Is it possible to love two people at the same time without being an asshole or a jerk?

By psychologist Fabio Olivo Montañez, Specialist in Clinical Psychology in Barranquilla.

This is a thorny and delicate subject, a frequent reason for private consultation, in which high levels of tension, stress, suffering, and marked emotional imbalance tend to appear in the person facing this dilemma. Although the degree of suffering varies from one person to another —depending on the foundations of their personality^[2]—, it is a fact, not an opinion, that this question has been, is, and will continue to be lived by many men, women, and sexually diverse people at some point in their lives.

Because of how often these experiences arise in clinical practice, and because of the direct and indirect psychological implications and consequences they have on those who live them, as well as their impact on the family (primary, nuclear, or extended), on psychic and even monetary economy, and on individual and social morality, it is relevant and necessary to reflect on this complex subject with clarity, depth, and breadth.

Speaking frankly, this challenge —which can feel sinister to the person going through it— usually begins with a betrayal of one of the parties, typically the main partner. That is why the person living this situation may be seen as a “son of a bitch” or a “bastard,” not only by their partner but also by those close to them: friends, family, or community. This moral condemnation has a basis, since at the root of this conflict there were lies, dishonesty, and, ultimately, narcissistic, self-centered, and selfish behavior. It is conduct that reveals the protagonist acted on their own impulses and needs, forgetting the other person and their mental health.

On the internet, in books, and in various videos, some claim that it is indeed possible to love two people at once; others deny it. Some are liberal, others conservative, and then there are the lukewarm ones (the “yes, but no” and “no, but yes” crowd). However, what you hear or read is one thing, and what you live is quite another. That is why I don't think it's wise to make such a momentous decision based solely on a self-help book, a YouTube video, or a TikTok clip. As Anthony de Mello suggests in his story “Eat the Fruit Yourself,” life is a unique and non-transferable experience, in which truth and meaning are personal discoveries that cannot be passed on directly. So, whoever is going through a dilemma of this kind should not base their perspective only on what others say, but should examine their own conflict from within. Making decisions “from the outside in” rather than “from the inside out” will only increase their suffering and that of everyone involved.

From a psychological perspective: is it possible to love two people?

Returning to the original question, and addressing it directly, from a psychological standpoint the answer is yes: it is possible. However, it is a complex and difficult place to sustain^[3], one that sooner or later passes through the “valley of horror” because of the implications and demands it brings. Perhaps more important than asking whether one can love two people simultaneously is asking why someone feels the need to do so, why they feel they will “die” if they leave one of their two objects of love^[4]. Whoever lives this conflict does not do so from a place of freedom^[5], and for this possibility to be truly “healthy,” it must not be the product of a whim, a craving, or simple emotional irresponsibility. In many cases, this inability may be related to factors such as:

• The torment caused by the idea that one of the parties will suffer.
• The fear of losing an object of love.
• A constant need for external validation.
• An addiction to pleasure, novelty, or adventure.

That said, in therapy it is usually not so much about the ability to love two people at the same time —from an emotionally healthy place— but about the confusion between desiring one person and loving another^[6], without one of those involved knowing about the other. This phenomenon reveals a mix of desire, love as an emotion (which I will call “infatuation” from here on), and love as a construction (which I will call “love-as-construction”). A chilling experience, if not a terrifying one^[7].

That is why I consider it imperative, at this point in the reflection, to clarify what the hell desire is, what on earth infatuation is, and what in the world love is, in order to inform you, try to explain what you are experiencing, and invite you to take a more suitable position for getting through the emotional tearing you are living.

How does a romantic relationship take shape?

To understand where this process may begin, let's continue with another question: How does a romantic relationship take shape? Or, in other words, at what point in the equation does a third person with an interest in your relationship come in? In this regard, I don't believe there is a single path; however, I will share one that is more or less possible:

From a relationship of recurring proximity (which can happen at the bus stop, on a commute, at work, at university, or at school, etc.), in some cases one can move to a relationship of closeness (in which you talk and recognize the other person, that is, you notice them) and, from there, progress through positive reinforcement toward friendship, if the other person meets certain characteristics that are best looked into^[8]. In this stage, needs for intimacy, support, and loyalty, among others, are met; it is a space where we tend to open up and share a bit of our story (the things that hurt us, that wounded us). If the other person is able to receive what has been revealed in a caring way, there is a chance to strengthen that friendship. But if, in addition, he or she is attractive to you —which means, in other words, that you like them, that they stir something in you—, and you notice they also look at you with dilated pupils and a particular sparkle in their eyes, you may move on (in the best and worst of cases) to the beautiful illness of infatuation. If you're lucky, sexuality and sex may eventually be added to the formula; this can lead you to that something that has no name, but doesn't need one because it is everything (dating or infatuation)^[9]. It is worth mentioning, however, that this “non-exclusive” path usually depends on the developmental stage of the lovers, which will affect the way sexuality and sex are added to the formula^[10].

