To Share or Not to Share?

[Fayerweather]

My bf, his gf and I recently got together for a "family meeting". There were some issues we were all having and we wanted to sit down and talk them out, and hopefully come up with some solutions/clear the air.

It went really well, but there was a particular problem that came up and I wanted to find out if any of you have had similar problems and how you dealt with them.

My bf's gf is a very private person and new to polyamory. She said that it made her feel unsafe and insecure to have my bf and I discuss his sex life with her when we were alone together. She said it made her feel excluded and she wanted to keep their sex life private.

To me, being able to ask my bf about his sex practices with other partners is essential to my feelings of security and safety. Also, I enjoy hearing about new and exciting things he is doing sexually. I was triggered by the thought of not being able to find out what I need to feel secure, and had a lot of trouble communicating that to her.

In the end, we worked out an agreement that if they did anything new in bed, that either he would ask her permission before telling me, or that she would tell me herself. Also, I would work on asking her directly about what they were doing (which made me uncomfortable, but I promised I would try.

Have any of you had issues with full disclosure? How did you deal with that?

[NeonKaos]

There was a discussion about this on fakebook recently.

The issue that needs to be addressed is: why is it necessary for you to know what they do in the sack together? Is it because you need to know you're "better" than she is? Do you need to "keep score"? If he's doing something with her that you don't like or aren't interested in doing, does that make you feel inadequate? If they are doing something together that you and he DO enjoy together, does that make you feel inadequate? Ask yourself questions along those lines, get to the root of why it's so important to you, and deal with the underlying causes of your hangups, instead of re-arranging your life around your hangups. I apologize in advance if my choice of the word "hangup" irks you. It irks me too.

[MonoVCPHG]

I'm with Neon on this one. I'm of the mind that if you give your blessing to a partner's sexual intimacy with another person, than that is as far as disclosure needs to go. Unless they are involving other people in that activity or there is a sexual safety incident.

His girlfriend has every right to complete privacy about what they do with their bodies in my opinion. If it is something you can come to a mutually comfortable compromise on though, that is great :)

[CranberryStardust]

I am a newbie, but I would think that if their relationship is seperate from yours with him, that she is entitled to privacy. It might not bug you if they talk about his sex life with you, but if it did, that would be okay and you would expect them to respect that. I would think it could take away from the intimacy and even the security of her experiences with him.

As long as they are being safe and not crossing any of the set boundaries ya'll might have, I say they should have privacy. She obviously feels uncomfortable and needs to know that her feelings matter. I would probably feel kinda weird about it, too.

[Minxxa]

I know that I have had a certain "curiosity" as to what hubs and his GF do, but I've never asked because I do feel like that would be a violation of their privacy. Hubs and I have spoken in theory about how if something new gets discovered with another person we'd like the ability to maybe introduce it into our relationship (this working both ways), but specific details to me seems really voyeuristic and not in a voluntary way. :eek:

I totally agree with seeing why knowing the details brings you security, and working on it from that angle. Really, in the long run, it may take more work, but the personal growth that comes with finding and eliminating insecurities is much more longlasting.

[nycindie]

Hmm, I can understand your excitement when hearing what your bf does in bed with another, but I don't quite understand how knowing what they do makes you feel secure - unless you're talking about a safer sex issue? That is puzzling to me.

That being said, the need his other gf has to to keep it all private is even more puzzling to me. Why should it matter that he's talking about sexual activities he is participating in with one of the women he participates with???? Aren't you all adults? I love being able to talk about sex with my friends, I've always done that. Get together with girlfriends, "What did he do, what did I do," and so on. Why should it be different with someone I'm involved with? Fine if she doesn't want to hear what you and he do, but why should she censor him when he's alone with you?

Okay, I guess there's no solution coming from me, I'm just offering another opinion. So, I would still question yourself to understand why you need to know -- if it's just prurient interest that gets you off, I think that's great, but if it's some sort of weird need to be in control or monitor him, or you use the information against yourself in some way, that's not too cool. And on the other hand, I think she's making a mountain out of a molehill.

[NeonKaos]

Agreed with nyci. I don't think it's a big deal knowing or not knowing, talking or not talking, but I would ask yourself the questions I put to you earlier in the interest of self-growth and understanding, and for the long haul. If you really do have issues about "security" you should address those instead of trying to change the world around you to accommodate denial.

[opalescent]

My bf's gf is a very private person and new to polyamory. She said that it made her feel unsafe and insecure to have my bf and I discuss his sex life with her when we were alone together. She said it made her feel excluded and she wanted to keep their sex life private.

To me, being able to ask my bf about his sex practices with other partners is essential to my feelings of security and safety. Also, I enjoy hearing about new and exciting things he is doing sexually. I was triggered by the thought of not being able to find out what I need to feel secure, and had a lot of trouble communicating that to her.

Beloved and I had to work out some similar issues when we started seeing other people. I did not want to give her details about what I did sexually with other lovers because I'm naturally pretty reticent and private about such things and because I assumed that telling her in detail would hurt her. (We did talk about what our mutual rules for safer sex practices are.) I was worried she would compare, wonder why I did such and such with so and so, the quality of my orgasms with so and so versus with her, etc. I also need space to process stuff in my head - which means I hesitate to talk about said stuff until I have a handle on it. (See the Privacy thread for more on this.) So I was generally reluctant to give her details.

However, Beloved needed to hear from me because to her, it was reassuring to *know* what I was doing, rather than imagining what I was doing. She is a bit of an exhibitionist and a voyeur so there was that aspect of it. Telling her made her feel more secure - which I, honestly, don't really get. However, it is true for her.

So what we do is that I tell her sexual practices but not 'play by play' details. I tell her what makes me come with other lovers and how my general desires are evolving.

I don't know if this is of any help to you but perhaps there is something you can use.

[Ariakas]

Have any of you had issues with full disclosure? How did you deal with that?

The person, who you would be talking about has all the rights here. Discretion and privacy are up to that person.

You should find another way to find security in the sexual side of the relationship.

When I am in relationships I expect some degree of privacy and discretion, I try to offer that and in turn I don't ask. I don't know a thing beyond my wife being with another man.. details feel invasive..

[redpepper]

Privacy all the way. My sex life is mine and the other persons alone. I think she has a valid concern for her privacy and the privacy of their relationship. Its really kind to you that she is offering ANY details.

[serialmonogamist]

Hello everyone,

I just registered. This looks like a great forum! I'm really interested in the ethics of various types of sexual/family relationships. It's so good when people take the responsibility to openly discuss polyamory concerns instead of just seeing what they can get away with secretly without any concern for the consequences or anyone else's feelings.

Anyway, in response to this thread I think that it is reasonable to expect one's partner to be free to talk about whatever they're doing with other people with other partners. Of course, it changes things a bit when people are using your openness to spy on you. I think when you openly agree to having multiple partners, you should also feel comfortable talking about each other with each other as long as there is mutual respect. Keeping secrets is usually more painful than the information that is being kept secret, imo.

[Ariakas]

Anyway, in response to this thread I think that it is reasonable to expect one's partner to be free to talk about whatever they're doing with other people with other partners. Of course, it changes things a bit when people are using your openness to spy on you. I think when you openly agree to having multiple partners, you should also feel comfortable talking about each other with each other as long as there is mutual respect. Keeping secrets is usually more painful than the information that is being kept secret, imo.

