Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Fireplace

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-09-2012, 04:21 PM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Well, I hope the OP comes back to read the responses and clarify what it is they are looking for so we can get back onto the topic and answer questions for them.
Totally agree. I was guessing, and others too, each using our own filters and backgrounds. Would have been good to get some clarification, as I asked for in my initial answer. Various people come to poly with a lack of adequate vocabulary to express how they feel, or believe that there is only one way to do things. We shouldn't be too harsh on that, in my opinion.
__________________
Please check out The Birdcage - an open, friendly Polyamory forum for all parts of New York State
http://www.thebirdcage.org/

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-09-2012, 10:59 PM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 352
Default

This isn't what the OP was asking, but I was wondering if the label "play partner" has more positive connotations than "fuck buddy." (It sounds more sex-positive, anyway).

Poly people who are also kinky often talk about having kinky play partners as part of their relationship networks. (Not all poly kinky people, obviously, but some!) A high level of trust and intimacy is required with a kinky play partner, even if you never fall "in love" or never do anything together that isn't sexual.

For me personally (I'm not quite vanilla, but I'm not really kinky either), I had such a wonderful experience having a "fuck buddy"-type relationship in my mid-20s that I can't imagine denying anyone the freedom to seek out that sort of thing. I suppose we were more friends-with-benefits because we did very much like each other as friends, but in truth we didn't have much in common as friends. We didn't have any reason or desire to hang out as friends. I went to his plays, he read my writing, we occasionally got together for sex. We never developed romantic feelings for one another, even though we were involved for almost 4 years.

He's the only past partner of mine (sexual or romantic) whom I keep in touch with and think of fondly. He was a much more positive force in my life than other men who had "loving" relationships with me.

So that experience has certainly shaped my approach to relationships.
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-10-2012, 12:50 AM
JaneQSmythe JaneQSmythe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pennsyl-tucky
Posts: 1,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MeeraReed View Post
This isn't what the OP was asking, but I was wondering if the label "play partner" has more positive connotations than "fuck buddy." (It sounds more sex-positive, anyway).
I wouldn't mind if the term "play partner" took on a broader definition, but my impression is that it is generally used in terms of kink (and does not always involved sex per se)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MeeraReed View Post
For me personally (I'm not quite vanilla, but I'm not really kinky either), I had such a wonderful experience having a "fuck buddy"-type relationship in my mid-20s that I can't imagine denying anyone the freedom to seek out that sort of thing. I suppose we were more friends-with-benefits because we did very much like each other as friends, but in truth we didn't have much in common as friends. We didn't have any reason or desire to hang out as friends. I went to his plays, he read my writing, we occasionally got together for sex. We never developed romantic feelings for one another, even though we were involved for almost 4 years.

He's the only past partner of mine (sexual or romantic) whom I keep in touch with and think of fondly. ...
That mirrors pretty well my relationship with the guy I chose as my first kiss and later my first sexual experience at ("PianoBoy" in my "Journey" blog). We were friends in a limited context - involving piano and theater - and got together occasionally for, initially kissing and petting, and later sex - but otherwise moved in separate circles. Our "pseudo"-relationship lasted for 5-6 years.

He's the closest thing to an "ex" that I have, even though we were never "together" or "in love"...I still think of him fondly, and am grateful for him "playing gently" with me for all those years as I was establishing my own sexual identity and relationship style - I think my positive experiences with him were very influential in my own development as a sexually-liberated confident strong sexy-girl.

Every few years I look him up and see what he's up to. Just last week I took MrS and Dude to a show he was hosting at a bar in a city not too far from where we live (MrS knows all about him and has met him a few times before, thinks he is a cool guy; Dude knows all about him as my "first" and has seen some of his performances on the internet)and we chatted and got re-acquainted between sets.

PS. PianoBoy is now "Married-With-Children" (who'd have ever thunk?)yet still the free-spirited freak I knew in high school...I am happy for him and glad to have seen him again.
__________________
Me: poly bi female, in an "open-but-not-looking" Vee-plus with -
MrS: hetero polyflexible male, live-in husband (22+ yrs)
Dude: hetero poly male, live-in boyfriend (3+ yrs) and MrS's best friend
Lotus: poly bi female, "it's complicated" relationships with Dude/JaneQ/MrS (1+ years)
TT: poly male, married to Lotus, FB with JaneQ
VV and MsJ: bi-women with male primaries, LTR LDR FWBs to JaneQ


My poly blogs here:
The Journey of JaneQSmythe
The Notebook of JaneQSmythe
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-10-2012, 01:27 AM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

For me it's really important to differentiate between a relationship that is naturally a FWB-type of thing and one where there is an imposed rule (usually set by a different relationship) that it's not allowed to progress beyond it.
__________________
Please check out The Birdcage - an open, friendly Polyamory forum for all parts of New York State
http://www.thebirdcage.org/

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-10-2012, 02:34 AM
JaneQSmythe JaneQSmythe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pennsyl-tucky
Posts: 1,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
For me it's really important to differentiate between a relationship that is naturally a FWB-type of thing and one where there is an imposed rule (usually set by a different relationship) that it's not allowed to progress beyond it.
I'm not very good at rules (although I am very particular - in general, I like to know exactly what the rules are and the ramifications for breaking them before I make my decision)...and I don't respond well to other people telling me what to do.

