kinky, poly and trouble sharing

Yup. That's just my take on this topic.

To me, poly isn't suited for this unique type of relationship agreement. I offer this opinion because the OP seems to have some guilt about wanting her DD/lg relationship to remain the only one in an otherwise poly agreement and I very much understand why she would want to keep this exclusive. There's no need to take offense or broadly construe my motives as malevolent. It's merely my opinion and yes, I spend a considerable amount of time on Fetlife and have RL experience in this arena. It's my opinion, one of many offered in this discussion. Perhaps it is not helpful to those who find success incorporating multiple partners into this unique type of relationship that calls for extreme vulnerability, but perhaps it is helpful to the OP or to someone else who is reading along. It's just my opinion, not a decree.

Sorry but much of what you said here, and the other thread you spoke about this, was sweeping statements. Any one in a non monogamous relationship has some scope to request aspects of exclusivity without it violating the purpose of non monogamy. That's no different for this dynamic. However, you're speaking as if people in this dynamic have more scope to ask for this as it is a norm. That's the issue with your opinion. You are presenting it as fact.

I don't think it is reasonable for you to say that poly isn't suitable for this relationship arrangement about other people's relationships. You can say that you can't have more than one relationship with this dynamic and need your partners to do the same. But you're saying that it is fundamentally against the purpose of a CG/little relationship, and that that is offensive to me and likely others like me who are in multiple CG/little relationships.

You do know people say this about ALL kink relationships. That no kink dynamic is compatible with non monogamy as a proper Dominant or submissive dedicates themselves to their partner. Or at least, other relationships have to be vanilla for it to be okay. I see what you're saying as pretty much the same argument as that.
 
Back
Top