Okay, so what about desire?

Okay… First of all, I should clarify that this reflection deals with unconscious desire, which in psychological terms is not a synonym for love —they are not the same—, which is why, between these experiences, there are sometimes intrapsychic disagreements of moderate or high intensity. These occur in real life when a person “feels-thinks” that they deeply love one person (for example, their husband) and, at the same time, “feels-thinks” that they deeply desire another (their lover). This is a reason for consultation with a high dose of emotional suffering for the person living this experience, one considered heresy in our culture. However, as mentioned in a footnote above, love does not stop desire^[11].

Unconscious desire is a force that moves incessantly, that is, it pushes, pushes, and pushes, unsatisfied and endlessly, because it always wants the impossible (the return of lost wholeness). It is a driving force that keeps us alive, that is related to a loss in childhood, and that protects us against the absurdity of life (death).

The subject is thorny and delicate because our desire is often tinged with the desires of others, and this is because from the very beginning we were conceived through the unconscious desires of others that marked us. An example of this is the desire (conscious or unconscious) of our parents when they conceived us, or the trace of expressions such as: “Look, look, she's so tiny you can hardly see her,” “You are the most beautiful thing in the universe,” or, going a bit further, “Let us make man in our image and likeness.” These imprints have since set a trajectory in our becoming^[12], because we take on what the other tells us. In this way, desire, its orientation, direction, and choice are shaped by the influence of the other. That is why it is essential to be aware of what was made of us; in this way, through the mark of the other, we settle into wanting, thus becoming subject-objects of jouissance, slaves to someone else's desire, beings with little freedom.

Infatuation and love-as-construction: they are not the same

For its part, love as infatuation fills you with an endless energy, associated with pleasure, with the flesh, with fascination for certain characteristics of the other person, perceived through their apparent life circumstances, their supposed way of being, of seeing and/or interpreting life (Merlano, n.d.). Assumptions that pretend to fill your voids and meet some of your needs, as in fact happens “temporarily.” The intensity of this emotion is so powerful that the “beloved” comes to be seen as a kind of god or goddess by their lover, and one comes to believe, very intimately, that they are the star of the movie —you know!—. This is a very strong experience, hard to hide from others (the person living it usually thinks: “I have to control the way I look at him or her, or they'll notice what I'm feeling”). The Prince of Song, José José, describes this experience in a very interesting way in one of his songs, El amar y el querer, revealing that from this position infatuation is wanting, is living, is enjoying^[13].

That said, it is important to clarify that love as an emotion is based on an illusion, on an idealization that ends up becoming a kind of time bomb, one that will not withstand the weight of reality and that has an expiration date. That is why no important and/or definitive decisions should be made during this stage, such as having a child, moving in together, or going into business, among other matters, since the likelihood of error is significantly high.

When a couple gets through the weight of reality, that is, when they overcome the conflicts that arise from confronting the idealization face to face with what is real —a process that must, without exception, be lived or faced before deciding to love or to build—, from then on there will be a knowledge or foundation that allows both parties to row in the same direction. The conflicts, negotiations, or lessons of this process of gestation or re-recognition should revolve, among other topics, around the following areas:

• Money management.
• Types of entertainment.
• How free time is spent.
• The kind of friends each person has.
• Academic interests.
• Life goals or objectives.
• Political ideals.
• Taste in clothing.
• Preferences for social media participation.
• Health conditions.
• The type of relationship with the family of origin.
• Philosophy of life.
• Spiritual or religious beliefs.
• Values or guides for behavior, among others, such as fondness for animals.

Only then can the relationship be experienced from a different place. This is a stage of a lot of work, in which you have to negotiate, renegotiate, and negotiate again on solid, legitimate, reasonable, and sensible grounds, because a family project —a home— will be built on those agreements. This stage is usually called love-as-construction, because from then on the relationship will be based on a fairly deep knowledge of the other person (what they can and cannot do), knowledge on which the decision to move forward —or not— will be made. At this point, it may be better for the pain to become flesh than to waste time.

