Couple? Throuple? Quad? Or Moresome?
Dear Hank:
My partner and I first met three years ago, and almost from the beginning we saw ourselves as a couple. Today we share the same apartment (and the same bed) and have even thought about getting married.
Recently my bae suggested I consider the idea of a throuple, and he told me he was inviting another guy to join us for a dinner that night. The guy was very smart and sexy (he looked like he could be my boyfriend’s twin). The three of us ended the evening in bed with one another, so it’s clear there was that kind of attraction. But a throuple? I mean two is company, but three is a crowd!
What do you think? Should I agree to convert our limited partnership to a public/private partnership?
Paulie Amory
Dear Paulie:
Relationships are never easy, although for some people they can be very rewarding (emotionally and/or financially). The challenge will be for each of you to find a way to emotionally connect with one another (from what you say about the after-dinner sex, it looks like the physical connection is already there.) The emotional connection is necessary to be part of what you are calling a throuple.
However, there are other ways than a throuple to have a three-way relationship. There is a triad, which is what you’ll have if your boyfriend is in a relationship with both you and the other guy, but you and the other guy aren’t in a relationship with one another. That sort of relationship is also called a “vee.” In that situation you would describe your partner’s other partner as a “metamour.” (Now you are getting a sense of how complex all of this can be.)
Psychologists say that communication is the biggest challenge to a throuple relationship. Of course, you have to be able to communicate with your initial partner (in an honest way, sharing your feelings and concerns.) You also have to do the same with the third guy. And he has to communicate well with you and your №1. There will be times when the three-way will be require an awkward conversation around the dinner table rather than a popper-infused romp in bed.
If you think three is a crowd, consider that some guys are part of a quad, which is a term to describe a four-way relationship. And then there’s the “moresome,” which means five or more guys are tying the emotional knot with one another. (No. The word isn’t derived from “Mormon.”)
But back to your question: Should you embrace your partner’s desire to be in a throuple? Before I would say yes to your boyfriend, I’d do some research. Think of it like a job interview, where you have several one-on-one conversations with the potential third guy (conversations IRL not on Grindr or by texting on your iPhone.) During those conversations your task is to ask him questions about himself and listen to the answers. Use what therapists call “reflective listening,” which means you repeat back to him what you’ve just heard him say. It is a powerful way to connect. Then ask him what he wants to know about you. If he doesn’t have any questions, that’s not a good sign.
Then report back to “the One,” letting him know where you see positive connections and where you see possible issues. Ask your boyfriend what he thinks about your concerns, and listen.
In a perfect world, the three of you would be a perfect match, which means you’d save a lot of money on rent, although you might need to switch that full-sized bed for a king-sized one. If you’re not feeling it, consider whether you could accept the new guy as your partner’s metamour and embrace a triad relationship. Even if you don’t see №3 as your lover, he might be a good bowling buddy or have fun fighting it out with you on Fortnite. In any case, don’t walk away until you give it a try. You might fall in love with the idea of polyamory. And if it isn’t working, you’re free to always say goodbye and go out on your own.
Still Single but Counting,
Hank
Questions you can’t bring yourself to ask your gay friends and neighbors? Or maybe you’re just queer and befuddled. Send them to Hank@AskAGay.net. (Warning: The answers will be factually correct, but might not be politically correct)