What about consideration for the other person? Not everyone in open relationships believes in full disclosure. In fact, in my case, I prefer some discretion. It makes the relationship feel private. This concept of the primaries having full rights, removes the privacy rights of the secondaries.. At least thats how it feels to me when reading it

Sometimes there is far too much open in an open relationship.

In this case we are talking about sex. Why does my wife need to know how I have sex with other people, or visa versa. There is 0 reason for that to be discussed... UNLESS thats within the confines of the sexual fantasy aspect within non-monogamy.

[nycindie]

How does she touch you?
...like this? Ooh, how about this?

Am I doing it right? Mmmmm.... Yeah!

...you like that? Me too.

<whimper>

...and then what does she do? ...Really?


Show me how.

Ahhhhh.... Oh! Wow! <giggle>



...and where are your hands when she does that? Oooh! I like that.


Oh, yeah...



Let me show you what ___ does to me... yeah, right there.


Oh, yesssss... that's right. Oh, I like this.

YES!!!




What else does she do for you?...

[serialmonogamist]

What about consideration for the other person? Not everyone in open relationships believes in full disclosure. In fact, in my case, I prefer some discretion. It makes the relationship feel private. This concept of the primaries having full rights, removes the privacy rights of the secondaries.. At least thats how it feels to me when reading it

Sometimes there is far too much open in an open relationship.

In this case we are talking about sex. Why does my wife need to know how I have sex with other people, or visa versa. There is 0 reason for that to be discussed... UNLESS thats within the confines of the sexual fantasy aspect within non-monogamy.
Well, like with everything else there are private issues that don't beg disclosure. Sure, some people like to announce particularly significant aspects of, say, a bowel movement but not everyone appreciates the information and it may offend as well.

I guess it depends on individuals' preferences but I have too often seen people agree to mutual secrecy out of fear to offend a person they love by expressing honest curiosity. If someone loves you and you love them, why should you see it as a threat if they are curious about private thoughts, feelings, and experiences? Isn't love all about sharing and being able to express things comfortably that can't be expressed otherwise?

I'm not saying that love is lacking if full disclosure on anything and everything isn't sought and welcomed. I just find it interesting to examine why it is that secrecy and shame surround sexuality in so many ways and I think this has much to do with why sexuality has so much negativity and pain connected with it.

[AutumnalTone]

I just find it interesting to examine why it is that secrecy and shame surround sexuality in so many ways and I think this has much to do with why sexuality has so much negativity and pain connected with it.

In case you hadn't noticed, nobody's talking about secrecy and shame or negativity and pain. Folks are speaking of privacy and discretion--and those are quite different.

The only people whose business it is what happens during sex with me are me and whomever I'm having sex with. That's it. Nobody else's business.

[NeonKaos]

Sure, some people like to announce particularly significant aspects of, say, a bowel movement but not everyone appreciates the information and it may offend as well.


The thing is, your bowel movements are your business only and you have every right to discuss your business with whomever you wish. It has nothing to do with whether or not something "offends" your audience.

f someone loves you and you love them, why should you see it as a threat if they are curious about private thoughts, feelings, and experiences? Isn't love all about sharing and being able to express things comfortably that can't be expressed otherwise?


It isn't about how much the "original" partners share and care for one another. THERE IS ANOTHER PARTNER, and what about THEIR "private thoughts, feelings, and experiences"? Doesn't the "other" partner have a right to be in complete control of THEIR OWN privacy? I fail to see how violation of someone else's privacy demonstrates love between two people "that can't be expressed otherwise". Go back and read that quote very slowly, and see how it makes less and less sense the more times you read it.

[nycindie]

In the end, we worked out an agreement that if they did anything new in bed, that either he would ask her permission before telling me, or that she would tell me herself. Also, I would work on asking her directly about what they were doing (which made me uncomfortable, but I promised I would try.

This sounds like a recipe in a cookbook. I couldn't live that way. I just don't think that talking or not talking should be a requirement. Go with what feels right in the moment, communicate what needs to be said or whatever moves you. Why such control over talking about sex? It boggles my mind.

[NeonKaos]

I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with someone who "has to" tell their other partner ANYTHING about what we do together. So the girlfriend will probably grow weary of this and leave, which is probably what the OP really wants down deep inside and doesn't even realize.

[serialmonogamist]

It isn't about how much the "original" partners share and care for one another. THERE IS ANOTHER PARTNER, and what about THEIR "private thoughts, feelings, and experiences"? Doesn't the "other" partner have a right to be in complete control of THEIR OWN privacy? I fail to see how violation of someone else's privacy demonstrates love between two people "that can't be expressed otherwise". Go back and read that quote very slowly, and see how it makes less and less sense the more times you read it.

I see your point, but then wouldn't you say that people also have the right not to have their partner talk about them with friends, therapists, etc.? Isn't the issue more talking about others with respect rather than total secrecy? I read a book on truth once that said that when you keep people in the dark about things, it's like saying that you have a right to knowledge that they don't have a right to. This may be a legitimate right within a physical relationship, but doesn't it also ruin the intimacy you have with a person if they have secret parts of their lives that are off limits? Granted, to have openness requires responsibility. It's hard to promise openness if the other person can't promise emotional maturity in dealing with disclosed information. But I have trouble seeing how you could maintain a healthy relationship with a "don't ask don't tell" policy between partners, though I'm sure it goes on all the time in all sorts of relationships for all sorts of reasons.

[Ariakas]

You are taking a specific point and now comparing it to a general point.

Talking about sex is never required. It is personal ane should be discreet. And it should be up to the people doing the fucking. Of course personal discretion is just that personal. Some groupings can do this full disclosure sexual fun. But other can't. And the right of the information lies with the people in the relationship. Not with the met amour.

In general, most people do talk about their lovers with other peoples. But not everything. I don't know anyone that talks about everything and every aspect. There are always things left to privacy and discretion.

And lastly therapy is something else. In the end if you are that messed up about a poly relationship where you need to discuss every aspect of the relationship, you should probably get out of the relationship. Therapy is usually pretty soecific and doesnt need every detail of everything. And even if you are in therapy.. That's a protected environment. Its not the same as telling your wife how you banged your girlfriend, what positions, how many orgasms, how many bed springs your broke, and what the neighbours thought.

The only person that should know every detail about every part of your relationship are the people involved in the relationship. Period.

[NeonKaos]

but then wouldn't you say that people also have the right not to have their partner talk about them with friends, therapists, etc.?

Re: "therapy" analogy

Please don't insult my intelligence like that.

That's an extremely flawed comparison. I talk to my GYN about those things but it's hardly the same as telling one partner what I do with the other partner. I ask my GYN for STD tests, but I don't tell my husband how many condoms my boyfriend and I used within a certain time period.

[serialmonogamist]

All I can say is that for me this is mostly a theoretical issue for discussion. I am open to exploring how polyamory would work in practice, but I've never had multiple sexual partners at the same time. From the responses I'm getting to things I say, it's as if I've triggered some primordial defensiveness regarding privacy rights. If the topic is as sensitive as it seems, it tells me that there are some deep-seated fears about what could happen if you were expected to openly field questions about your sex lives. Personally, I don't like it when people interrogate me about things I don't want to talk about either, and that's not just limited to sex. However, I can still reflect on the fact that the reasons I am sensitive about being asked about certain things is because of how I think the information could be used to harass me in some way or otherwise manipulate me.

