Originally Posted by Atlantis
I realize this is directed at LR but..Prof and S have a peeing rule too, but that one is more suited to the BDSM thread.
And yes, Kevin, he broke the love rule, I haven't brought it up since: not to say I don't think about it.
I got into relationships with 2 people who started out with very firm ideas about restricting love and emotional attachment. It would seem that time and familiarity has led them to relax these rules as far as I am concerned, but this rule does not seem to be uncommon.
I hope you all are happy!~ ^_^
Originally Posted by london
I have personal limits, boundaries, as it were, but they mark the point whereby my needs aren't getting met and so I have to change things in my life. I.don't believe in attempting to control someone else in order for them to be who I need them to be. My partner(s) are free to do as they wish with the understanding that some of their decisions may affect the way we interact. It might affect it negatively. Being free to do as you wish doesn't negate the fact that I expect due warning when something has happened that will change the way we interact. My partner is free to go bareback with anyone he wants without asking, but if he did and then didn't tell me before we had barrier free sex, I would feel betrayed.
So yes, I do have open relationships without limitations. That's why I do this poly thing: it encompasses all the things that I think are fundamental to healthy relationships in a way that you are forced to practice if you want to consider the needs of everyone involved. You have to trust your partners and their partners when you don't limit how they can interact. You have to respect how people need to interact differently in order to form emotional attachments. You have to acknowledge the needs of your metamour if you want partners who focus on maintaining relationships and you don't want to enforce protocols that go some way to guarantee that they do. Putting down limits and boundaries to control the behaviour of others seems like an attractive way of protecting yourself, but really it just sets an undesirable foundation for polyamorous relationships. One that assumes the people involved are going to behave unethically.
Oh Nature!~ Wow!~ ^_^
I know we disagree on some things, but with this I 1000% agree with you!~ ^_^
Personally, I think of myself as a river dancing in the wind, I'm a free spirit, always moving, always dancing, always singing, always free, I am one with nature and any one who wants to be with me must accept that if they are ever going to be happy with me.~
Honesty, openess trust, peace, and love these things are important to me.~ I agree that things may not always be one way or the other, but that's not what I mean.~ I mean that these "ideals" are important and so I want complete honesty, openess, and trust between all of my lovers.~ I want everyone to get along and to love each other, I wouldn't be able to handle it if my lovers hated each other or didn't even want to be in the same room with each other.~
I want to experience everything even creating and raising children, but I don't see these things as "requiring" any kind of "permanence" as children themselves are not "unchanging creatures", every thing changes, everything moves, why would you try to fight that?~ How is that in any sense of the word "natural"?~ I just don't see or understand how so many "modern Humans" see and understand "raising children" especially when they've had limited "success".~
I have my own ways and my own thoughts of how to raise my children if I ever do create and/or raise them, but these ways are not set in stone, no quite the opposite, these ways change and move according to life, my ideals, and my children's thoughts.~ I may have my own ideals of how to raise my possible future children, but how that turns out is up to everyone involved especially my children.~