The sexual element

GroundedSpirit

New member
We'd like to get a thread going with respondents from both genders. So guys, please don't overwhelm this!

Ladies, we NEED your input and thoughts on this desperately.

Humans are sexual creatures. Despite how anyone would want to try to paint it, the sexual component of polyamory is an important part of the desire to embrace the lifestyle. It is NOT the only one, but an important one, and one where most of the pitfalls lie.

It seems to be a fact (yes, exceptions always exist) that the sexual needs and desires of males are very different from females. Herein lies the root of most of the "complications" of alternative lifestyles, as well as the vast majority of more conventional relationships.

Here we'd like to make a statement of observation based on MANY years of close observation, intimate relationships, conversations, etc.

In a relationship, the primary needs of each gender are:
Males-- Sex first, emotional needs secondary
Females-- Emotional needs first, sexual needs secondary


Again, note the disclaimer of acknowledging exceptions to any rule.

So, if, as a species, we agree to the accuracy of these trends/observations, should we not ask this question? What can/should be done about the obvious conflict?

We'd like to start the conversation by offering a possible starting suggestion for both genders.

Males:
Be attuned to the ladies' emotional needs. Voice explicitly to them that you DO acknowledge them, and try to learn better how to meet those needs. Discuss it frequently.

Females:
Try to dispose of societal programming about your gender. Embrace the natural sexuality you were gifted with at birth. The term "slut" can well be, and should be, a term of endearment. A true orgasm (or a few) can be a huge boost to both your physical and emotional health.

Okay, so let's hear it from you all!

C & K
 
This is a question that goes way beyond "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus." There is an entire academic field devoted to asking that very question. It is a complex one, indeed.

But what you seem to be addressing in your suggestions doesn't address emotional vs. sexual needs. It seems to be addressing society's sexual repression of women. Those are two very different subjects.

So here's my Cliff's Notes version of the larger question and what it entails.

1. Recognize the difference between gender and sex.
2. Agree on what constructs gender and sex.
3. Recognize societal programming in both genders, what their causes are and what purpose that programming has served. (I notice that you ask females to dispose of societal programming, but not males.)
4. Recognize the biological programming of both genders.
5. Learn and understand the complex relationship between societal and biological programming.
6. Educate people on all of it.

There's a lot of good reading out there on this subject from many feminist academics and authors. Judith Butler's "Gender Trouble" addresses this with the idea of "performativity," which applies to feminist and queer theory. It also probably applies to polyamory, as much of how we conduct our romances in life is performative. That is, they fill a constructed role in our society.

Another really good read is "Evolution's Rainbow: diversity, gender and sexuality in nature and people" by Joan Roughgarden.
 
Last edited:
Excellent points

Thanks C,

I really appreciated the thoughtful post.

I agree that it was less than complete by leaving out the need for male realignment. But the choice was somewhat intentional at first, based on a concern of scale. The omission of genetic predisposition was absolutely intentionally omitted. I don't want to or dare to touch THAT one! The jury is very much still out on how rigid the genetic controls are and there's much active research underway that's strongly pointing to the fact that we have far more control over even that then was originally suspected.

Anyway, lest this turn into a scientific thread <smile> we'd like to keep the focus on soliciting input from the female population regarding their perspective on their choice (intentional or otherwise) to suppress or ignore their special sexual potential.

As another "seed" observation, we've note a 10-fold increase in bisexuality among males in the last few years. I do not see this as a "bad" thing, necessarily, but only as a lagging indicator of how relationships are evolving, the primary difference being the sexual choices with the males seem to be driven out of frustration, rather than thought-out choices. We think it would not be a step "forward," were we to evolve to a point of a primarily gay and lesbian society, because of the inability to openly discuss and work together on these differences.

Comments from everyone?
 
Ben speaking here:

I have been told by several women that I "make love like a woman." The first time I heard this, I thought I was being mocked. She had to explain it as a compliment.

