#emotional availability

With his time, his attention, and the way he shows up emotionally, energetically, and mentally.

With gentle touch, kind words, steady reassurance, and thoughtful appreciation.

With compliments that feel sincere, affection that feels safe, and affirmations that feel nourishing.

With care that is both tangible and intangible.

“You deserve to be cherished.”

“You still have fire in you—and that’s inspiring.”

“I want to nourish someone’s path, not control it.”

“You have the kind of energy I could exhale with.”

Imagine you're in the beginning talking stage with a man who practices ENM. He's telling you that he's emotionally open and ready for commitment. You two speak at length about what kind of partnership you want. He doesn't have an anchor, and neither do you. It's looking like the perfect setup for something real.

"I want to amplify the flow and path of the person I want to be with. GIve them the room to grow in the direction they need, but be close and attentive enough to be nourishing."

"Personally, my life has been an amazing experience so far. And I'm at the point in my life where I have the ability to help someone else thrive through emotional support."

"Do you feel like it's harder to find a connection lately? As the years go by, it seems like it's easier to be distant. While feeling connected via social netowrks."

"My friends can count on me, and often do. Especially for adventures, creativity, and advice."

He talked about gardening like it was spiritual. About life like it was sacred. He didn’t just respond, he reflected. Echoed your depth and matched your warmth.

"Gardening has shown me that you can't force anything and expect beautiful results. It's been a huge learning experience that reflects how people should be treated."

You talked about plans. Picked a day. Shared morning updates. Good night texts. A date was forming, he said. He says he's a bit busy with work and renovations, but if he's making time to talk to you, he must have a good handle on things... Right?

At the meet-up up you spend hours talking and connecting organically. He tells you about buying two properties, including the one you guys are hanging out in. The other he wants to turn into low-income housing for starving artists. It's very admirable.

He talks about his classic car collection and how his job allows him to store it in their garage so he can work on them after hours. How he has a huge chunk of change in the bank and a good credit score. You're sure it's just to impress you, but a man's money has never one time made you wet. It's good to know that he's financially responsible, though.

During one of our online chats, you told him he had Dom vibes. He asked what it was about him that told you that. He tells you he's more of a soft Dom. Which is something that intrigues you.

You learn that he also likes going to raves and festivals where clothing is optional... Then he begins telling you about his hallucinogen use. Shrooms/LSD. He's the artist/nomadic type, so it fit his vibe even if it wasn't something you were into. You tell him you've never tried, and he gets that look in his eyes. One that promises corruption. He throws a little orange chew-looking thing on the table and says you should take it. In his eyes is a challenge. You don't touch it, and he changes the subject completely. Just leaves the option on the table. You don't take it, and he respects you more for it.

Overall... It's a good night. You feel a connection even if it was a bit intense for a first meeting.

After that night, something terrible happens: you start asking questions. Nothing invasive, just standard things anyone in ENM would ask if they like the person they're getting to know. (How many other partners do you have? Are they territorial?) You have experience with the latter, and you wanted to get it out of the way. He doesn't have an anchor, so you figure it would be pretty simple.

He said he's a secondary to a divorcee... They started as friends, but then her marriage went sour, and they filed. That it isn't anything serious.

So when the playful banter between you two starts going into making hypothetical plans (his suggestion at that), and he drops the "not any time soon. I've been so busy, I just can't help but feel like I jumped the gun in trying to socialize" line. It's like a bucket of ice water has been thrown on you. You just say, "fair enough". And leave it at that. And then he comes back saying he'll just focus on trying to make time for you.

This doesn't sit right with you, obviously. So you begin asking pointed questions. Because if he's so busy, how is he making time for the divorcée? All the partying he tells you he likes to do? You can understand established connections being prioritized, but are genuinely curious as to how that works. You ask again if she's someone who would ask him to stop seeing someone she didn't want him with. (You've been through it before) He was evasive in his answer.

"That's a hard question, cuz she's an actual friend, but I planned on dropping the physical part of it eventually."

"She's a close friend, and helps with things from time to time. So we hang out and get stuff done."

"She's looking for her own anchor person."

"I know I'll have to cut off physical things eventually."

So you realize that he's good enough to be her secondary, but not anchor. And from first-hand experience, you know how that stings. You don't even need to ask if he has feelings for her.

You now realize that this man has been trying to condition you to accept the literal bare minimum from him by constantly bringing up how "busy" he is while making time for the connections that matter, even if he isn't being prioritized in them.

Being so "busy," he can't see you, but can go out partying every Friday night.

So when you go out with an old friend that Saturday, tell him for full transparency, and send pics for an outfit check? (Just a pic asking if the outfit was cute.) He goes cold and distant. So later, you sent a text about looking so good that it made him go silent. He sends a pic of his paint-covered hand and says you look way better than him, and how he's sad the weekend is over.

No, "did you have a good night out? Were you safe?" Just that familiar tension. The unspoken you did something wrong energy. Like your joy and freedom... was suddenly a personal offense.

Funny how the man who once said he wanted to uplift you couldn’t even ask how your night went.

And the kicker? It was his house he was painting. He could’ve asked you to come by. Could’ve invited you in. But instead, he stewed in silence and made you feel guilty for not waiting by the door.

“Maybe I should deactivate my dating profile.”

“I’m not good at this right now.”

“Winter was easier. Just joints and couches.”

