Couple-hunting in Unicornia

Yes, I do think it has something to do with a fierce desire to belong, esp. with the more 'family-minded' poly folks. I sort of resonate with what Deborah Anapol wrote about how single and newly-out polys feel they must first find their primary to start a family with before starting to add members. And how you can go around that with choosing a family/couple to join instead.

It is tempting, and yet oh so hard because the idea of chosen families is still so new and outside of the mainstream to many people. Like you said, there is this ceiling of 'this close is how you can get, this is what we are comfortable with right now' that seems to be in place for so many people.'

I sometimes think if it were better for single polys who are dating from that 'family/this is a lifestyle choice for me' place to find secure not-necessarily-romantic family arrangements first and then start reaching out romantically from a secure base/foundation of their own.
 
Girls girls girls

...are tough cookies to date, I tell you.

When is a coffee date a coffee date, and when is it really a DATE, or even better, a make-out date? The secret to successful lesbian dating, of course, is that you never know until it's too late! Wham, you are in a relationship and talking about moving in together before you have even made up your mind on if she likes you or not. The trick of course is never to tell each other what you think, and just let your expectations bloom out of nowhere and wreak havoc on your emotional status, without saying a word. In the world of dyke drama, nothing is easier than to start dating somebody who doesn't realize they are dating you, and vice versa.

Well, it's not all gloom and doom in Dykelandia, but when a girl says that the more she is pursued, especially by men, the less interested she becomes, does that mean a) pursue me hard, right now; b) don't show any interest in me whatsoever and I might come running to you; c) I'm not at all interested, so don't bother; d) I'm totally interested but just need my time? Option e) any combination of the above, is a very real possibility, too.

So as not to appear like a lesbian stalker, I have only responded to her messages, and it is definitely now her turn. I have no problem doing the pursuing, but don't want to make her feel like we went out on a date and now she needs to make up her mind either way.

And in the When does attraction start? -thread I've read how people might need a LONG time to make sure if they like someone that way or not. Not doing things my way (i.e. hopping in bed together and figuring it out from there) doesn't make them bad, dysfunctional people, just different.

So far my successes in the world of lesbian dating owe everything to meeting girls through guys I already know. Bona fide lesbians politely ignore me, so I'm left with the bisexual crowd. Not that I mind at all.
 
...are tough cookies to date, I tell you.

When is a coffee date a coffee date, and when is it really a DATE, or even better, a make-out date? The secret to successful lesbian dating, of course, is that you never know until it's too late! Wham, you are in a relationship and talking about moving in together before you have even made up your mind on if she likes you or not. The trick of course is never to tell each other what you think, and just let your expectations bloom out of nowhere and wreak havoc on your emotional status, without saying a word. In the world of dyke drama, nothing is easier than to start dating somebody who doesn't realize they are dating you, and vice versa.

Well, it's not all gloom and doom in Dykelandia, but when a girl says that the more she is pursued, especially by men, the less interested she becomes, does that mean a) pursue me hard, right now; b) don't show any interest in me whatsoever and I might come running to you; c) I'm not at all interested, so don't bother; d) I'm totally interested but just need my time? Option e) any combination of the above, is a very real possibility, too.

So as not to appear like a lesbian stalker, I have only responded to her messages, and it is definitely now her turn. I have no problem doing the pursuing, but don't want to make her feel like we went out on a date and now she needs to make up her mind either way.

And in the When does attraction start? -thread I've read how people might need a LONG time to make sure if they like someone that way or not. Not doing things my way (i.e. hopping in bed together and figuring it out from there) doesn't make them bad, dysfunctional people, just different.

So far my successes in the world of lesbian dating owe everything to meeting girls through guys I already know. Bona fide lesbians politely ignore me, so I'm left with the bisexual crowd. Not that I mind at all.

Id say it could be any of A-E, what I would base my decision on was the way she sounded when she said it & any body language I could discern at the time. or If I was really blind & Infatuated, Id just assume it meant "A" & take my chances.
 
