Great subtext until you start thinking too much… Who decides which is part of the kit and which not? Which kit is Holly in? Which Verbena? What if you have a part only once that is needed in two different kits? Is Jeff Goldblum complete without the fly?
I’m not sure anyone has to fit in, or play a part, in a relationship. The model for me is usually how would I relate to a child (knowing nothing about having a child). Children don’t have to meet my needs.
Something seems wrong when I hear about people’s needs being met. I don’t have needs from a relationship, really. I don’t shop for people who will share the cost of living. If they don’t share, that is a problem. It’s not why I entered a relationship, though.
So, Aster being expertly gentle here and Holly being adorably modest is very nice to see.
But needs aren’t just physical things, like cost of living. For example, there’s emotional needs, too; if your romantic partner is (or becomes) distant, cold, or just doesn’t mesh with you, then your emotional needs aren’t being met.
Maybe I am using language that is not typical. My last relationship was 15 years with someone who was tough acting and repulsed by non-sexual touch, where I am a sopping wet ball of empathy that wants hugs and kisses all the time. I broke up with her after realizing I hadn’t actually been in love. It wasn’t because my needs weren’t being met. Maybe, the realization came from not having needs met, but that’s not how I thought of it.
I fall in love, I don’t know how to choose to love. A partner is a part of my family. If they are distant or even cruel to me, it’s a problem with a permanent fixture in my life, I can’t go get another one.
There are limits which could mean I need to be physically separated from someone who I love, for our health. Like with Abeille’s difficult mother. But, I would probably still think of them as a permanent part of my life.
I think Holly is already welcomed by Ivy and Aster, and the part he plays is fluid.
Here’s the thing though: if you can love people unconditionnally, when it comes to actually be involved in a relationship, as in “to stay in each other’s life”, the needs of everybody must be ascertained.
For instance, a friendship is a lot easier to maintain than a romantic partnership. But even then, there are things that you need from a friend. For me, it’s being able to speak freely, and being able to trust them. I have people in my life I truly care about, that I never considered friends because… well. they aren’t trustworthy. I really like them, I want their happiness and am willing to do whatever I could if they need help. But they’re not really friends, there are things I’ll never talk about with them, ever.
The same goes for a romantic relationship, but it’s even more important to communicate everybody’s needs, because the damages could be catastrophic.
Again, talking from my own experience: I need to give, and get, constant signs of affection to my partner. My first big love wasn’t really fond of that, and I was willing to tone it way down for them. In the end, we still broke up for other reasons. And afterwards, a looong time after that (and after having found someone who shared my need), it occured to me that I should have been more honest with myself on that matter. Because it made me genuinely sad to not be able to show my affection.
And nowadays, I know that for me, a romantic partner has to share this need. To me, this is non-negotiable.
On the other hand, my partner is very close to their family, while I’m fairly asocial. I find their family gatherings tiring, but I still put up with them because it’s really important for my partner. The fact that they’re great people, helps. I’m still tired as hell after a reunion, but I’m happy to have spent time with them.
Now, a bit of theory. Were I actually disliking those gatherings, we’d probably should split up, because they’re something that matters A LOT to my partner, while they would make me miserable. My partner needs someone who is “part of the family”, but (again, IF I truly didn’t like it) I shouldn’t be forced to do something that makes me unhappy. And my partner shouldn’t put up with someone who is not willing to be part of the family.
It would then be unfair to the both of us to stay in a romantic relationship together, when a big part of it would be based on a concession that shouldn’t have been made.
Maybe we could still be friends, but we certainly shouldn’t stay romantic partners.
Also, if your partner is distant or cruel to you, if their behaviour hurts you… talk about it with them. If nothing changes, or if they ask things of you that you just can’t do, for your own sake: go away. Your falling in love doesn’t mean that they can trample all over you. You say you can’t get another “permanent fixture”, but… yes, you can. Especially if the one you are with is making you suffer.
Metaphors necessarily break if you dig into them too much, or they would just “be the thing” instead of a metaphor. Do not push your metaphors too far.
You probably didn’t mean to come off condescending, but Holly is allowed to feel he might not fit in the relationship. Fortunately, Aster was able to show him how he does fit and is needed. It was a moment of reassurance, not an offering.
It really is: the entire story starting with Ivy and Holly. When Ivy feels like she isn’t getting what she needs, they talk about it, instead of being fighty. The relationship doesn’t die because someone isn’t getting their needs met.
Cascading from Abeille discovering what she needs and talking about it with Ivy, Ivy thinks she wants a loving relationship also. Holly discovers his feelings more over time and grapples with what he really wants. He doesn’t storm out when he finds Ivy with Aster and his bond just gets stronger as the relationship develops.
As a story of more than two people in a relationship, it addresses people in love who are not possessive. Other stories, not that I’ve seen many, seem to be more like friendship relationships, with sex. Up to this point it’s incredibly therapeutic for me and it makes me feel very hopeful that relationships don’t have to be either prisons or fleeting moments.
Great subtext until you start thinking too much… Who decides which is part of the kit and which not? Which kit is Holly in? Which Verbena? What if you have a part only once that is needed in two different kits? Is Jeff Goldblum complete without the fly?
I’m not sure anyone has to fit in, or play a part, in a relationship. The model for me is usually how would I relate to a child (knowing nothing about having a child). Children don’t have to meet my needs.