When you named the shift? When you said, “You came on strong, and now I feel like I’m bothering you…” His response wasn’t accountability.

It was escape.

So it leaves you wondering... Are people really out here using poly to excuse being emotionally present and avoid accountability? You ask him if he's in the lifestyle for the right reasons and get left on read.

Moral of the story?

If he’s “technically secondary,” but treating you like a ghost?

That man is not poly. He’s just hiding his emotional cowardice in the language of freedom.

Welcome to Polyscamory—where the connections are optional, the answers are vague, and the “ethical” part disappears the moment you ask for more than vibes.

If only they'd return or initiate the effort, be not just willing but desirous to communicate and work with (rather than against or simply not at all with) you.

Nobody ever slowed down and taught him that intimacy could be gentle.

That it could be intentional.

That it could be an offering—not a performance.

For so many Black men, intimacy was something they were rushed into.

Pressured into.

Mocked into.

Told it made them a “man.”

That the sooner they “got it over with,” the stronger or cooler or more respected they’d become.

But nobody talked about connection.

Nobody talked about emotional safety.

Nobody told him his presence alone was enough.

Nobody gave him permission to be soft with a woman, to explore her mind before her body, or to take his time and be fully there.

So many boys grew into men who treat intimacy like a proving ground—

instead of a place of union.

They were taught to conquer, not connect.

To take, not to tune in.

And we wonder why emotional distance runs deep.

Why foreplay feels rushed.

Why holding space feels foreign.

Why women often feel unseen, even when we’re being touched.

But the truth is:

He was never taught how to be with a woman—only how to get to one.

He learned touch before tenderness.

Pleasure before presence.

And so many of them walk around craving connection but not knowing how to build it.

It’s not always that he doesn’t care.

It’s that he was never taught how to care deeply in that way—

especially for someone who might actually love him back.

So to the Black men unlearning the rushed versions of love and intimacy:

We see you.

Take your time now.

You don’t have to prove anything.

We want your soul, not your performance.

Audio version available here:

I think if there was a contest for "Mister Contradiction" this guy would win it without any effort. In a few lines he managed to say that love requires accepting someone for who they are but that finding someone attractive for their personality is selfish. Like, WHAT? If I like someone for their personality it means I'm accepting them for who they are, right?

Furthermore, believing that love means loving without getting anything in return is not only inaccurate but also dangerous, and I will now explain why.

A healthy relationship requires reciprocity and mutual respect. If any of these things are missing, it's not love. It's not healthy to believe that one of the two has to do all the emotional labor and expect not to receive the same from their partner. It's also a dangerous concept because its basically saying that all those people who have left their partner because they were emotionally or physically abusive or both are selfish. According to the logic of loving without receiving anything in return, even if your partner beats you up or brings you down emotionally, you cannot leave them because otherwise you are selfish.

I'm not saying that the guy who wrote this idiotic post meant it that way, but unfortunately that's the subtext.

Plus, if we’re being honest, the concept of loving someone and getting nothing in return IS selfish, because you’re literally saying that one partner can take without giving anything back to the other partner. Taking without giving back is selfish, while wanting to be loved and respected equally is not. It’s just how healthy relationships work. Relationships are not a charity. Obviously I’m talking about emotional exchange, not financial.

Besides, it's literally the norm to start a relationship with someone you feel comfortable with. It's not selfish, it's just how human relationships work. Why would I want to start a relationship, romantic or platonic, with someone I don't feel comfortable with? Like, WHAT?

That's like saying a black woman who doesn't want to start a relationship with a white supremacist, Trump-supporting white man is selfish. Like WHAT?

Oh and by the way starting a relationship with someone solely and exclusively for their money is not love but exploitation. It should go without saying, but here we are. 🙄

Romantic relationships are born out of a desire to both love and be loved, and there is nothing selfish about that. However, saying that people should love without receiving anything in return in emotional terms is extremely selfish. This guy doesn't realize that he is supporting the exact type of dynamic he claims to detest.

Also, having standards is normal. I think it's quite normal to want a partner who is emotionally available, mature, smart, etc. Physical appearance is secondary. I don't know about you, but for me a man can be as handsome as a Greek god, but if his personality sucks the only thing I'll feel for him is repulsion. Of course, nobody is perfect, but there's a difference between having flaws and being a shitty person.

This also applies to friendships. Friendships are a give and take just like romantic relationships. You can’t expect your friend to do all the emotional labor without getting the same in return.

Unconditional love, as noble a concept as it may be, cannot exist since human relationships will always be conditional to some degree and that's okay. We are humans, not gods. We are not perfect. Perfection doesn't exist and that's also okay.

Besides, what does having aesthetic preferences have to do with being disabled, disfigured, etc.? As I said before, if you truly love someone, physical appearance is secondary. I feel like this guy was unconsciously projecting his true self onto others with his post. I mean, you only have to read his post carefully to realize that it's full of contradictions. Also, if you go look at his comment history on his Reddit profile, he called another guy "gross" because he wrote a beautiful post about how much he loves his wife, so I honestly think he is an extremely frustrated person who feels the need to take his frustration out on others. He is one of those people who probably believes that if he can't be serene and happy then neither can anyone else. This guy needs to do some soul-searching and most importantly learn to act like a decent person.

Before criticizing others, this guy should look in the mirror.

Sorry for the long rant, but I needed to get this off my chest.