Well, it's not all gloom and doom in Dykelandia, but when a girl says that the more she is pursued, especially by men, the less interested she becomes, does that mean a) pursue me hard, right now; b) don't show any interest in me whatsoever and I might come running to you; c) I'm not at all interested, so don't bother; d) I'm totally interested but just need my time? Option e) any combination of the above, is a very real possibility, too.

Okay, this made me giggle. ;)
 
or If I was really blind & Infatuated, Id just assume it meant "A" & take my chances.

Heartened by your post, I actually text-ed her and turns out she's been really busy but would love to hang out after school craziness is over!

After coming out to a circle of friends I've gotten to witness a lot of reactions, teary-eyed and really angry ones included. Astonishment is probably the common denominator between them. Also, an acquaintance recently confessed to a mutual friend that she finds me really scary :eek:. ME?!? The Church-going bunny lady? Who works with ID folks and loves children and everything which includes fluff? Granted, she thought that Christian women would at least not flaunt it if they fall somewhat short of the one man-one woman-for life ideal. Good luck she didn't tell it to my face - spared her from hearing a lecture on how 'one man-many women-until the hubs finds someone hotter' is really the Biblical ideal of marriage, and I am carrying my weight to return as from our single-standard-monogamy ways, adopted from the Pagans, to our Biblical Hebrew roots.

Anyways - I actually started to wonder how, approaching our mid-twenties, our circle of friends is starting to split into two. There are folks who have found their One and Only and are getting hitched, and then there are those of us who either have fairly recently ended things with their One and Only Turned Not So and are playing the field with no serious intent, or have a full-time squeeze but who balk at the M word. I wonder how well the two factions end up being able to relate. The one thing I don't want is to alienate my non-poly friends, but I fear some of them might want to distance themselves from me - after all, I could be after their boyfriends/hubbies for all they know!
 
By any other name

With poly, a lot of people seem to be a bit overworked by the whole definitions game. What to call myself. What to call our relationship. When is a relationship a relationship.

I'm all right with others getting in the game. What saddens me a little is the extra stress it causes my SOs when they try to figure whether to call me a girlfriend or whatnot. What if in a couple one wants to progress really fast and the other is just reeling with the idea of having A gf, not still quite processing having a SHARED gf?

I can be the girlfriend, the family friend, the significant other, what have you. It really makes no difference to me. But I do get that for some people, the language is the thinking. To be called a 'girlfriend' implies a whole different set of expectations and acknowledgements than a 'friend', no matter how dear, or a 'co-parent', and certainly a different set than a 'lover'.

Words have power, but only so much as we allow them. In NRE, some people want to tell the world about their new love, bring her to family functions and buy a massive house together. And others are more comfy with the 'keep it secret, keep it safe' policy - they delight in having something that is only meant for them, delight in having awesome secrets as it were. Like having discovered your own private beach, off the beaten path, which no one else seems to know about.

Which is all fine by me, but if the partners are not on the same page with this, stress and the definitions game ensues.
 
A person very near and dear to me expressed their disappointment over my chosen way of life. They said how they had always thought I shared their family values and high moral standards, which include respect for monogamy. I asked if they truly thought monogamy is the cornerstone of both family values and morality, and they said, to a large degree, yes.

I asked them if it was better then to cheat on one's partner on the sly. They asked back if I thought it was better to kill somebody with a gun or with a knife. I didn't get the comparison. Cheating is wrong; polyamory is consensual non-monogamy, and if everyone wants it, moreover seeks it out, I can't really understand how that could be a priori unethical. If someone who could be poly cheats it is not a failure of polyamory, not even necessarily of monogamy as a very valid and for some people totally workable life choice; it is failure of visibility, education and support for people to come to terms with who they are and to learn that there are options other than misery and mayhem for them (and no, I don't want to convert anyone, or think it is our duty to convert others to poly - I just think everyone who is able to be out should be, just like I think GLBT and other members of alt sex cultures should be as out as possible).

