Thread: London/Boston
View Single Post
  #6  
Old 08-21-2012, 10:06 PM
lovefromgirl's Avatar
lovefromgirl lovefromgirl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Great Soggy Northeast
Posts: 353
Default

Tuppence from the peanut gallery:

Quote:
Originally Posted by LondonGuy View Post
While in Boston I realised the BDSM scene out there is largely poly (perhaps as much as 60% of people there) which differs dramatically to the scene in London where roughly 20% would be polyamorous or in some other form of open relationship.
Loose correlation, not causation. Poly is not required for kink, nor is kink required from poly. This is one of my soapboxes -- I hate it when people conflate the two.

Quote:
I have never been interested in sharing true love around between multiple partners or allowing my partner to do the same. I like the connection I make with someone to be private, special, romantic, kinky and completely open and honest. I couldn't possibly be open and honest with multiple people while keeping a completely private and special bond with each of them. The two are at odds.

I would also really not want to share a partners affections or her intimacy with another man. I know I would get very jealous of the time she spent with him.
So... you're monogamous, or at least monogamish (someone on here uses that as part of hir screen name). There's nothing wrong with that.

Quote:
2) I like the intimacy that comes with sharing sex with someone you love (or at least someone you feel you are falling in love with). Love and lust are for me very much connected

3) I like the security of knowing you are going to get damn good sex... You know how to please them and they know how to please you
That's not a poly/mono thing, that's a human thing. I'm poly and I think of sex that way, too.

Quote:
4) Sex is just more relaxed and more fun when it is familiar, I want the girl I am with to be my best friend, my love, my girlfriend, my trophy, my submissive, my play partner and my slut. All mine, all in one girl.
Whereas a lot of that would be a show-stopper for my polyamorous, sexually vanilla ass. (I could do the pro-domme thing with some training, but not as a sexual bond with anyone else. It's more a "Come and get your mindfuck" thing.) Mostly it's the "my" word that has always put me off. As soon as they started insisting I belonged exclusively to them, I had to get out of the relationship. I will happily be a best friend, a love, a girlfriend, and even a trophy, but as a free agent.

Quote:
I did once consider such an arrangement precisely because the 2 girls involved brought different things to the table. My ex partner tricked me into getting her pregnant and turned out to be an awful mother, her best mate however was a fantastic mum and a very good influence. I would have been happy entering into a triad there. We played as a threesome once and it only ever went as far as heavy foreplay but I think mechanically we could have worked better as a triad than we did as a couple (not that I believe it would have lasted forever even in that format).
It's one thing to collaborate for non-romantic purposes, like childrearing. I'd need co-parents if I ever parented, and I do mean the plural. I'm seeing that as more akin to splitting rent with a close friend, though.

...so, your child. Are you at all involved in its life? Will it be visiting you in Boston? Is it fully-grown at this point or something?

Quote:
I also recognise that some of the fantasies I have cannot be fulfilled within a truly monogomous relationship. For instance I would really like to double (or even tripple) penetrate a girl. I can imagine being used in every hole at once would induce subspace in many a sub.
It's all ethical non-monogamy, but that umbrella term covers swinging, play, FWB, and polyamory. Your level of sexual involvement is not necessarily your level of emotional involvement, and that's okay!

Quote:
I would also very much like to be able to force a partner to be bisexual with women of my choosing. It's the act of forcing her to perform such an act which I find most appealing, due to the dominance and humiliation involved. With genuinely bisexual women it takes these aspects out of it.
This genuinely queer woman would probably slap you across the face if you tried, yes.

Quote:
So does all the above make me polyamorous? Or just an open minded monogomous individual?
At best, open-minded monogamous. I'm not seeing anything that would indicate you want more than extra play partners.

Quote:
I cannot make serious long term plans for my future with so many unknowns.
So you make that very clear, and anyone who can't handle it is out of the question. (Though if that were my boss making me wonder, I'd be upset. Big difference between "I could be in Boston next month" and "I could be in Boston in two years".)

Quote:
I would really like permission to continue flirting with this girl. I do not see either girl as being a threat to the other since I would not want a trans-Atlantic long distance relationship and will not choose where I live based on which girls are within each city.
The ethical part of ethical non-monogamy demands that they be allowed to decide whether they are comfortable with that. You cannot judge how each woman will feel about the other. You certainly cannot tell each woman how she feels.

Quote:
Is the fear of asking greater or the regret in not asking?
She has to know. If you want to keep this at all above-board, she has to know there's someone else. If you do not ask, and go ahead with having a girl in each port anyway, you are cheating on both of them. That's not poly by a long shot.
__________________
"I swear, if we live through this somebody's going to find their automatic shower preferences reprogrammed for ice water."

Refuge in Audacity { home of the post-raph stunner }
Reply With Quote