View Single Post
Old 05-08-2011, 03:40 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231

Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
When Vino and I were monogamous, it wasn't like that at all. It was a quid pro quo.
Emotional and sexual monogamy was what we offered each other in exchange for knowing we'd always have each other to love and rely on. We didn't hand over power to each other--we made a choice to control our own behavior, for our own benefit.
I see what you are saying Ivy but I feel you are trying to whitewash the facts. Don't take that personally, please. Not intended that way.
What you are saying is that you made an "agreement" (mutual) and that therefore that voids the power control clause.
But does it ?
In any "agreement" you have inserted the "IF" construct.
"IF" I do xxxxxx you agree to do (or not do) yyyyy. The implication here is that if I now fail to follow through - to in fact DO xxxxx - it's unwritten that you are entitled to now do/not do yyyyyyy. In a large majority of relationships this potential retribution is what starts things down the slippery slope. To say it is not a mechanism of power control really is stretching the truth. If you question that, I suggest you look around you more closely at any monogamous models you may have access to.
This all of course is subject to that 80/20 rule or whatever. COULD there be couples that could form the 'agreement' and allow it to expire on need with none of the power control/retribution drama ? Of course. There's an exception to every rule.

The alternative we explore is to not make that type of agreement in the first place. This removes that potential conflict from the equation to start with. It's one less potential wrench in the relationship spokes.
I don't "agree" to never love or have sex with anyone but you and don't expect you do differently. If in fact it turns out that one of us does by chance remain monogamous there's no foul. That person is happy, content and that's what the objective of the relationship is-right ?

Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
Love and desire can be controlled and suppressed, just like jealousy.
Desire.....maybe. Love ? Highly questionable. And not without (sometimes) significant pain. And as so many will vouch for, trying to shut off something natural can inflict some serious physical and emotional damage. Depression, anger, physical illness etc. Depends on the individual's internal strength.

Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
I think controlling my feelings for now is only fair to him. After all, he's the one getting the short end of the stick here--what benefit does he get out of me banging other men?
Fair is good. Empathy. Caring. Love.
To a point. The point that it becomes heavily unbalanced. That the damage to one in the quest to protect the other is torpedoing the health of the relationship anyway.

Because it IS entirely possible for him to benefit from you "banging" other men/women/whatever. We see it all the time ! If it is important to you, pleasurable, you become a happier, more fulfilled person. You carry that 'wellness' with you all the time. It affects everyone you come in contact with. And it's often just about as common that your own passion and sex drive increases, which also carries over to him. Third, there's often a hard to describe feeling of bonding that occurs between you, largely generated from your side. Your realization of what he is "giving" you by supporting your freedom of choice only raises your respect for him and often love.

So it all depends on the individuals...............

Reply With Quote