Something seems wrong when I hear about people’s needs being met. I don’t have needs from a relationship, really. I don’t shop for people who will share the cost of living. If they don’t share, that is a problem. It’s not why I entered a relationship, though.
So, Aster being expertly gentle here and Holly being adorably modest is very nice to see.
But needs aren’t just physical things, like cost of living. For example, there’s emotional needs, too; if your romantic partner is (or becomes) distant, cold, or just doesn’t mesh with you, then your emotional needs aren’t being met.
Maybe I am using language that is not typical. My last relationship was 15 years with someone who was tough acting and repulsed by non-sexual touch, where I am a sopping wet ball of empathy that wants hugs and kisses all the time. I broke up with her after realizing I hadn’t actually been in love. It wasn’t because my needs weren’t being met. Maybe, the realization came from not having needs met, but that’s not how I thought of it.
I fall in love, I don’t know how to choose to love. A partner is a part of my family. If they are distant or even cruel to me, it’s a problem with a permanent fixture in my life, I can’t go get another one.
There are limits which could mean I need to be physically separated from someone who I love, for our health. Like with Abeille’s difficult mother. But, I would probably still think of them as a permanent part of my life.
I think Holly is already welcomed by Ivy and Aster, and the part he plays is fluid.
Here’s the thing though: if you can love people unconditionnally, when it comes to actually be involved in a relationship, as in “to stay in each other’s life”, the needs of everybody must be ascertained.
For instance, a friendship is a lot easier to maintain than a romantic partnership. But even then, there are things that you need from a friend. For me, it’s being able to speak freely, and being able to trust them. I have people in my life I truly care about, that I never considered friends because… well. they aren’t trustworthy. I really like them, I want their happiness and am willing to do whatever I could if they need help. But they’re not really friends, there are things I’ll never talk about with them, ever.
The same goes for a romantic relationship, but it’s even more important to communicate everybody’s needs, because the damages could be catastrophic.
Again, talking from my own experience: I need to give, and get, constant signs of affection to my partner. My first big love wasn’t really fond of that, and I was willing to tone it way down for them. In the end, we still broke up for other reasons. And afterwards, a looong time after that (and after having found someone who shared my need), it occured to me that I should have been more honest with myself on that matter. Because it made me genuinely sad to not be able to show my affection.
And nowadays, I know that for me, a romantic partner has to share this need. To me, this is non-negotiable.
On the other hand, my partner is very close to their family, while I’m fairly asocial. I find their family gatherings tiring, but I still put up with them because it’s really important for my partner. The fact that they’re great people, helps. I’m still tired as hell after a reunion, but I’m happy to have spent time with them.
Now, a bit of theory. Were I actually disliking those gatherings, we’d probably should split up, because they’re something that matters A LOT to my partner, while they would make me miserable. My partner needs someone who is “part of the family”, but (again, IF I truly didn’t like it) I shouldn’t be forced to do something that makes me unhappy. And my partner shouldn’t put up with someone who is not willing to be part of the family.
It would then be unfair to the both of us to stay in a romantic relationship together, when a big part of it would be based on a concession that shouldn’t have been made.
Maybe we could still be friends, but we certainly shouldn’t stay romantic partners.
Also, if your partner is distant or cruel to you, if their behaviour hurts you… talk about it with them. If nothing changes, or if they ask things of you that you just can’t do, for your own sake: go away. Your falling in love doesn’t mean that they can trample all over you. You say you can’t get another “permanent fixture”, but… yes, you can. Especially if the one you are with is making you suffer.
Metaphors necessarily break if you dig into them too much, or they would just “be the thing” instead of a metaphor. Do not push your metaphors too far.
Holly, equality and acceptance are being freely offered. I know you’ve got the sense to accept them. Last Panel: Good lad.
Eli…
You probably didn’t mean to come off condescending, but Holly is allowed to feel he might not fit in the relationship. Fortunately, Aster was able to show him how he does fit and is needed. It was a moment of reassurance, not an offering.
This is so sweet!
CUTE
Oh I love this page. The message is slow clear about his place with them. So sweet.
Ah, amicabe, allegory aspousing Aster, affectionaly astounding and also affirming. Amazing.
Absolutely astonishing alliteration. A+.
I can’t “Awwww!” big enough
Awesome anecdote!
Aster is such a blessing here. <3
Holly at the third panel I CAN’T EVEN AAAAA <3333
GINA this is so wholesome. I’m tearing up, awwwww.
Honestly, this comic is so full of positive representation. Thank you from this fat, old, poly, bi/pan, cis, lady.
It really is: the entire story starting with Ivy and Holly. When Ivy feels like she isn’t getting what she needs, they talk about it, instead of being fighty. The relationship doesn’t die because someone isn’t getting their needs met.
Cascading from Abeille discovering what she needs and talking about it with Ivy, Ivy thinks she wants a loving relationship also. Holly discovers his feelings more over time and grapples with what he really wants. He doesn’t storm out when he finds Ivy with Aster and his bond just gets stronger as the relationship develops.
As a story of more than two people in a relationship, it addresses people in love who are not possessive. Other stories, not that I’ve seen many, seem to be more like friendship relationships, with sex. Up to this point it’s incredibly therapeutic for me and it makes me feel very hopeful that relationships don’t have to be either prisons or fleeting moments.