With sex, I think it is a shame that people feel like they can't talk about what they feel or do with other people with those they love. A big part of the joy of intimacy, imo, is being able to talk about things you wouldn't talk about with just anyone. It's nice to be able to open up and this thread is almost making it sound like people are having to sacrifice intimacy/openness with one partner to be able to have sex with another. Whether or not that's legitimate, it's still a sacrifice of sorts isn't it?

[Ariakas]

You are reading to much into our defense of the right for privacy and discretion. Don't over think out defense. Take it at face value.

We all treasure open and honest communication (allowing for human mistakes in communication) but we also all accept that there needs to be privacy.

That's all.. That's it.. Nothing more.. Nothing less..

[serialmonogamist]

You are reading to much into our defense of the right for privacy and discretion. Don't over think out defense. Take it at face value.

We all treasure open and honest communication (allowing for human mistakes in communication) but we also all accept that there needs to be privacy.

That's all.. That's it.. Nothing more.. Nothing less..
Well, I guess you could read more into my questioning of privacy because imo secrecy and shame are byproducts of culture that equates open sharing with danger. When I am in a relationship, I like the feeling of being able to talk about past experiences even if they took place in other "private" relationships. I think I would want the same freedom with multiple partners at the same time. I would feel repressed and used if my partners expected me to protect their secrets from each other. If they had other partners, I would expect them to talk about whatever they wanted regarding me provided that their partner respected me enough to not exploit their position of receiving privileged information. Really what this comes down to is that it is better not to put others in the position of keeping secrets for you. If you don't want something disclosed, better to keep it to yourself I think. That doesn't mean that there are no ethics to the way people respond to information they receive. E.g. I don't think Tiger Woods' prostitutes or Arnold Schwartzeneger's mistress should have been burdened with permanently keeping their relationships a secret, but then I also don't think it's legitimate the way the media and the public treat the information when they get it. The problem is you can't control other people, even when they're abusive, and there is a lot of harassment, bullying, shunning, etc. that goes on regarding sexuality and many people don't even consider themselves as doing anything wrong by abusing people in this way.

[AutumnalTone]

Well, I guess you could read more into my questioning of privacy because imo secrecy and shame are byproducts of culture that equates open sharing with danger.

Once again you're assuming shame is part of the equation. Once again I will point out that it is not and that you'll never understand our position if you insist on that assumption.

It's quite simple: if you and I are involved with the same woman, what she and I do sexually is none of your business. I am *not* choosing to share that intimacy with you simply because you are also involved with her.

Should you ask for any such details, you are attempting to coerce intimacy with me that I don't choose to offer.

Should she speak of such details without my consent, then she is violating my trust and forcing an intimacy on me that I don't wish to share.

I guarantee it's a self-limiting process, for once I find out about such a thing, there would be no further intimacies to worry about.

In short: *I* get to decide with whom I'm intimate. Not her and not you. Anybody who can't understand that isn't ready for a relationship, as far as I'm concerned.

[serialmonogamist]

Once again you're assuming shame is part of the equation. Once again I will point out that it is not and that you'll never understand our position if you insist on that assumption.

It's quite simple: if you and I are involved with the same woman, what she and I do sexually is none of your business. I am *not* choosing to share that intimacy with you simply because you are also involved with her.

Should you ask for any such details, you are attempting to coerce intimacy with me that I don't choose to offer.

Should she speak of such details without my consent, then she is violating my trust and forcing an intimacy on me that I don't wish to share.

I guarantee it's a self-limiting process, for once I find out about such a thing, there would be no further intimacies to worry about.

In short: *I* get to decide with whom I'm intimate. Not her and not you. Anybody who can't understand that isn't ready for a relationship, as far as I'm concerned.
It doesn't have to do with coercing intimacy out of anyone. It has to do with people controlling information with people other than you. What you're basically saying is that someone is required to keep what they do with you a secret from other people. Obviously it would be nice if people cared enough about each other to either not gossip or not react to gossip, but few people are that mature in my experience. That's why I brought up the high-profile examples like Tiger Woods and Arnold Schwartzeneger. Both of these cases involved people who kept their relationships with these men secret/private at first but later decided to disclose them for money and/or other reasons.

A personal relationship isn't really much different. A person who is deeply in love with you might not want to disclose information about you to other friends but when they get annoyed with you for some reason, they might just go ahead and gossip about you. I see people talking/gossiping about each other all the time, presumably without a thought regarding the ethics of disclosing others' information. I think if you told them they weren't allowed to talk about people without their permission, they would take it as you trying to control them unfairly. I'm not saying they're right but I think they have the power in the situation since no one can really STOP them from talking about whatever they know. If you want to restrict your relationships with people you trust, it can be really hard. Just ask Tiger and Arnold.

[Magdlyn]

Eh, I am with Cindie here, and so is my gf. None of our other lovers have ever asked for us to keep sexual details a secret either. I guess we're all loosey goosey here and getting off on each others' escapades all around. *shrug* Maybe it's a New York thing. We talk a lot.

[Ariakas]

Eh, I am with Cindie here, and so is my gf. None of our other lovers have ever asked for us to keep sexual details a secret either. I guess we're all loosey goosey here and getting off on each others' escapades all around. *shrug* Maybe it's a New York thing. We talk a lot.

Of course we aren't specifically talking about this kind of freedom when all involved want it.

This is specifically to when the metamour doesn't want that kind of information shared.

At what point do you start disrepespecting the other person and start removing the other persons right to discretion.

My wife and I are open about what we do.. Very.. So I am not opposed to the idea. Bt I also believe in respect..I am far from perfect but I try to uphold the wishes of my partner involved.

[SourGirl]

A personal relationship isn't really much different. A person who is deeply in love with you might not want to disclose information about you to other friends but when they get annoyed with you for some reason, they might just go ahead and gossip about you. I see people talking/gossiping about each other all the time, presumably without a thought regarding the ethics of disclosing others' information. I think if you told them they weren't allowed to talk about people without their permission, they would take it as you trying to control them unfairly. I'm not saying they're right but I think they have the power in the situation since no one can really STOP them from talking about whatever they know. If you want to restrict your relationships with people you trust, it can be really hard. Just ask Tiger and Arnold.

You are 100% right on the money there. Its been my experience, that the very same people screaming for privacy, actually mean secrecy. They want the ability to keep hush about what suits them, and the ability to whine and gossip about what doesn`t.

[serialmonogamist]

You are 100% right on the money there. Its been my experience, that the very same people screaming for privacy, actually mean secrecy. They want the ability to keep hush about what suits them, and the ability to whine and gossip about what doesn`t.

I don't think there's enough discussion about the social-politics of secrecy, shame, and fear. I think people are afraid of what they imagine could happen as a result of their secrets being made public and that results in repressive avoidance of openness. Of course you want to respect people who are sensitive to information-disclosure, but where does that leave you in questioning why there's a need for secrecy in the first place?

[AutumnalTone]

I don't think there's enough discussion about the social-politics of secrecy, shame, and fear.