As a man, I have greater need for the emotional component than the sexual. I just ended a year-and-a-half relationship with a woman where we never had sex. We slept together. We were intimate on occasion. But we never had sex. It was all me, in fact. She was actually begging me at times. But I didn't feel the emotional connection that *I* needed to "go there" with her. As it turned out, she was lying, cheating, stealing and leading me on. So, as I look back, I'm glad that I held back.

I'm not sure how I fit into the cookie-cutter on this one.
 
As another "seed" observation, we've note a 10-fold increase in bisexuality among males in the last few years. I don't this as a "bad" thing, necessarily, but only as a lagging indicator of how relationships are evolving, the primary difference being, the sexual choices with the males seem to be driven out of frustration, rather than thought-out choices.

Can you explain this bit? I'm not quite understanding what you're getting at here. I don't see the connection between the conclusion you draw (men's sexual choices being out of frustration) and the indicator you're talking about (increase in male bisexuality).
 
Can you explain this bit? I'm not quite understanding what you're getting at here. I don't see the connection between the conclusion you draw (men's sexual choices being out of frustration) and the indicator you're talking about (increase in male bisexuality).

It almost seems to me that he is indicating that because men can't get woman to have sex with, they are turning to bisexuality. They are frustrated with trying to get laid by women, so they are turning to their similarly-frustrated buddies. I could be way off, though.
 
Well, Mono, if that's what they're thinking, that's a mighty big leap to be making. I'd need to hear a lot more justification for such conclusions.
 
I'd have a hard time buying into that. It sounds like it would be based on very localized personal experiences. I would think social acceptance would be the main reason for more men to be openly bisexual, and that would greatly impact the stats.
 
Continued (hopefully)

Hello Everyone,

I am just getting used to this forum posting, so hoping this post lands in a proper place. Only way we could figure out how to do it.

Mono has tagged it dead on, i.e., that the general consensus seems to be that large numbers of males are "coming out," if you will, and are embracing or experimenting with their bisexual side solely from lack of available females to attempt any alternative form of relationship other than full 100% monogamous commitment, classic marriage, in some form, at least.

But Ceoli, it's really not a terribly big leap, although we can't be totally sure it's not more of a States issue than a global one. You, having maybe more of a global exposure, may have a different perspective. We could certainly take you on a "tour" of numerous meeting sites here in the US where you could experience this yourself. It's quite astounding, compared to 10 or even 5 years ago.
 
Mono has tagged it dead on - i.e that the general consensus seems to be that large numbers of males are "coming out" if you would, and either embracing or experimenting with their bisexual side solely from lack of available females to attempt any alternative form of relationship other than full 100% monogamous commitment. Classic marriage in some form at least.

General consensus from where? What evidence are you basing this conclusion on?
 
I'd have a hard time buying into that. Sounds like it would be based on very localized personal experiences. I would think social acceptance would be the main reason for more men to be openly bisexual and that would greatly impact the stats.

ITA. Thank the goddess many are letting go of the social stigma associated with being a gay or bi male.

I'd like to add my input. I am a highly sexual female. I ID as queer, and though I appear femme in many ways, I do have "male" qualities. I am assertive, open, energetic and often dress in men's t-shirts, jeans and chucks. I never wear high heels. But I do get a kick out of dressing up boho/girly as well.

But, my libido! OMG. Once peri-menopause got underway 10 yrs ago, and my kids were all finally sleeping thru the night, I became MUCH more interested in sex, and went from multi-orgasmic (like 3 or 4 Os) to being able cum almost unlimitedly for an hour or much more.

I've been with my current primary partner for only 10 mos. I still feel NRE for her, but hers seems to have faded somewhat (although she denies this, and it could be related to job loss depression). One of the things I miss about the earlier months was when I'd walk thru the door after not seeing her for a couple days, and we'd immediately kiss and run to bed.

In speaking of men and women, I'd like to add my partner is a MtoF transgendered woman. So the gender binary doesn't really relate to us. We both share aspects of both genders. Also, I'm a switch. I can top or bottom.
 