That said, it is worth keeping in mind that, in practice, this process requires —as a would-be spiritual leader made popular on social media puts it— a couple more skills in the specific case of the man toward his female partner, because all he needs is to know how to be a friend, partner, lover, brother, father, teacher, educator, mediator, cook, tour guide, know how to swim, dive, climb, be a mechanic, plumber, in-driver, interior decorator, image consultant, OB-GYN, electrician, psychologist, doctor, psychiatrist, be attentive, friendly, athletic, elegant, gentlemanly, intelligent, imaginative, creative, sweet, strong, understanding, tolerant, prudent, ambitious, capable, brave, decisive, reliable, respectful, passionate, wear a size 43 shoe (or larger), be financially stable and, above all, faithful… not be jealous (but not uninterested either), get along really well with her family (hers, but without spending more time with them than with her), give her space (but show concern), not forget birthdays, dating anniversaries, the wedding anniversary, graduations, the first time (and remember the shape, color, texture, and brand of the underwear), and VERY important: not forget her best friend's birthday.

In depth psychology, there is nothing more serious than a joke, hence the joke; because even if a man ticks every box on that checklist, it will guarantee him nothing, absolutely nothing. If you don't believe it, I invite you to remember the case of Caroline Celico, who publicly said she separated from her husband because he was “too perfect” for her^[14].

But anyway, beyond that, the thesis, the key idea expressed in the love-as-construction phase, is not how risky love is, but that it is a stage that requires TIME and sustained actions over time, devoted to meeting your partner's needs, such as care, emotional support, intimacy, loyalty, trust, passion, commitment, and autonomy, among others. However, this does not mean that it is impossible to love two people at the same time^[15].

So, based on everything discussed so far, love is more a decision to build that can even go against desire, need, or whim. In other words, decision can also overcome passion; a level of awareness as a couple that does not come out of nowhere, nor overnight, nor from a smile, a playful look, a liking or physical attraction, a crossing of legs, or a sexual encounter. Reaching that level requires a certain degree of mental health and maturity.

Loyalty or disloyalty: the two paths

Now, at this point in the reflection, the question must be reformulated or posed differently, perhaps like this: Is it possible to love and desire two different people at the same time without being a “son of a bitch” or a “bastard”?

The answer is yes. However, a thorny and delicate issue must be settled, which revolves around whether the person who decides to embark on this experience will do so through loyalty (a path that may spare you the labels included in the original question) or through disloyalty. In other words, whether they will express to their partner(s) the torment going through their mind, or whether they will choose the role of the lie.

If they choose the second path, they will move into a process of complete breakdown of trust, in which, besides running the risk of being labeled, in the words of Paquita la del Barrio, a filthy rat, a crawling animal, the scum of the earth, a botched monstrosity, a subhuman, a specter from hell, or a damned vermin, they also run the risk of breaking the bond, the relationship, for good.

This path will bring other challenges, such as constant vigilance, tension, stress, agony, and the exhaustion of having to use friends as alibis, having undeclared expenses and exceeding financial limits, hiding calls, deleting messages, juggling schedules, and enduring fatigue, among other things. Not an easy task to sustain over time. However, the idea here is not to fall into prejudice, condemnation, self-condemnation, prophecies of incapacity, or pathological guilt, because we are human beings and living, for us, is a real challenge; a challenge in which, fortunately, we have the right to make mistakes.

As for the first path —openly communicating the dilemma to whoever needs to know—, besides being ethical, it can be an interesting way to put an end to the bipolar madness, to that polarized thinking of seeing a single no-way-out exit, of having to choose one of the loves, of deciding which of the two to stay with: the one whose kiss gives you life and wraps your soul in caresses, or the one who waits for you at home, so sweet, noble, and good, the one you love and who has always cared for you with faithful devotion, the one who loves and pampers you.

In this regard, this alternative —the first path— is a fight that only the brave have fought (as the song La dueña de mi suerte, performed by Rafa Pérez, says). It is an option whose premise must be to harm no one. That is why it is important to choose your words very carefully and prepare for a conversation that is not only honest but also mature, frank, and empathetic, without defensiveness or excuses, but with truths, seeking at all costs to save a relationship (especially if there are children involved, though not only for that reason). Whatever the relationship is called, the bond must be protected. Lack of preparation may intensify the conflict, suffering, and pain between the parties.

Undoubtedly, along this path (in which perhaps, in the realm of fantasy and imagination, you may want to keep both), your world will probably fall apart. Despite your good intentions, it is a complex and difficult path, as it departs from the monogamous relationship legally and morally accepted in today's society, from what is taught by the model of love and by the moral guidance of a violent culture disconnected from human feeling, perhaps more rooted in religion. You will clash with the culture. At the same time, it should not be forgotten that a relationship of this kind requires coordinating matters such as intimacy, expenses, household responsibilities, relationships with the other person's family members, quality time together, and the need for entertainment, among others.

