mrrao

My wife went on a cute date this week with a partner she hasn't gotten to connect with recently and they both brought each other flowers. My boyfriend is completely overcome and being a useless lesbian (their words) about a cute enby who has been flirting with them via text for months but is finally in town this week.

When I have done educational work around non-monogamy a question I get a lot is basically how I cope with the overwhelming terrible feelings associated with imagining my partner having sex with other people. I struggle to answer this question because I do not have overwhelming terrible feelings when I imagine my partner having sex with other people but also I do not choose to imagine this very often. I do not have either curiosity or horror about this topic. Mostly I feel that it is generally not my business.

Most often when people say "I couldn't do that!" my answer is then you shouldn't. If you are not interested in non-monogamy you shouldn't do it. I love that my wife and her partner gave each other flowers and I love that my boyfriend is a useless lesbian. I think this is adorable. I'm having my coffee and feel warm inside because it reminds me how in love I am with both of these sweet humans. But there are many people who do not have this response and are still attracted to non-monogamy, and "just have the correct, enlightened feelings" is a shitty and too-common answer.

Another answer to this question is that I most often relate to my partners' other relationships from the stance of being their friend, rather than their lover. When my wife tells me she's in a dry spell with another partner, I am concerned because I want my friend to have a healthy and satisfying relationship, and when she tells me the dry spell is over I am excited because I want my friend to have a healthy and satisfying relationship. I do not think about what that means mechanically in the same way I also do not imagine in detail any other friend having sex.

Another answer to this question is that I think of my relationships as existing within an ecological space in which all relationships affect one another. My girlfriend's other relationships being in a good place means that our entire relational ecosystem is healthier. Her being in conflict with someone, whether it's a partner or her mom, introduces conflict into the ecosystem, so I have an interest in supporting her other relationships being healthy. Her peace and security and satisfaction are my peace and security and satisfaction. If that comes from her getting railed by some dude on Grindr, her need is my need.

Another answer to this question is that I am extremely comfortable with my own jealousy and can let it arise and pass without leaving a mess. I am not afraid of jealousy or anger or other big feelings and can acknowledge them to myself and to partners without a sense of terror or obligation or shame. I will note, good management of big feelings does not make these feelings smaller or more pleasant. I feel like I have done a good job managing a big feeling when I react in a way that does not generate a new, avoidable second problem.

Another answer to this question is that I understand jealousy as pointing to an unmet need that I have and I can generally address that unmet need without reference to the other relationship and usually without conflict. If I'm jealous that my partner is seeking casual hookups rather than having sex with me, I'm actually upset that we aren't having more sex--that ultimately has nothing to do with whether she is also cruising on the apps. I can address that by saying "I'd like us to have more sex" and then if she's amenable to that, doing things that make space for us to have more sex, like being more flirtatious and scheduling dates in ways that increase the potential for sexual connection. Reframing jealousy as actionable desire reduces resentment dramatically (this is also something I'm working on generally--what if desire is not painful deprivation but in fact the first ingredient to basically all pleasure???).

Sometimes it's not actionable. Sometimes my partner is having sex with someone else and does not wish to have sex with me. Sometimes my partner is publicly attached to another partner but unwilling to be public with me because they are not out to their parents yet. Sometimes my partner is moving in with their other sweetie and would not wish to live with me. Sometimes my partner is married to someone else and would not marry me even if it were legal or they would, but it's not. And in that situation I most often privately validate that there is grief about not having sex or domesticity or validation that I want, and I decide whether the relationship overall is something I want given that it has that feeling in it. I am clear with myself about which unmet needs I am willing to leave permanently unmet in a given relationship and overall, and I hold the responsibility for that decision, which allows me to relate to each partner on the level of what they are actually offering, without resentment. If I do not want what they are offering, I leave.

Another answer to this question is that I struggled a lot more with jealousy and resentment when I dated people who treated me like shit, and when I hated myself and felt like I was worthless. Now that I am in the habit of forming secure, trusting relationships with people who treat me with respect, difficult jealousy just doesn't come up very often. A lot of what drove my unpleasant reactions in earlier relationships was that I genuinely could not rely on my partners to be honest or kind. Now that I can, it's easier to relax.

Another answer to this question is I have worked pretty hard to base my sense of self worth on something other than being sexually desired by others and to construct relational spaces where everyone feels like they can assert their genuine needs, even when it means not connecting intimately. When I felt like my entire worth as a person was whether I was fuckable (to everyone at all times), sexual or romantic rejection felt like being totally worthless as a person and a dry spell was catastrophic to my well-being. So did anyone's interest in not-me, because why aren't they interested in me? Now I am able to accept someone declining sex or rescheduling a date or not wanting to date me at all or wanting someone who isn't me without it feeling like a total judgment of who I am as a person.

Another answer to this question is that there are times when jealousy clouds issues in ways that make it difficult to judge what to do, especially in the case of abuse within the relational ecosystem. Controlling relationships seem to generate more jealousy than healthy ones--jealousy can justify isolation tactics, and isolation can generate jealousy. But subjectively it's hard to distinguish "I feel jealous about the time you're spending with this person" from "this person is intentionally undermining your relationship with others, and I happen to be one of those people." The best answer I have for this is that I try to cultivate relational spaces where jealousy and fear and unmet needs can get discussed without generating blame or obligation, and where there's a high level of trust that a person is raising issues honestly and not to manipulate. But honestly, when there's an abusive relationship in the ecosystem, it fucks everything up for a while, and there's probably no way to respond that makes that not happen.

You didn't specify a dimension so I'm gonna go for Lashof's knot.

In 1971, Lashof constructed a locally flat embedding of S^3 into S^5, which is not concordant (let alone isotopic!) to a smooth embedding. To remind people of definitions, a locally flat means that the image of the embedding is locally homeomorphic to the standard R^n in R^{n+k}; two embeddings f_0, f_1: X \to Y are concordant if there is some embedding F: X x [0,1] \to Y x [0,1] such that F_i = f_i for i=0,1.

This is maybe surprising - in 4-dimensions (where it's often easier to find non-smoothable stuff) it's known that all spheres are concordant, so in particular all locally flat spheres are necessarily concordant to all smooth ones; it's still an open question whether there are any locally flat embeddings of orientable surfaces in S^4 which aren't isotopic to a smooth embedding.

Edit: I forgot the main reason it's cool. Other than it exists. Since it's null-homotopic, it is homotopic to a smooth embedding. But in fact, it's homotopic to a smooth embedding via an arbitrarily small homotopy! If you're very clever (ie Daher and Powell), you can use this to show that all locally flat embeddings of 3-mflds into 5-mflds which are smooth on the boundary are homotopic to a smooth embedding via an arbitrarily small homotopy! Basically squeeze all of the non-smoothness into small balls, then show these must look like Lashof embeddings. This gives you half of the fact that concordance of surfaces in 4-manifolds is the same topologically and smoothly, which is quite unexpected (It's not true in other dimensions! Even dimension 3!! This is basically the only case where only dimension 4 doesn't care about category! This is very very strange!!)

The construction is also fairly simple, once you assume a result of Cappell and Shaneson. Below the cut.

Thm [CS]. Let M = (S^1 x S^3) # r (S^2 x S^2), for some large enough r. Then M x S^1 has a self-homeomorphism which is not homotopic to a diffeomorphism.

sometimes a person will like and reblong a post

sometimes a person will reblong but not like a post