Once again, the assumption that there's shame and fear involved. That's really pathetic.

Your constant pushing of your agenda makes any substantial discussion with you impossible, as there's obviously no place for anybody else's experience and understanding in your world. It would make things so much easier if you'd just state your agenda up front so folks can then know to not bother trying to have a reasonable discussion.

[NeonKaos]

Once again, the assumption that there's shame and fear involved. That's really pathetic.



It reminds me of when someone sees a bunch of people of [whatever race, nationality, ethnicity, gender, etc.] gathered together somewhere and assumes they are excluding, oppressing, or marginalizing everyone else.

[Magdlyn]

I dont know about the whole gossip worry. Is it because you're afraid the partner of a lover, feeling spurned, will "out" you to people you'd rather not know?

As far as sexual "secrets" or discretion, don't others here either consciously or unconsciously share new sexual practices with the first partner, that you've learned with partner 2 or 3? At least sometimes? I know I do. Wouldn't this be a way to non-verbally share so-called private things you've done with others?

[NeonKaos]

As far as sexual "secrets" or discretion, don't others here either consciously or unconsciously share new sexual practices with the first partner, that you've learned with partner 2 or 3? At least sometimes? I know I do. Wouldn't this be a way to non-verbally share so-called private things you've done with others?

Incorporating new things into your sexual repertoire is a bit different than requiring your partner to report back to you every little thing and/or get your permission with the things you do with your other partner(s), whether the other partner(s) are comfortable with it or not.

[Magdlyn]

Incorporating new things into your sexual repertoire is a bit different than requiring your partner to report back to you every little thing...

Oh, I am not talking about a "requirement." My gf and I were talking about this last night though. While we dont require or demand to know every detail, we both feel more comfortable and less jealous if we know the general gist of most dates. I think it's like meeting a metamour, she or he usually seems less threatening in person. And information about what really happened on a date is less threatening than just not knowing and imagining it's all so much better with the other lover than it is with oneself.

Also, say I am going to meet up with J. Afteward, I tell my gf, "J is into XYZ." Then she might suggest I trying doing this or that with him as well, if it seems similar to something she has done with a person with that fetish. Then I can be a more creative knowledegable partner to J.

[NeonKaos]

Oh, I am not talking about a "requirement."

OK. But I said "requirement" because that is what was in the original post of this thread.



Also, say I am going to meet up with J. Afteward, I tell my gf, "J is into XYZ." Then she might suggest I trying doing this or that with him as well, if it seems similar to something she has done with a person with that fetish. Then I can be a more creative knowledegable partner to J.

Indeed, yes I have that going on right now myself. I am somehow making it work without saying to A, "B is into XYZ.. Let me tell you about all the times B and I did XYZ, and how long it took, and how many times I came."

Instead, I might say to A, "Being with B has opened my mind to some new things that I didn't think I was into before. I might want to try some of those things with you, what do you think?"

(You know exactly what I am talking about, don't you? LOL We'll have to catch up soon.)

This gets the job done without all the TMI. Of course it's different if the people involved are not adverse to a modicum of sharing. I do not have a "100% privacy" agreement in my relationships, but I don't want them to know everything I do with the other, and neither do they.

[NeonKaos]

I thought of one more thing:

my choice(s) "to share or not to share" are based on respect for my partners and my decision to treat others as I would like to be treated, not on a "rule" I have with anyone.

As I have said elsewhere, this does not HAVE to be complicated.

[serialmonogamist]

Once again, the assumption that there's shame and fear involved. That's really pathetic.

Your constant pushing of your agenda makes any substantial discussion with you impossible, as there's obviously no place for anybody else's experience and understanding in your world. It would make things so much easier if you'd just state your agenda up front so folks can then know to not bother trying to have a reasonable discussion.
I could just as easily say that you're being defensive because you're in denial. The truth is that I don't know whether you are or not but I think it is important to avoid denying that there is a culture of sexual shame that prompts secrecy and fear of being outed. What is it that you are saying my agenda is exactly. Because I won't just unquestioningly accept that sexual privacy/secrecy has nothing to do with shame or fear at any level, I'm pursuing an agenda?

[CranberryStardust]

Since when did privacy become synonymous with secrecy?

It seems a little exploitative to say that this girlfriend, the secondary, should sacrafice her own sense of comfort, her boundaries and privacy just for the "intimacy" of a relationship she isn't even involved in. Why is the OPs need for detail and the security she finds in discussing the sex life of her husband and his Gf more valid or important than the gfs desire for some discretion?

There is nothing wrong with sharing intimate details of your sex life or asking questions of others...but there is also nothing wrong with NOT asking or telling. It really is preference. No one should be judged based on their preference.

I personally wouldn't want a partner to share information or details of my sex life and I am not the least bit ashamed. I am a classy girl...and I don't fuck people so that someone else can enjoy the story later. Also, it takes away the intimacy...might as well tape it.

[serialmonogamist]

Since when did privacy become synonymous with secrecy?

It seems a little exploitative to say that this girlfriend, the secondary, should sacrafice her own sense of comfort, her boundaries and privacy just for the "intimacy" of a relationship she isn't even involved in. Why is the OPs need for detail and the security she finds in discussing the sex life of her husband and his Gf more valid or important than the gfs desire for some discretion?

There is nothing wrong with sharing intimate details of your sex life or asking questions of others...but there is also nothing wrong with NOT asking or telling. It really is preference. No one should be judged based on their preference.

I personally wouldn't want a partner to share information or details of my sex life and I am not the least bit ashamed. I am a classy girl...and I don't fuck people so that someone else can enjoy the story later. Also, it takes away the intimacy...might as well tape it.
I think it would be interesting to just break it down to figuring out what the various issues are either way, openness or privacy. There's been a lot of assumptions and accusations in this thread, my own included. I'm mainly thinking about it from my own perspective, since I would enjoy having the freedom to openly talk about past experiences with a new partner. I would assume, of course, that the new partner wouldn't be using the knowledge to harm the person I was talking about. If I thought that would happen, I would talk about the past experience with reference to an anonymous 'friend of a friend.' I just know that I would feel like I'm over-dominating if I would tell an ex not to ever talk about anything we ever did with anyone else. I would expect her to take responsibility for it, though, if someone she discussed me with would use the information against me. It's no fun to be upset that everyone's gossiping about your fetishes and all your ex can say is "oh sorry" with a little giggle of indifference and enjoyment of your humiliation (after all you are their ex).

[Lucinda]

I see both sides of this. When a lover of tells me information of his sex life outside of me, I feel close to him. I feel an emotional intimacy between us. However, I do feel a little scared and vulnerable at the thought that somebody who is not directly my sexual partner would know what my lovemaking is like.

I enjoy a middle ground. My lovers and I do respect the privacy of sex, and we don't talk about details. But we do share general information. So I might say to Fred: "Ted and I tried using costumes in the bedroom, and I was aroused when wearing a pirate outfit." I can give Fred information about me, and how I reacted sexually to the situation. This increases our intimacy, and helps him know me better. But I don't have to go into detail about Ted's sexual response to the activity. That is Ted's information to share if he wants to.

Ted may tell me that he enjoys sex during thunderstorms. He can tell me that he had sex with Jennifer during the last storm. He doesn't have to describe the sound of her moans her orgasm face to me. That would be too personal because Jennifer and I don't have the relationship where we'd discuss that with each other.