However, it is worth highlighting and valuing that this path strengthens one of the great pillars that support an important relationship: trust. Because the other person knows where they stand. Even so, this path is only the tip of the iceberg, since the other parties will do their part. This process may lead to the end of one or both relationships, and in such a situation, even if the right thing is done, perhaps all that remains is to accept that it is over. It is not the most passive option, because with it another great task begins: grief. However, this path also puts an end to the betrayal.

Request an Appointment

What happens in the therapy room

Loving and desiring two people at the same time is not a theoretical topic; it is everyday bread in private practice. In particular, I remember patients in analysis who say they feel they love two incredible people at the same time. They express the certainty that neither of the loved ones will accept the triangle, which is absolutely reasonable in our Western culture. That position, according to them, forces them to make a decision, a painful choice, an experience they live with a high degree of anguish due to the immense suffering that fills their hearts. At that point, some have told me, with vehemence and distress, that they don't feel capable of leaving either of the two. It is a very, very hard experience, which takes hold in the mind of the person suffering it like a mental herniated disc; truly a terrible experience, where the way out, without a doubt, is not a lobotomy. My silence in response to such a narrative is deathly. I remember some confronting me with displeasure, saying: “Say something, don't just sit there in silence. After all, that's what I'm paying you for, right?”

At that point, I usually ask: “What have you done to handle the situation?” Some share interesting strategies with me, such as lists of issues, pros and cons, analyses of strengths and flaws, or even trips to disconnect for a while. However, as interesting as the exercise is, these strategies do not silence the pain that has already become flesh. This makes me think that, although valuable, they are not the solution. Perhaps it is necessary to accept that, despite honesty and sincerity, the other person has a certain freedom (or less than we think) not to accept a polyamorous relationship. In fact, even with the best intentions, they may decide not to accept it. And that's where everything gets complicated, because something has to be lost. No one can have everything they want in life; sometimes something has to be lost. And although you may identify with the emptiness left by what was lost, there is also the possibility of connecting with your own process of transformation.

This is where a couple of deadly questions tend to come up, which I usually put in their place: “How do you do that, doctor? How do you accept that something has to be lost? And how do you repair the damage done?”

At this point, it is inevitable that someone will get hurt. Keep in mind that every interpersonal relationship involves risk, and two of the parties in the trio take it consciously or unconsciously. Although you should try to cause as little harm as possible, every decision has implications and consequences, and every card has its counter. And the counter comes. All parties in this conflict will have to face the consequences of their decisions. Each of them will have to accept things, however painful they may be. Also, remember: the longer you take to make a decision, the more fate will make it for you. That is, one of the parties in the trio, or both, will make it. If your strategy is not to decide, you are actually showing a sign of inability.

This dilemma is not solved by overthinking, ruminating, dramatic or impulsive solutions, or by beating ourselves up for feeling-thinking that we love two people at the same time. Even when we do it for the wrong reasons (because of other people's desires), these things make us human. And I tell you that, even when we make the wrong decisions, that doesn't make us sons of bitches or bastards; it is a reflection that we are alive, a reflection of our humanity. Living it bravely, face to face, is ultimately an excellent opportunity to transform ourselves, to transcend. What does make us such is trampling on the other person's dignity, mockery. That said, it is worth remembering that life should not be taken so seriously, and that it is not true that there is usually only one way out of things. Instead, I invite you to consider that perhaps you are wrong about something much more powerful and, in the end, definitive: perhaps you are failing to value your mortality by believing you have all the time in the world to invest more than you really have in certain challenges. For that reason, perhaps you are failing to make the most of your life. That is why I invite you to detect, distinguish, and question those feelings, thoughts, and behaviors that make you feel ashamed of yourself when you close your eyes and that make you see a distorted reflection in your inner mirror.

Couples therapy in Barranquilla

If you are going through this dilemma, you can book an appointment with psychologist Fabio Olivo Montañez, Specialist in Clinical Psychology with a Master's degree in Conflict Management, with in-person sessions in Barranquilla and online consultations.