I would also like to see some stats, please.

I think humans are humans and that it has just become more socially acceptable to be into both men and women. End of story. It's a great time to be fucking!! :D Even 15 years ago, when I came out as a lesbian, I was shunned and ostracized. It's hard to believe now as things have become far more fluid and open. Yup, we are so lucky now. As a highly sexual woman, I am damn glad to be living in North America and in this time in history. Bring on the fucking!
 
I'd have a hard time buying into that. Sounds like it would be based on very localized personal experiences. I would think social acceptance would be the main reason for more men to be openly bisexual and that would greatly impact the stats.

I tend to agree with this. My bf is bi and its certainly not because we don't have enough sex. He is primarily sexual with women, but he still enjoys being with a guy occasionally. And it's very sensual when he is with a guy. It's not just quick sex and that's it.
 
Supporting data/experience

Ceoli,

Being a member of a variety "meeting" sites, both conventional and alternative lifestyle areas, as well as spending time on those and other live chat networks, we can only absolutely assure you the surge is real. Currently I'd say we are approached between 50 - 100 times a week by bisexual or curious men that would like involvement with an open-minded couple.

Being the philosophical and research minded people we are, whenever possible, we take the time to have real in-depth conversations with as many of these people as time permits. The explanations and reasoning form a VERY obvious pattern.

We wonder why YOU are questioning this so intensely? Is it that shocking? Does it hold some deeper meaning for you?

Our only intent in broaching this topic was to try to raise the awareness level, particularly, in the female population, of the true repercussions of their attitudes and actions, to maybe foster a little self-analysis by asking the question: "Is this the society I would intentionally choose to foster and live in?"

Is this gap too large to bridge? Do we end up with a world where M/F sex (or any of the other various options, MMF, etc.) exists solely for reproductive purposes? What do we lose by not stretching ourselves a little to form those bonds and understand each other?

We wish we could see more activity on this topic.
 
Being members of a variety "meeting" sites - both conventional and alternative lifestyle areas, as well as spending time on those and other live chat networks, we can absolutely assure you the surge is real. I'd say we are approached between 50 - 100 times a week by bisexual or curious men that would like involvement with an open-minded couple. We take the time to have real in-depth conversations with as many of these people as time permits. The explanations and reasoning form a VERY obvious pattern.

Your pattern is still biased by a selective population of people. What you're practicing is something called confirmation bias. Instead of using a statistically-balanced sample, you're finding men from meeting sites, which already skews your sample. Then when you find men that are interested in meeting couples, you have further skewed your sample. Now it may be that more bisexual men who are bisexual for the reasons you state have better access, but that gives no information about the population as a whole.

To put it another way: I like apple pie. I join a site that is about apple pie and I'm noticing more and more people are joining said apple pie site. Wow! That must mean there must be a surge of apple pie likers in the world, huh?

No, it means more people are joining an apple pie website. There is no other information one can really glean from that, because there are far too many factors that are unaccounted for. This is why anecdotal evidence *isn't* used to illustrate statistical trends.


We wonder why YOU are questioning this so intensely? Is it that shocking? Does it hold some deeper meaning for you?

Are these assumptions you're making? I am questioning it specifically because social science is something I'm very interested in, as well as gender studies and queer issues, particularly those issues around bisexual identity. (I identify as bisexual.) I see severe cracks in the reasoning upon which you're building this entire question. I also question it because I'm pretty sure most of the men of the bisexual community would be rather insulted by the assertions you're making. And when I see assumptions based on very little evidence that seem to promote destructive stereotypes (i.e., more and more bisexual men are bi because they must be sexually frustrated), you can bet I'm going to want some pretty clear conclusive evidence of it. You haven't been able to provide that.

Our only intent in broaching this topic was to try to raise the awareness level, particularly, in the female population, of the true repercussions of their attitudes and actions. To maybe foster a little self-analysis by asking the question: "Is this the society I would intentionally choose to foster and live in?"