[Tonberry]

I don't know how I would feel in such a situation.
On the one hand, I understand anyone's need for privacy, and would want to respect that.
On the other hand, I've always talked about our sex lives with my girlfriends. Always got my partners' permissions first, by which I don't mean getting the permission before everything, but getting a general "yes, you can talk about our sex life with your friends". Seamus actually added "that's what girls do anyway, I wouldn't feel right asking you not to".
This being said I don't say 100% of everything, and information is information I volunteer, I'm not answering questions.

So, I would say... if I knew his sex with other partners is a taboo subject... it would make me feel excluded from part of his life as a friend, since I discuss things like that openly with my friends. And as far as talking about sex with me, I actually wish he'd do it more :P He doesn't talk to his friends about that.

On the other hand, I can imagine if I had another partner, I wouldn't go talking about one another... I mean, when I was with both Raga and Seamus, I didn't go comparing notes or anything... still I wasn't really keeping secrets either.

In the end, I don't think I'd wait for him to get home from a date and go all "so what did you do? How was it?" or anything like that, but while talking about various things, I would expect things from his personal sexual experience to come up, as I know mine would come up too. And not just talking with him, talking with her, too, I'd want to be able to share that, it's one thing about a metamour that you can ask about things nobody else would have experience with or get advice from each other or things like that, not just in a sexual context but including in a sexual context.

[serialmonogamist]

On the other hand, I've always talked about our sex lives with my girlfriends. Always got my partners' permissions first, by which I don't mean getting the permission before everything, but getting a general "yes, you can talk about our sex life with your friends". Seamus actually added "that's what girls do anyway, I wouldn't feel right asking you not to".
I think this is a big issue. Whereas a woman who found out her bf was bragging or otherwise gossiping about their sexual encounters would stereotypically dump and avoid him, men are stereotypically either accepting or ignorant of their gf talking about them and their sexuality with her girlfriends. Men who would try to prevent women from talking about them with their girlfriends would be viewed as controlling, I think, and dumped. It may be sexist, but I think there might be a double-standard where female gossip is seen as a natural part of feminine sociality and male gossip is viewed as rude and controlling.

[Tonberry]

It's possible that it's generally seen that way... But as I said, I would have expected the same too... so I don't think that double standard is always there.
I think it has to do with the "man with a lot of experience = stud, female with a lot of experience = slut". Talking about a man's experiences (even with you) becomes a compliment (he's doing it so he's a stud) while talking about a girlfriend's becomes an insult (she's doing it so she's a slut).

[nycindie]

. . . I do feel a little scared and vulnerable at the thought that somebody who is not directly my sexual partner would know what my lovemaking is like.
Hmm, curious... why? What is it about someone else having an idea of how you like to fuck that brings up fear and vulnerability in you?

[I worded it as having an idea and not exactly knowing, mind you, because really even if someone verbally told them every little detail about you, they wouldn't really know what it's like to fuck you unless they actually fucked you]

[polyexplorer]

I too can see both sides...

If my wife refused to talk at all about any encounters she has with someone else, I would feel disconnected from her. I don't want intimate details, but some general sharing helps us to connect and I think is part of our intimacy.

Having said this, it is her right to withold that information if she chooses, and she can choose to not say anything at all, but in doing so there will be a cost to this, and the cost is a sense of disconnection between us.

I think it is unhealthy to need too much information to be disclosed, and I think it is equally unhealthy to feel like no information at all can be given...

[NeonKaos]

To me this is nothing more than another case of "treat others as you would would expect to be treated (or even slightly better at first just to err on the side of too much respect rather than not enough)".

But of course that doesn't make for heated debate because who would argue against it?

[Tonberry]

To me this is nothing more than another case of "treat others as you would would expect to be treated (or even slightly better at first just to err on the side of too much respect rather than not enough)".

But of course that doesn't make for heated debate because who would argue against it?

Well that's the problem, though, as I said, I would WANT my partner to talk about me. But other people feel differently. That's why the "treat others as you would would expect to be treated" thing fails, because your "treated right" is someone else's "treated horribly" and vice-versa.

[NeonKaos]

Well that's the problem, though, as I said, I would WANT my partner to talk about me. But other people feel differently. That's why the "treat others as you would would expect to be treated" thing fails, because your "treated right" is someone else's "treated horribly" and vice-versa.

That's because some people can't wrap their minds around the idea that they are not the funicular center of the universe, and that what they do has an effect on people they claim to care about.

I would suggest that folks who like to freely share other people's private business would have a very different view when the shoe ends up on the other foot.

So I still say treat others as you would WANT them to treat you, which is not the same as "treat others the way you would TOLERATE them treating you". And if the other person's idea of "tolerable" is your idea of "horrible", then maybe you aren't compatible together in that kind of a relationship.

[Tonberry]

So I still say treat others as you would WANT them to treat you, which is not the same as "treat others the way you would TOLERATE them treating you". And if the other person's idea of "tolerable" is your idea of "horrible", then maybe you aren't compatible together in that kind of a relationship.

...or you can talk to people and know what they like. I mean if you're a dom and your partner is a sub, obviously you're not treating them the way you'd want them to treat you at all, yet you're both happy, and certainly not incompatible. If your partner doesn't want things shared, don't share them, but rather than assume, talk about it, that's my point.
If I assumed my partners like the same things I do, I would often treat them in ways they don't like. I certainly don't WANT to treat them that way, whatever THEY want is what matters, but if I don't ask them what they want and assumes they have the same tastes I do...

Just because I prefer if my partners talk about what I do with them in bed doesn't mean I'm not willing to keep it quiet if they don't want me to talk about it. Just because I don't like receiving oral sex doesn't mean I don't like to give it. And so on. If every person A treated others the way they (A) want to be treated, I think a lot of people would be miserable.

Also, treating people the way you'd want to be treated would mean treating everyone the same, and I believe you should treat your partners (as well as your friends, your family, etc) differently from on another because they're different people.

[NeonKaos]

... treated others the way they (A) want to be treated, I think a lot of people would be miserable.

it seems a lot of people are already miserable. Is that because they are already treating others the way they want to be treated?



Also, treating people the way you'd want to be treated would mean treating everyone the same, and I believe you should treat your partners (as well as your friends, your family, etc) differently from on another because they're different people.

See, this borders on being insulting to my intelligence. Just because a gramatically correct sentence can be composed by a combination of certain words does not mean that particular sentence makes sense.

No of course it doesn't mean treating everyone exactly the same. I don't want to be treated the same BY everyone, so why would i treat everyone else exactly the same. You treat them the way you'd want to be treated in the relationship you have with that individual.

I think my IQ just dropped ten points while writing this.

[Minxxa]

I think treating others the way you want to be treated works in terms of the broader things like respect and honesty. If you want people to be honest with you and respect you and listen to you, then you should do those things to/for them.

When it comes to specifics, I think treating them the way you want to be treated can be problematic. I know that it's taken me a while to realize that I need to treat my husband very differently than I want him to treat me with regards to specific items because he doesn't feel the same way I do about those things. For a long time I thought I was being respectful and thoughtful because I was treating him the same way I wanted him to treat me-- and in the end it was causing problems because he does not see things the same way as me, and I was in fact making things worse. :-/

Now we just have to talk it out... I have to actually ask him what he'd like in certain situations and though sometimes it mystifies me because it's so completely opposite of what I'd do, I'm taking his word that he knows himself better than I do (at least at that particular moment).