Request an Appointment

Notes

• [1] The at sign (@) is used because desire is not exclusive to men in a relationship, but also applies to women.
• [2] Among which are: early models of love, level of neuroticism, and the quality of one's thoughts, among other psychological elements. ↩
• [3] Because it is not easy to keep both God and the devil happy at the same time; so perceptions of incompatibility in fulfilling commitments and loyalties can, and will, arise; a perception that may generate or evoke unsustainable and merciless demands from one or both parties in the love triangle; not because they are bad or *#&%, but as a defense, as a voice of protest against a representation of aggression, violence, or indignation toward their beloved. ↩
• [4] A case worthy of study, of analysis; and although it may seem serious to you today, I humbly invite you to see it from another point of view, as a sign that you are alive, as a sign that you have already tasted what it means to be cannon fodder, a stumble that in the end may perhaps lead you to find yourself; however, this case is not always the kind of problem we have. ↩
• [5] But from the place of an object of desire. ↩
• [6] That is why one can love and betray at the same time, and although less likely, one can also betray while infatuated, because not even infatuation stops desire. ↩
• [7] Look, although I know each of us arranges our passions as best we can (since we come with built-in flaws), I must warn you that if you have decided to begin a relationship with a lover, do not let love be added to desire, because that is where the horror “begins”; that is the road to hell, on which you will not only buy your own condemnation, but you have no idea of the anguish that awaits you. However, I also know that warning you probably won't help much, because sometimes dread is impossible to avoid, since we are driven by a pathological search to scratch at our wounds, a compulsion to repeat that leads us to an abyss that captivates us, a place some psychologists call jouissance. ↩
• [8] Exploring the reasons why they want to be your friend, their intentions, and getting to know how they usually behave in their interpersonal relationships, exploring how they interpret the world and their circumstances, exploring their values, their entertainment preferences, and the way they resolve conflicts, among other characteristics, in order to reduce the risk of making the wrong choice. ↩
• [9] If you are in a relationship when a process like this begins, and you are vulnerable at some point toward your partner in the realm of the real, the imagination, or fantasy, combined with your own marks, inexperience on the subject, or a risky moment involving alcohol, you may stumble into betrayal; you may stumble upon yourself. ↩
• [10] Because in closeness, sexuality or sex may come into play, and if you're lucky you may end up infatuated or even in love, if a one-night stand doesn't end in an unwanted pregnancy, an STI, HPV, or HIV, as has happened, and still happens… or in an unhealthy habit of filling voids. ↩
• [11] A statement that does not condemn us to betrayal either, because, although it may not seem so, our nature is not instinctive, and although it is difficult and takes a lot of effort, betrayal can be avoided, faithfulness is possible, of course it is; however, and despite this, I warn you that there are things stronger than love and desire. ↩
• [12] Which is why we are not free beings; what we have, barely, is a crumb of freedom. ↩
• [13] But be careful, because we don't fall for just anyone; that person has a trait that connects us to them from childhood (a trait that may be physical or psychological), for example a way of looking, laughing, sitting, walking, etc. What I want to say openly is that it is not as random as it seems. ↩
• [14] Well, in the end, love is a risk, isn't it? Love is not reliable, and whoever ventures into it must face its dangers, because there is no certainty in it. By the way, Caroline's husband was Ricardo Izecson dos Santos, considered one of the best soccer players in the world… in case you don't recognize the name, he is better known as Kaká. ↩
• [15] However, another question is valid here: Will the parties in your love triangle want to share their beloved? ↩
• [16] However, I invite you not to condemn, and to consider that perhaps she is none of those things; perhaps it is the behavior of a human being who is very, very, very afraid of losing you, because you know that if she sees you with another man, she will die; and if you die, she will go mad. In other words, perhaps we are facing a double-edged dagger.
• [17] Lyrics adapted from the song El dilema by Silvestre Dangond.
• [18] Even more so if there are children involved.
• [19] That is why I invite you to prepare by keeping in mind, in addition to honesty, criteria such as interest (care, protection, and/or satisfaction of what each party needs or cares about), options (looking at and studying possible agreements), alternatives (rationally analyzing and ruling out everything that could have been done before reaching an agreement), legitimacy (that the agreement or deal is fair, that is, giving each person what they deserve, in the right proportion, when they deserve it, and as warranted), relationships (striving not to harm or damage the relationship), and commitments (keeping promises).
• [20] And here I suggest that the non-acceptance by them, or by one of them, may perhaps be due to a moral limit imposed by religion, not by (human) nature; so it is not true that there is something inscribed in our species that prevents the parties in a love triangle from even living together in the same house, putting an end to the whole thing once and for all, and being able to focus on what matters (transcending, living, seeking happiness). That said, there's no need to go around posting this kind of love on social media or sharing it with coworkers, right?
• [21] This way you can make the most of your existence; perhaps you can make the most of the little time you have left… talk to yourself and speak frankly; perhaps that way you'll make better use of your time; perhaps that way you'll live and seek your happiness.