Is this gap too large to bridge? Do we end up with a world where M/F sex (or any of the other various options, MMF, etc.) exists solely for reproductive purposes? What do we lose by not stretching ourselves a little to form those bonds and understand each other?

I think you'll find that there are far more aware people than you're assuming. You'll also find that there are a heck of a lot of people of all genders already doing such analyses. However, it seems to be if that analysis doesn't fit into how you think it should look, then there's no place for it in your conversation. If you are indeed philosophical and research-minded, I would suggest that before you reinvent the wheel here, you educate yourselves with some reading on gender studies, feminism and queer theory, where these are not new questions or conversations.
 
Okay, 'nuff said

Okay, Ceoli. This rant is starting to be a disservice to the readers. We're not going to get any other feedback if it continues, so, we'll give you your points on scientific validity (never the intention anyway) but ding you points on your "confirmation bias" theory. We are totally familiar with that and it's definitely not the case. But again, 'nuff said. I'd be happy to continue the debate/clarification in some other way, but feel it's unfair to the readers to continue it here. We believe our email is public here (?) so feel free, if it really means that much to you.

In the meantime, let's hear from others.

How many of you ladies have had serious, heartfelt discussions with your mono-minded friends and what, if anything, would it have taken to get them to really sit down and analyze their options and choices?
 
::shrug:: If looking for clarity of reasoning and factual support is doing a disservice to the readers, then so be it.
 
It's interesting. One of my most sexually-positive friends is really not receptive to the idea of polyamory. When I bring it up to her, she seems to get defensive and simply says that it won't work. O and I will break up. End of story.

Others who are not as sexually positive are more supportive and analyze the situation more objectively. I feel there must have been some sort of trigger in my other friend to make her react this way. However, most of my close friends would *never* even consider exploring this lifestyle. One, who is in a long-term relationship, said she is actually a bit jealous of me! She wishes she could do the same, or at least talk about it.

For myself, my libido has never been higher. I have gotten over the "wrong vs right" thing about sex, and I stay safe. I have a new appreciation for my body, and the male body. I am probably one of the few women who think penises are beautiful. I admire them, which I know is out of the box. Many people say this about women's bodies, but I think men are works of art too, and not just the muscular ones.

I think I just decided to say "fuck it" (ha pun intended), and embrace my sexuality post divorce, realizing that it is healthy, and that all that matters is that I and others are safe within my actions, both emotionally and physically.
 
I agree with Ceoli and RedPepper. I'd like to see some statistics, too. Clarity of reasoning and factual support would be very helpful in furthering this discussion.

Also, characterizing the discussion of your reasoning and the request for factual support as a "rant" isn't conducive to encouraging others to join the discussion.

Finally, perhaps you might want to spend a little more time reading existing posts here on this forum before you assume the ladies here are generally operating under the enculturation of repression so prevalent in Western society. If the common social motivators worked on us polyfolk, we would all be traditional monogamists; clearly, we are not. Because love and respect for all parties, including oneself, demonstrated through honesty, trust, compassion, and open communication lie at the heart of polyamory, I've found that many or most of the polyfolk here have either done the work to discover their own genuine needs and desires (including their sexuality) or are in the process of doing so. Thus, many observations which may apply to society in general do not apply to polyamorists. If I were to make a generalization about polyfolk, I would say that, in general, we have either shaken off the shackles of repression, are picking the locks now, or at least rattling the chains.
 
Last edited:
General consensus from where? What evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

The problem I have with it is that men who are involved in institutional homosexual relations or those getting sex "on the down low" with other men because they don't have willing female partners don't identify as bisexual--they identify as straight. That the only sexual outlet they had was homosexual doesn't change their basic orientation, and once they have female partners available they no longer engage in homosexual activity.

So, there'd have to be some seriously large studies performed that support the notion that men are identifying as bi simply because they don't have female partners available before I'd accept that premise as true. I'll wager the reason more men are identifying as bi has to do with increased acceptance of bisexuality.
 
Back
Top