[Tonberry]

When it comes to specifics, I think treating them the way you want to be treated can be problematic. I know that it's taken me a while to realize that I need to treat my husband very differently than I want him to treat me with regards to specific items because he doesn't feel the same way I do about those things. For a long time I thought I was being respectful and thoughtful because I was treating him the same way I wanted him to treat me-- and in the end it was causing problems because he does not see things the same way as me, and I was in fact making things worse. :-/

Yes, that's what I was referring to. I don't doubt that Neon is a smart person, but I think giving that advice can be problematic as some people will just follow it without thinking instead of communicating and figuring out what their partners want.
I think advice such as "treat others you want to be treated" just contribute to people thinking everyone works the same and it's already a too common misconception, so point out that people don't all work the same way is always good to do.
That's why I'm careful to say, communicate, figure out how people want to be treated, and treat them that way. Sure, it's more complicated than treating them the way you'd want to be treated, there are more steps and more effort required, but that's usually a better rule of thumb as far as I'm concerned.

[serialmonogamist]

I think giving that advice can be problematic as some people will just follow it without thinking instead of communicating and figuring out what their partners want.
I think you're really onto something here. So many people take a manipulative attitude toward interacting with others. They think they have to come up with a secret recipe for how to act and then follow that program and if it doesn't work they have to go back, change the program, and start again. Why are people afraid of communicating and negotiating their actions as they're happening? I think it may be because many people have been abused/bullied in a way that makes them feel like they have to remain closed or they will be dominated. It's sad because they can end up dominating others by remaining so closed.

[nycindie]

. . . treating people the way you'd want to be treated would mean treating everyone the same . . .

Um, no. It doesn't. It's rather silly to think that it does.

[Tonberry]

Um, no. It doesn't. It's rather silly to think that it does.

Why? I don't get what's silly about it. If I want people to make chocolate cake for me, I make chocolate cake for everyone. If I want people to hug me, I hug everyone. If I want people not to share naked pictures of me, I share naked pictures of nobody. I'm a single person, if I need to treat everyone the way I want to be treated, well there is only one way I want to be treated.
That's why I think it should be dependent on the other person and not on yourself.

[nycindie]

No, it means, if I want to feel respected and heard, and for my wishes to be considered, I respect and listen to others and consider their wishes. It doesn't mean I treat everyone the same because everyone is different but if I tune into them and listen to them, treating them the way I want to be treated, then I relate accordingly.

It is adjustable to the people I'm relating to. It doesn't necessarily have to do with specific tasks. Let's say, for example, someone wants me to do something sexually that for me would feel degrading. I'm not into degradation or humiliation at all. So, if I did it, I would be giving them what they want, but it would be something I couldn't bear to have done to me. However, if I listen and respect them, in the way I want to be listened to and respected, and saw that this fulfilled them in a way that something else would fulfill me, I might be comfortable with that. I would consider their wishes just as I would want my wishes considered. I wouldn't have to go along with it or do it if I was totally against it or it made me uncomfortable, but I would communicate honestly with that person, just as I would want honest communication. THAT is treating someone the way I want to be treated.

[Tonberry]

I understand your explanation, but it seems to me, you're treating them the way THEY want to be treated, not you. Unless the only thing that sentence means is "respect people, don't be a jerk", but then just saying that is faster. Or "try to put yourself in people's shoes" but that goes with acting depending on what THEY would want, not you.

Although, "what want if I was in this situation" is still the wrong question to ask yourself. "What do they want, in this situation", is the right question, and the only way to know is ask them.

I understand the principle, but hearing that sentence over and over, I'm afraid it contributes to people's idea that people want the same things and work the same way. Like, someone thinks something isn't cheating, they do it, and to their partner it was cheating. If they didn't think of it in terms of what they'd want, or what they'd be fine with, and instead asked their partner to establish rules, they could avoid things like that.

I think you need to consider each new person like someone who requires a new manual. There really isn't much, if anything, that's the same from one person to the next. Every time you meet someone you need to relearn to interact socially, and they might be completely different from anyone else you've interacted with. So of course you start from a few things you learned from past experiences, but only to check how the new person works.
So I think a sentence like that, focused on yourself rather than other people, can just ingrain that message even more. People aren't consciously deciding not to talk to their spouse about what's okay or not. They just don't imagine people might not all have the same boundaries. And really, I have yet to have two partners who had the same ones.

If "treat others the way you'd want to be treated" is supposed to be code for "respect people and communicate", I'd rather say "respect people and communicate". Otherwise, it seems either too vague to really mean anything, or specific and literal but completely untrue.

[Minxxa]

It's looking more and more to me like we all agree on the concept, but the phrase "treat others like you wish to be treated" is being interpreted differently by everybody.

Some of us are seeing that as "if you would like massages, then you should offer massages to others". Which in my case doesn't work because hubs doesn't like massages, but I do. So he won't accept my massages and to get one I need to ask.

And some of us are seeing it as a broader sense of treat others with respect and honesty like you wish to be treated. Which I'm thinking we all agree with.


So instead of arguing semantics of a phrase that can be interpreted either way, how about we talk about what we seem to be agreeing on:

Act in good faith, with good intentions, honesty, respect and love, in order to receive same back. Communicate with your partner(s) about what they want and need, so that you know how to treat them specifically in the manner they wish to be treated, even though that may be completely opposite of how you wish to be treated. (And respect the differences.)

[nycindie]

If "treat others the way you'd want to be treated" is supposed to be code for "respect people and communicate", I'd rather say "respect people and communicate". Otherwise, it seems either too vague to really mean anything, or specific and literal but completely untrue.
Well, it's more than just that, really.
It's looking more and more to me like we all agree on the concept, but the phrase "treat others like you wish to be treated" is being interpreted differently by everybody.

Some of us are seeing that as "if you would like massages, then you should offer massages to others". Which in my case doesn't work because hubs doesn't like massages, but I do. So he won't accept my massages and to get one I need to ask.

And some of us are seeing it as a broader sense of treat others with respect and honesty like you wish to be treated. Which I'm thinking we all agree with.

So instead of arguing semantics of a phrase that can be interpreted either way, how about we talk about what we seem to be agreeing on:

Act in good faith, with good intentions, honesty, respect and love, in order to receive same back. Communicate with your partner(s) about what they want and need, so that you know how to treat them specifically in the manner they wish to be treated, even though that may be completely opposite of how you wish to be treated. (And respect the differences.)
Here is a nice little description of how the The Golden Rule works in life, written by a Humanist and relating it to empathy:

"Sometimes people argue that the Golden Rule is imperfect because it makes the assumption that everyone has the same tastes and opinions and wants to be treated the same in every situation. But the Golden Rule is a general moral principle, not a hard and fast rule to be applied to every detail of life. Treating other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves does not mean making the assumption that others feel exactly as we do about everything. The treatment we all want is recognition that we are individuals, each with our own opinions and feelings and for these opinions and feelings to be afforded respect and consideration. The Golden Rule is not an injunction to impose one’s will on someone else!

Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect – qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from. And although it isn’t possible to know what it really feels like to be a different person or live in different circumstances and have different life experiences, it isn’t difficult for most of us to imagine what would cause us suffering and to try to avoid causing suffering to others. For this reason many people find the Golden Rule’s corollary – “do not treat people in a way you would not wish to be treated yourself” – more pragmatic.

The Golden Rule cannot be claimed for any one philosophy or religion; indeed, the successful evolution of communities has depended on its use as a standard through which conflict can be resolved. Throughout the ages, many individual thinkers and spiritual traditions have promoted one or other version of it. Here are some examples of the different ways it has been expressed:

Do not to your neighbour what you would take ill from him. (Pittacus, 650 BCE)
Do not unto another that you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this law alone. It is the foundation of all the rest. (Confucius, 500 BCE)
Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing. (Thales, 464 BCE)
What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them. (Sextus the Pythagorean, 406 BCE)
We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them act toward us. (Aristotle, 384 BCE)
Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for another’s welfare as your own. (Aristippus of Cyrene, 365 BCE)
Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you. ( Isocrates, 338 BCE)
This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you. (From the Mahabharata (5:1517), 300 BCE)
What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow men. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. ( Rabbi Hillel 50 BCE)
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (From the Bible, Leviticus 19:18 1440 BCE)
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them. (Jesus of Nazareth, circa 30 CE)"

The above is from http://www.thinkhumanism.com/the-golden-rule.html

[redpepper]

thank you NYCindie, I was waiting for someone to use the word "empathy"... I would add "compassion" and "consideration" to that... Mono likes to use "extended consideration" when it comes to poly dynamics as metamour love is sometimes the make or break of a dynamic...

To me, "empathy" is a bit different than doing "unto others as you would have them do unto you." It revolves around thinking how you would feel in the situation rather than doing what YOU would like or do in the situation. It takes the "I" "me" and "self" out of it for me and looks at it from "they" "we" and "us" instead. This to me is what builds strong community, strengthens communication, builds trust and quite frankly is what I think will be the only way to end wars, create peace and save our planet... :) just saying.

[Minxxa]

I liked that humanistic version NYCINDIE... thanks. :)

I agree empathy is totally important. But I'm realizing that different people have differing abilities to be empathetic. My hubs is not empathetic. At all. He can listen to what I say, and see how I'm feeling, but he doesn't "get" why, doesn't really understand, and cannot put himself in my position. I spent 10 years not understanding that. So for him, it's important for him to communicate with me and for me to lay it down exactly what's going on and what I need. I don't (can't) expect him to understand me, or know how I feel. But I can expect him to respect that I do feel that way, and for us to do things to correct whatever situation's going on.

If you take the I and me out of it, then you risk treating someone in a specific manner because that to you is respectful and empathetic and helpful, and having that be NOT what they want or need. Maybe that's just my specific experience in life (very possible), but what I want and need is not anything like what hubs wants and needs, and until we sat down and talked and communicated that we didn't know. We both thought we were treating the other one well-- and it was OUR definition of well, not the other person's-- and so we both felt not taken care of and misunderstood a lot of the time. Very frustrating experience.

What I learned from that was not to treat hubs like I would want... but to ask him what he would like in any given situation. I learned not to expect him to "understand" my feelings, but to listen and to work with me (if needed-- sometimes it's all me I just need him to hear it).

I'm really empathetic so it took me... um... 43 years to figure out not everybody is! Hubs and I had an argument (minor) the other night because he doesn't think it is possible to really "understand' someone's feelings unless you've experienced the very exact same thing. :-/ I had to explain to him that I got it that HE can't do that, but many people can. Just because he doesn't experience it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But he really really doesn't understand that ability at all. Even his GF agreed with him that he doesn't have empathy. What he does have is the ability to accept people for who they are, listen to what they're saying, and to adjust to what they need. But you have to tell him straight up what that is.

[serialmonogamist]

Hubs and I had an argument (minor) the other night because he doesn't think it is possible to really "understand' someone's feelings unless you've experienced the very exact same thing. :-/ I had to explain to him that I got it that HE can't do that, but many people can. Just because he doesn't experience it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But he really really doesn't understand that ability at all. Even his GF agreed with him that he doesn't have empathy. What he does have is the ability to accept people for who they are, listen to what they're saying, and to adjust to what they need. But you have to tell him straight up what that is.

People learn to block various kinds of empathy for different reasons. The kinds of empathy that your hubs blocks may be something whose emotional effects you have learned to manage but he hasn't. Likewise, he may be able to empathize with some other kind of experience that you would resist. Personally, I have found that some women have trouble empathizing with the fatherly feelings of male authority figures. I think this is because they have devoted so much energy to liberating themselves from the feelings of oppression they get from dealing with such men that they develop a resistance to understanding such men's positions and what they're feeling when they are pursuing paternalistic goals. The same woman could easily identify with a mother's struggle with her children or with a partner but when it comes to understanding/empathizing with a paternalistic man, she'll shoot into opposition or just glaze over. Please note, I am not generalizing but just talking about something I've noticed in a few people.

[Dirtclustit]

and not too many things bother me more than others sharing about my private life with others. But in the situation of shared lovers I don't consider it a problem unless of course the other lover fails to keep that private information to their self. I strongly believe in full disclosure, without details, mostly because I have only met a few people that know what they're talking about when it comes to sexually transmitted diseases. If a girl friend of mine had vaginal sex with a condom, but let him penetrate her ass without one that is definitely something I want disclosed as keeping such info from another sexual partner is flat out irresponsible.

And only because there are some people who are ignorant enough or do not fully comprehend the concept of honesty, might get confused and after intercourse with a man that involved wearing a condom for vaginal penetration but no condom for anal and describe such an interaction as "safe sex" I need to know where the penetration was if any and whether or not there was a latex barrier at all times. I don't care if their partner was the worst or best lover they had ever had, but to me their is a difference between intercourse where a condom is worn at all times and sex where insertion and the first thrusts (ie: the latter should be stated as sex with a condom, however the sex didn't start with one )

I realize that everybody tells white lies or stretches the truth here and there, but when it comes to sex and people and care about everything regarding risks of contracting a disease is black and white for me. Full disclosure and definitions of exactly what constitutes safe sex is doctrine to me. People who do not share my views I have no time for in my life.

I know it sounds stupid, but I have been dumbfounded by people's idea of full disclosure and I as a result of having too large discrepancies in too many important words (such as "safe sex") I am no longer friends with those people, but I do not talk smack about them

I am very private but very understanding of the fact that people have some pretty freaky kinks, to the point where I don't mind sharing details about my life when I know that said details are not going to go any further nor will they be mentioned even anonymously because you'd be surprised how identifiable details are even when anonymous. They are esp identifiable to parties who participated, which evidently is a hard concept to understand for some third parties who were not present.

I realize that some people may not share my views and I have absolutely no rightful place in telling anybody what they can or can't do. I also realize I cannot hold other people responsible for my views on what constitutes sexual health and I cannot hold people responsible when they are not completely honest, esp when I am not the one engaging in sex acts but rather our link is just a person in common. However I do expect my partners to be not be naive and I do not take kindly to people who put me at risk. I have absolutely no respect for anyone that knowingly puts others at risk and does not disclose that they did so. Again I would never talk smack about such a person but actions like those are sure fire ways to immediately lose my respect.

