the outcome of incompatible needs is "I guess we're just not compatible" rather than "I guess I have to bend myself to your needs".
I'd have honestly been quite happy if the outcome had simply been an agreement that we had *incompatible* needs. I think possibly you missed this part of my previous comment, though...
"In both cases it wasn't viewed as a relationship renegotiation, it was viewed as me being a bad person for not meeting their (brand new and unilaterally imposed) needs, even though I myself had not changed... as though by not changing who I was for that particular partner I had done something terrible."
This is the problem I have... it hasn't been a single one-off event, but a repeated use of the word 'needs' by multiple persons as a tool of manipulation and a means of trying to beat me into being something I'm not (and I say trying, because it generally has not worked out well for the person trying it, beyond the first very specific case of the abusive partner who also happened to be my very first Dom when I was inexperienced in kink). Incompatibility I'm fine with. Being told outright that I'm a bad person for not changing my own core values in response to whatever my partner(s) feel they currently 'need' from me, not so much.
I can't help thinking that entitlement stems from more traditional monogamist thinking, where partners are expected to be 'everything' to each other.
I think we're in agreement on how it *should* work, though. I've had some awesome relationship transitions (both breakups and intensifications of relationships), on the other hand, with folks who were prepared to lay their cards on the table without manipulation and say something more like 'What I want has changed. Where do we stand as a result?' (whatever words they use to say it).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Needs
Date: 2015-04-24 03:56 pm (UTC)I'd have honestly been quite happy if the outcome had simply been an agreement that we had *incompatible* needs. I think possibly you missed this part of my previous comment, though...
"In both cases it wasn't viewed as a relationship renegotiation, it was viewed as me being a bad person for not meeting their (brand new and unilaterally imposed) needs, even though I myself had not changed... as though by not changing who I was for that particular partner I had done something terrible."
This is the problem I have... it hasn't been a single one-off event, but a repeated use of the word 'needs' by multiple persons as a tool of manipulation and a means of trying to beat me into being something I'm not (and I say trying, because it generally has not worked out well for the person trying it, beyond the first very specific case of the abusive partner who also happened to be my very first Dom when I was inexperienced in kink). Incompatibility I'm fine with. Being told outright that I'm a bad person for not changing my own core values in response to whatever my partner(s) feel they currently 'need' from me, not so much.
I can't help thinking that entitlement stems from more traditional monogamist thinking, where partners are expected to be 'everything' to each other.
I think we're in agreement on how it *should* work, though. I've had some awesome relationship transitions (both breakups and intensifications of relationships), on the other hand, with folks who were prepared to lay their cards on the table without manipulation and say something more like 'What I want has changed. Where do we stand as a result?' (whatever words they use to say it).