So the conversation ended with them saying 'I don't want to hear anything that is related to this sickness of yours. I am only able to tolerate you in my vicinity if I pretend that it doesn't exist'. Well, gee, if that is not a sure way to invite an ongoing poly-monologue from me I don't know what is. The only way to normalize this 'sickness' of mine, to show that people who are happy and sane can and do enjoy this, is to keep on talking about it.
 
A person very near and dear to me expressed their disappointment over my chosen way of life. They said how they had always thought I shared their family values and high moral standards, which include respect for monogamy. I asked if they truly thought monogamy is the cornerstone of both family values and morality, and they said, to a large degree, yes.

I asked them if it was better then to cheat on one's partner on the sly. They asked back if I thought it was better to kill somebody with a gun or with a knife. I didn't get the comparison. Cheating is wrong; polyamory is consensual non-monogamy, and if everyone wants it, moreover seeks it out, I can't really understand how that could be a priori unethical. If someone who could be poly cheats it is not a failure of polyamory, not even necessarily of monogamy as a very valid and for some people totally workable life choice; it is failure of visibility, education and support for people to come to terms with who they are and to learn that there are options other than misery and mayhem for them (and no, I don't want to convert anyone, or think it is our duty to convert others to poly - I just think everyone who is able to be out should be, just like I think GLBT and other members of alt sex cultures should be as out as possible).

So the conversation ended with them saying 'I don't want to hear anything that is related to this sickness of yours. I am only able to tolerate you in my vicinity if I pretend that it doesn't exist'. Well, gee, if that is not a sure way to invite an ongoing poly-monologue from me I don't know what is. The only way to normalize this 'sickness' of mine, to show that people who are happy and sane can and do enjoy this, is to keep on talking about it.

We have lost friends over it as well. that's cool though, they can live how they want & We will live how we want.
 
That's awful. I hope you can knock some sense into them. :( Don't let it get to you too much!
 
Sorry about your friend. I've lost a lot of friends over the years for many reasons-- but I finally at some point realized that they weren't really my friends. They were people that I was friendly with... until something silly came up and the "friendship" fell apart. Several years ago I was sick for a while and ended up being very hermity for a while. When I came back out of it, the lone surviving friends are the ones I've kept. And I only have a few of those. The rest I consider acquaintances whom I've shared some life experiences with. I appreciate them for that, but it's surface. And I've become okay with that because while I will sometimes share other parts of my life with people, I mostly don't bother unless they are one of my REAL friends-- the ones that know everything about me and still accept and support me and vice versa.

Then again, I'm old-er. :) And my personal life lesson was that it was better to have just a few GREAT, REAL friends, than a lot of "so called" friends who bring drama to your life.

But that's me. :) It is sad when people can't accept that their friends have different views of life. Especially the judgment that apparently you're no longer on the same "moral" standing. My guess is that you're a whole lot more honest with yourself and others than she is... interesting...
 
Our swinging days are over

Thank you for your kind words of encouragement! I'm not really that thrown off course, just surprised more than anything else.

A funny thing just happened. I had thought of how to communicate in as nice a way as possible to an on/off-fuck buddy that the sex really wasn't doing anything for me lately. We were not connected, as the saying goes, and it felt like going through the motions. I decided to give it a shot nevertheless, wondering that maybe I could take responsibility of my own good times and put in a little more effort. Well, they cancelled, because sex with people they are not partnered to just isn't doing anything for them anymore :D!

So once again, we have more evidence indicating that people who gravitate towards poly are not in it just so that they have a permission to fuck everything that moves, at least not in the long run.
 
Yeah... that's me too. The only people I end up attracted to are friends, or friends of friends and most often they are not available, so there you have it.

It used to bug me a bit, because hubs can meet someone and find something they have that attracts them and ignore all of the stuff that doesn't really and still have fun. But I think his fun comes more from being able to make someone really enjoy themselves-- not as much the other way around, you know? Not sure, but one thing I've learned is that he has his way of being and I have mine and they're both OK. I don't need to force him to be different and I don't need to be different. That part has taken a while to figure out, but it's kind of nice.