I'm much better at "negotiated boundaries" (which allow for re-negotiation) or "current agreements" (which implies some degree of temporary-ness - even if "temporary" = 19 years, as with our original OPP). But feelings cannot be ruled for/against - only actions - so a "rule" of FWB-only doesn't really seem work-able. I can agree not to have sex with/spend time with/talk to someone, I can't agree not to have feelings for them.

I make "rules" for myself (i.e. personal boundaires) which involve how I relate to others. I tend to break those as well.. (which generally leads to some nice periods of introspection, and, at least in one case, a relationship 2 decades strong).

Semantics is fun, eh?

JaneQ
__________________
Me: poly bi female, in an "open-but-not-looking" Vee-plus with -
MrS: hetero polyflexible male, live-in husband (22+ yrs)
Dude: hetero poly male, live-in boyfriend (3+ yrs) and MrS's best friend
Lotus: poly bi female, "it's complicated" relationships with Dude/JaneQ/MrS (1+ years)
TT: poly male, married to Lotus, FB with JaneQ
VV and MsJ: bi-women with male primaries, LTR LDR FWBs to JaneQ


My poly blogs here:
The Journey of JaneQSmythe
The Notebook of JaneQSmythe
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-10-2012, 05:07 PM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Unlike some of the other debates and discussion on here which are most definitely about semantics, I think that this goes well beyond word-choice or meanings of words - I firmly believe that trying to put agreements in place which try to limit or somehow control how someone feels in their heart are counter-productive, repressive, and unrealistic.
__________________
Please check out The Birdcage - an open, friendly Polyamory forum for all parts of New York State
http://www.thebirdcage.org/

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-12-2012, 01:29 AM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
I firmly believe that trying to put agreements in place which try to limit or somehow control how someone feels in their heart are counter-productive, repressive, and unrealistic.
Yes, definitely. I can't find a positive way of viewing a situation where someone would say, "You can sleep with my spouse but you two can't develop feelings for each other." Seems unrealistic at the very least. Controlling & unhealthy at worst.

On the other hand, people who choose to be monogamous together are choosing to limit and/or control their feelings for other people, aren't they?
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-12-2012, 01:33 AM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe View Post

PS. PianoBoy is now "Married-With-Children" (who'd have ever thunk?)yet still the free-spirited freak I knew in high school...I am happy for him and glad to have seen him again.
Ha! My free-spirited dude also ended up Married With Children (the unlikeliest outcome I would ever have predicted for him). He fell deeply in love at age 45, to a woman also in her mid-40s...they had an unexpected pregnancy and decided to get married, settle down, and raise the baby (a boy). Their house even has a picket fence! I think he had to give up acting and get a real job.
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:17 AM
SearchingforMyself SearchingforMyself is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
Unlike some of the other debates and discussion on here which are most definitely about semantics, I think that this goes well beyond word-choice or meanings of words - I firmly believe that trying to put agreements in place which try to limit or somehow control how someone feels in their heart are counter-productive, repressive, and unrealistic.
I feel like this is the situation that I'm in right now. My metamour J has always held veto power in her relationship with JP. As far as I know, all of his previous relationships have been FWB at the most. In fact, I think that is what we were originally supposed to be - but it does seem to have become more. He has been involved with other women over the years but I'm the first one that he's "brought home" - J is very much a homebody and not social at all. I now spend most weekends at their home with them and J will happily spend time on her computer while JP and I watch tv together. We refer to ourselves as the wife (J, obviously) and the mistress (me) - while letting others such as family and J's co-workers draw their own conclusions. I feel that this is becoming more than FWB between JP and I but the only word I can think of to describe my feelings at the moment is "attached" which is just so vague. It's a bit confusing - to say the least... Hard to negotiate/renegotiate boundaries when I can't yet put my feelings into words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MeeraReed View Post
Yes, definitely. I can't find a positive way of viewing a situation where someone would say, "You can sleep with my spouse but you two can't develop feelings for each other."
Maybe someone who feels the need to say something like this has had an experience with a cowboy/cowgirl?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-13-2012, 02:03 PM
Anek's Avatar
Anek Anek is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 45
Default

My experience has been that regardless of how the relationship starts, it will evolve on its own.

CG and I started as FWB and seem to have remained at that stage, although I briefly started having more feelings for him which then fizzled out. His wife would like for us to be more closely connected, but it's not something we can coolly decide.

TKO started decidedly as FWB, actually as play-partners, and has evolved into a fully poly relationship including a great connection with his other girlfriend. Who would have thought?

I guess when you meet new people you can't say up front what type of relationship is going to happen. Unless it's "love at first sight" (in which btw I don't believe), any relationship will tend to start as friends, evolve into including sex and/or and evolve into including feelings maybe in reverse order.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boundaries, forum moderation, friends with benefits, play partners

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:44 AM.