is very upsetting and stressful to your partner, and that's really wearing down their emotional and mental resources and when they come home or they hang out with you, they're super short tempered and snappish, and you're getting in more fights, or maybe they're forgetting to take care of the other responsibilities they have because of all of the stress. And that stress is just really leaking over onto you. And in those situations, sometimes you find yourself holding a lot of space or your partner while they're dealing with that relational stress, maybe you're supporting them in that relationship.
And then that's draining down your mental and emotional resources in ways that you don't like, or maybe your partner is really blind to some of their partner's flaws. Like maybe this person is manipulative or really immature or really chaotic or in other ways harmful. And or maybe they just really push your buttons and remind you of a high school arch enemy that you had or someone you otherwise just don't feel safe around. And even in those situations, I don't necessarily recommend like opting out of the whole relational ecosystem as a way of dealing with it. And I even wanna go so far as to say, sometimes people that we love need to engage with people that we find harmful, maybe even harmful to them as part of their growth journey. And I wanna leave room for the possibility that we could remain in relationship with them while they're doing that.
And I, as I said before, of course, look for ways you can set boundaries or potentially make adjustments within yourself to insulate yourself from potential negative impacts of the other relationship. But if you just can't or if it's just too much work, it's okay to say I can't coexist with this other person. One thing to be cautious about though, is maybe you feel fairly certain that if you say that your partner's gonna say, well, then I'll end that relationship and I'll be with you, be prepared for them to not because they may not. And if you're really prepared to say, I can't coexist with this other person, be prepared that your partner might choose to walk away from the relationship with you. And I just wanna say this one more time, because I think it bears repeating that if you have an entangled relationship and you use the threat of leaving your partner as a way of maintaining your primacy or keeping yourself out of any discomfort around any other partners that your partner might date if you aren't actually willing to go through with it and leave, or you know that the threat will influence or control your other partner's behavior, and that's why you're doing it, that's really not okay.
And if you have a partner who is behaving in this manner, who is regularly threatening the relationship, whenever they're unhappy or uncomfortable with something that's going on in your other relationship, I need to tell you, you are an adult and you probably need to begin working to stick up for yourself in this relationship. If you're going to be continuing to be polyamorous, it's really not fair to your other partners. If you have no ability whatsoever to stick up for the relationship that you're making with them and offering them any sort of securely attached relationship with you is really just frankly, false advertising. But it is possible that even if you do have a healthy, mutually empower relationship with an established entangled partner, you might find yourself in a situation where your relationships are incompatible and you have to choose and you don't want to.
So what do you do if you find yourself in this unfortunate situation where you feel forced to choose? Well, first of all, if you do decide to break up with someone else, because one of your partners is having a problem with that, don't blame the other partner. It's really not fair. You are still making the decision and it's really important that you own it. So don't say, you know, such and such is making me break up with you, or I have to do this. You always have a choice. And at the end of the day, you're choosing what is actually best for you, even though it's hard and it may not be what you'd really want. It's also important to allow the grief and the appointment and the feelings of loss to be there for you because they're real feelings and they're valid. And it's okay to have wished that this could have worked out even when it just can't.
And it's okay even to make some space a little bit for some resentment, although I really do think that resentment is not something that you gen and really want in relationships that are loving and sustainable, but a little bit is gonna be there. I think the antidote to that is to, again, remember that it is your choice and you are making decisions that are what is best for you that will help get you out of resentment and also make you feel more empowered. And lastly, if you're in a situation where you have to choose between partners really lean into that relationship, you decided to keep, instead of letting that decision poison, the relationship that you have, I would encourage you to find ways to cherish the relationship you've chosen and accept that it's worth those hard choices or, or sacrifices. And if it's not, then maybe you didn't make the right decision.
So to recap, I think having explicit veto agreements are not so great, but I think there are a lot of ways where implicit vetos can exist that are also not so great. And I also think there are times when someone needs to opt out of a situation, and that means a veto might happen, even when everyone is trying to be good and kind, and not being controlling or entitled or acting like they own anybody. There are times when relationships just can't be compatible and coexist with each other. And I'll say one last thing here, which is that is why partner selection is so important. Y'all if you have an existing relationship that you cherish and that, you know, you wanna prioritize and keep in your life, treat that with some care. When you think about who else you're going to bring into your life and how closely you bring them in.
You know, I think about our relational ecosystems, like an actual ecosystem, like a garden. And if I know that I have this beautiful plant in my garden, that I want to allow to continue to thrive, I might not introduce a plant that would choke it or take over the soil or dip into its water supply, and otherwise harm the garden that I've cultivated as a whole. And, you know, it's just true that not all plants and not all people work well together, that isn't always insurmountable, but sometimes it just is. And that doesn't mean anybody has done anything wrong and it sucks to make hard choices. But if you have to, the best thing you can do is own them. Whether you're the one who needs to opt out, or whether you're the one who has to make a difficult choice, you deserve to feel happy and safe and good in your relationships. And for you get to decide what's really best for you.