Frankly, If I'm not with someone I truly dig, I'd rather be reading a book or puttering around the house. :)
 
But I think his fun comes more from being able to make someone really enjoy themselves-- not as much the other way around, you know?

I have a clear gender preference in this, and have a theory as to why it is. With men, I have no problem with being a demanding sack of potatoes with her feet up in the air saying 'Come do me now'. A good friend once said that she really doesn't bother about male orgasms, because a) guys pretty much come anyway (not true, as I've later discovered, but I think I migh actually attract over-achiever males :D) and b) most of them seem to get their fun out of watching the girl have hers.

Whereas with girls, I'll bend over backwards and twice over to give them the best kicks they can have, and find myself sort of feeding from their good energies, so that I can be totally sexually satisfied with nobody having touched my genitals at all :eek:. This is probably part weird residual gender role programming and part testament to the fact that there are a lot fewer multiorgastic males than there are multiorgastic females, but anyways, there you have it.

Frankly, If I'm not with someone I truly dig, I'd rather be reading a book or puttering around the house. :)

I couldn't agree more! Good yoga/cleaning session totally beats bad sex every time. I recently bought scrubbing agent for the bathroom at the Sweets residence, and have been aching all over to get to vacuum at VanillaIce's place. A really good scrubbing session is a huge release for me, and now I won't write about this any more because I realize there are probably anonymous peer support groups for people like me and I should really seek one out :D.
 
LOL, I do love the cleaning too! :)

I think I just have never had much luck with having decent sex with a random hookup. The only time a "one night stand" was mind blowing was with my now-husband! :D
 
Amen to that. I've never even had sex and have decided that I don't want to just do it with anyone, I want to wait until it feels right and the feelings are really there. Yoga is the best! Not so much on the cleaning. That tends to feel more like torture for me. ;)
 
When is a triad not a triad?

Take a hypothetic world where you are involved with A and B. A and B are also a couple. Enter C. You and C are a couple. Now, A and C express interest in each other. Imagine that in this hypothetical world, A and C also become involved on a couplish basis. What do you call that, like honestly? A triad? A quad?

My objections to using a triad, in that there would be two parallel triads in this case, is that the participants in you-A-C don't view themselves as having one relationship you-A-C in addition to having three parallel relationships you-A, you-C and A-C. So the old adage of 'there is not one, nor three, but FOUR relationships in any triad' would not be applicable. So, whereas the relationship A-B-you is a triad, the new situation would just be you-C and A-C.

My objections to using a quad is that this is not really a case of two couples becoming involved with each other, but we have, from the point of view of A, a triad and a vee (A being the hinge of B and C); from the POV of C, two parallel, independent relationships with you and A; and from the POV of you in this hypothetical situation, a tangle.

I'm toying with the idea of calling it a diamond.

(And if you think that the 'hypothetical you' in this situation is actually me and this is a real-life situation I am actually having, then you just haven't played enough of 'what if' :D.)
 
I have to admit you have confused me.

oh wait.. hang on.. you aren't A? you've removed yourself from the lettering?...

Wow.. ok now I get it..

Two parallel V's or two parallel triads.. hell maybe a W.. or M.. or soemthing. At some point there is no simple labelling..

*runs to get coffee* ok.. shouldn't be trying to figure out relationship quadratic equations without caffeine.
 
Woot, how did you figure out I was talking about myself while I tried to be very theoretical to avoid suspicions that this might be based on my life :eek:!

No, seriously, Mr. Sweets and VanillaIce are planning to go on a 'date' next week (by date we mean replenish their energies with food prior to a night of physically demanding horizontal mambo). Mr. Sweets, Windflower and I are a triad. I have a couple-relation with Vanilla. Thinking ahead of myself as I'm wont to do, if the thing between Mr. and Vanilla evolves into something more, will it mean I am now involved in two triads (an hourglass figure from my relationship)? Or do triads by definition require hanging out in and out of bed in threes?

I am trying to quit caffeine :(.
 
Back
Top