Trust with me is huge, but at the same time so is being respectful of privacy. My views in regards to distinguishing right from wrong in matters of trust and privacy are for the most part set in stone. They are part of my core values and don't really offer any situational leeway or gray areas which for me means most if not all matters are either black or white.

[Anneintherain]

This has been an interesting read...I'm sure I read it last year - but since it got bumped I'm going to respond.

If a metamour is not my friend, I might not want to share with them things I would share with my friends. I DO talk about sex with my closest friends sometimes, but don't tell partner A what is going on with partner B or vice versa since I have not asked if they mind. I am curious about stuff that goes on with my lover's partners but unless I have been told otherwise it is NONE OF MY BUSINESS. It may be a shared partner, but that doesn't mean I'm in some hive mind. I don't expect what happens in the bedroom must be public domain just because everyone spends time with the same penis. I don't see a difference in a partner giving their other partners a play by play of our last date and them posting it on a forum frankly, neither is fine with me unless I've said it is.

If a metamour is not my friend, I don't imagine they want me privy to what they do when naked, unless they are doing it where I can see. I can only imagine the response I'd get if I started asking my bf for details of his sex life with his wife after she made it clear she thinks I'm a fine person but doesn't want anything to do with me... If somebody I date (including my husband Adam) starts sharing stuff with me that involves a third party, I do check in to make sure the other party is OK with it, and has been informed that it's going to be shared knowledge.

I am not ashamed of sex, but that just means I'm fine with metamours knowing I like sex, or I am noisy and worry the cops will get called on me some day - things that give a big picture idea of who I am as a lover for their partner, but not the details. It doesn't mean I want them to know that last night we did ________ or that I worked up my courage to ask their boyfriend or husband to do ______ to me and I loved/hated it. (Exception - if I brought up a subject that was new or had to be negotiated with a metamour - sex at an event, group sex, whatever - then I would expect it would be discussed.)

I know there are differences between people, I've had metamours that would not want me to know a damn thing about their sex lives, and ones who are turned on by the idea of their sex life being discussed with me and hopefully becoming wank fodder - but unless the other person tells me which one is its, I still file it under NOMB. I do not see how it benefits my life to know things that somebody else wants to keep private as long as it does not break any agreements I have with whichever partner, but I do see how it hurts somebody if I insist on having a right to know things that somebody else doesn't want me to know.

I think a lot of the people piping up for "of course you should be able to share" mean to share sexual successes and joys, but that can be conveyed with "I had a great time last night" and a big grin. I am ALL for sharing if all parties agree, but not sharing is not dishonest. If I get a bruise from one partner and another says "what happened?" I will say if it's from whatever general thing it was from, sex, elbows, biting, cats landing from space - but that doesn't mean it's secretive or shameful if somebody doesn't want me to know they have the most amazing orgasm if they get their nipples stimulated just like this, or that the last 20 times in a row they've done it in the missionary position cause it's easier on their low back... Really, different people do have different comfort levels, and I think that all parties involved should get a say in how information is shared in multi partner dynamics.

[Fiona]

Pretty much just nodding along in agreement with Anneintherain. My husband and I (and my partner and I) discuss safer sex practices and that sort of thing, but I don't want or need details of their sexual encounters.

[jones]

My bf, his gf and I recently got together for a "family meeting". There were some issues we were all having and we wanted to sit down and talk them out, and hopefully come up with some solutions/clear the air.

It went really well, but there was a particular problem that came up and I wanted to find out if any of you have had similar problems and how you dealt with them.

My bf's gf is a very private person and new to polyamory. She said that it made her feel unsafe and insecure to have my bf and I discuss his sex life with her when we were alone together. She said it made her feel excluded and she wanted to keep their sex life private.

To me, being able to ask my bf about his sex practices with other partners is essential to my feelings of security and safety. Also, I enjoy hearing about new and exciting things he is doing sexually. I was triggered by the thought of not being able to find out what I need to feel secure, and had a lot of trouble communicating that to her.

In the end, we worked out an agreement that if they did anything new in bed, that either he would ask her permission before telling me, or that she would tell me herself. Also, I would work on asking her directly about what they were doing (which made me uncomfortable, but I promised I would try.

Have any of you had issues with full disclosure? How did you deal with that?

I would say although I understand finding your partner's sex life exciting, I know I found it exciting with G's lovers however I will give my life atm, I am seeing A, we have sex most of the times but we also go out on dates etc I always tell G that we have had sex and he doesn't ask what we do, I don't explore anything than the norm with A where as me and G do but if I did explore something different or wanted to like fluid bonding or anal I would talk to him so I am saying if she wants to keep what she does with him private then I would respect that.

[Witch]

I like how this thread went from talking about sexual privacy to whole theories on sexual shame versus sexual privacy.

I hate it when my husband shouts out to his friend while we are all in the apartment "I DID THIS WITH MY WIFE"

His friends' girlfriend and I look at each other.. like ....."Omg... DId he really just go there."

I'm not ashamed about the sexual practices I do with my husband(the sexual practice in question in fact is something our couple friends do too.)

However, its more intimate when its kept private I think. I like it that way. Its something "we" share and not any one else. Now say my husband has another partner and they practice the EXACT SAME SEXUAL PRACTICES, if either my husband or his lover don't want me to know, then thats their business.

Its like the whole argument about anti gay groups going EWW WHAT YOUDO IN BED IS GROSS. You can't say thats sexual shame, thats straight(mostly religious people) acting like five year olds. Thats what makes my husband straight, the idea of having sex with a man completely does the opposite of arousing him. No shame in that, just not for him. So you can't link a need for sexual privacy with sexual shame 100% of the time.

I don't think the GF in question doesn't want you to know because she is ashamed with what she does, but because honestly... when it comes down to it. Its none of your business, if they choose to make it your business then okay, it becomes your business. I believe you have certain rights as a human being and having sexual privacy is one of them. The only thing I think multiple partners have a right to know about sexual matters with other parties is if it directly affects them, such as with safer sex. Do you use condoms or not? And thats about it.

The GF has a total right to her privacy.

Here's another analogy. A long time ago when we had our first roommate. The room mate did not have a computer and asked to use my husbands in the time being to help look for a job. He was fine with it, until he was leaving the house. He honestly didn't want her using it while he wasn't around. He wouldn't give her the password so she could get into it whenever she wanted. The same roommate also used my lotions, shampoo, and body wash when I didn't know. Said certain items were things I used VERYLITTLE, cause they were SPECIAL items I bought to pamper myself with, they weren't my normal shampoo and body washing items. However she seemed to have this thought, that because we were roommates, she should be allowed to use whatever was in the house WHENEVER, cause she would let us do the same with her stuff.

Can you see where thats wrong? My stuff is MY STUFF. No it doesn't hurt it much if you use it, but its STILL MY STUFF. Just because YOU have a way of thinking about the usage of it doesn't mean I have to be the same way. It's my stuff... It's my thoughts..

Its my... SEXUAL PRIVACY... NOT YOURS... The End.



PS: Said roommate lasted less than a year because of said problems... I think the same thing could reign true for your relationship if you're not more considerate of her needs as well.