recurring patriarchal problem

MeeraReed

Well-known member
I keep noticing a recurring problem among some guys (almost always straight & cis-gendered) who are coming to the forum because they are struggling with a polyamorous or non-monogamous female partner:

They cannot handle the slightest thought of their female partner doing something sexual with another guy. It is basically the end of the world as far as they are concerned. Like, complete meltdown territory.

Although these guys often at least try to be okay with their girlfriend having sex with other women, they refuse to examine the issues underlying their feelings about other men.

Now, I don't think that these guys should try to be non-monogamous/poly at all or that they need to accept their girlfriends being non-monogamous. (Usually, they should break up with their partner for incompatibility). BUT I do wish these guy would examine the patriarchal roots of their feelings.

Because, their feelings basically come down to one or several of these ideas:
  • that his girlfriend becomes damaged goods as soon as another man touches her
  • that the guy becomes a "cuckold" (not in the consensual kink/fetish way) if he "lets" another guy do something with his girlfriend
  • that something terrible happens as soon as another man's penis enters his girlfriend's body
  • that when this happens, his girlfriend proves herself to be a slut

I am running out of patience for guys with these issues. Guys who have a foursome with another couple but then have a meltdown watching their wife with the other guy. Guys who insist they don't want to be poly because "cuckoldry" isn't their thing. Guys who encourage a girlfriend to kiss another guy then just couldn't ever bear to kiss her again, or to reflect on why they felt that way. Guys who just insist that their partner dating other dudes is a hard limit, absolutely impossible no way end of the world.

Like, it's fine not to want to be non-monogamous or poly. But maybe you can face your inner unconscious misogyny even while being monogamous?
 
Well said MeeraReed. This was the exact issue that I had with the last woman that I had a serious interest in. Her and I have major chemistry but her husband who is supposedly bi and poly and has had his own relationships went all meltdown like when she and I tried to actually start having a real relationship. Pretty much stopped her and I in our tracks.

So it was OK for him to have an outside relationship. ...But not her. His hope without discussing it with her (that I found out later) is that he could find another guy and they could be in some triad together. She doesn't really like his taste in men and its not what she wanted. I met her husband once at the very beginning and he seemed like a nice guy, but I am not bi and while down the road I could see being friends with him, I was not interested in anything more. I told her that and that I wanted to let her and I's relationship cultivate first. Her and I chat now and then but I haven't heard from her in a while now. It's a shame because her and I could have had a great relationship but it was thwarted by a very insecure, selfish guy. ...and because they have kids together, she doesn't want to harm that, she stays. I understand her predicament and have told her that I am here if anything changes, emotional support or whatever.. She has to do what she has to do, and my feelings for her are the same. So in this case the guy didn't want another dick in her unless he could share that dick with him. Shame because her and I had sooo much in common.

Now, I am a mono -> poly convert. So there are times I have emotional issues and the part of "cuckold" if I am not with someone, but I try to learn from it and not let it consume me. I would never stop my wife from any poly relationship. Just because we are married, I don't own her. I don't own all her feelings.

I wish more men would stop the hypermasculinity BS and the partner is my possession BS.

-J
 
I see that this is a dig at me because of that kissing part so I will respond accordingly.

Why we won't do that?

Because we don't have to. We don't no matter how hard you try to force that bs to us.

I am also sick and tired of people like you, telling us how we should feel and act. So annoying, arrogant bullshit coming from you here. Lot of "feminist" babble. That is just sad.
 
Last edited:
I see that this is a dig at me
FWIW, I knew what the OP was talking about, & your thread didn't occur to me at all. Really, you're probably not that important. :)

While I think it's offbase to denounce the OPinion as "feminist," I was going to duck in here & point out that (in the past year at least) these forums have seen one or two tales where the genders were reversed. In one, the wife baldly said that since she intended to fuck other men, that meant she in her magnanimity had "freed" her hudband to also fuck other men. :rolleyes: There's any number of factors why it might be more common for the guy to be the "big meanie," but it's certainly not "just a guy thing."
Why we won't do that?
I really doubt there's an actual defined "we" there, much less that anyone is empowered to represent all of "them."
 
FWIW, I knew what the OP was talking about, & your thread didn't occur to me at all. Really, you're probably not that important. :)

While I think it's offbase to denounce the OPinion as "feminist," I was going to duck in here & point out that (in the past year at least) these forums have seen one or two tales where the genders were reversed. In one, the wife baldly said that since she intended to fuck other men, that meant she in her magnanimity had "freed" her hudband to also fuck other men. :rolleyes: There's any number of factors why it might be more common for the guy to be the "big meanie," but it's certainly not "just a guy thing."

I really doubt there's an actual defined "we" there, much less that anyone is empowered to represent all of "them."

OP mentioned something I posted here and she commented on my thread. Obviously that was a dig at me.

Those cases have nothing to do with me. My gf wants to have romantic relationship with one girl and that does not force me to let her be with other guys. I am also not the one asking for this arrangement so, I am not "baldly saying that I intend to fuck other girls and "freeing" my gf to have relationships with other women.

It is we, because of her(yeah assumed) wording. If she sees this as a problem, there must have been plenty of guys like me here. I truly believe that this is the case for most men in my situation. We don't have to do that. No one can tell us that we should be doing that.
 
I'm sorry, Keke, I didn't mean to make a dig at you. I was talking about a bunch of other threads, many from weeks ago. I think you're in a difficult spot with you girlfriend, and I'm sorry.

I have seen other men with similar stories to the kissing example. It was not personal toward you.
 
I'm sorry, Keke, I didn't mean to make a dig at you. I was talking about a bunch of other threads, many from weeks ago. I think you're in a difficult spot with you girlfriend, and I'm sorry.

I have seen other men with similar stories to the kissing example. It was not personal toward you.

Okay.

In that case, I am also sorry for my angry response.
 
I agree with you MeeraReed. I as a cisgendered pansexual poly woman have had massive problems with male partners who were comfortable with me having a female partner but not a male partner. A straight man just left me saying he realised that actually he is not poly and he wants an exclusive relationship, so he's leaving me as I cannot offer him that; however he was clearly quite comfortable with me having a female partner and not a male one, therefore I do believe his reaction had a lot to do with toxic masculinity and unhealthy, misplaced competition between males. It baffles me that even someone as sweet, considerate, respectful, open-minded as he is (definitely not your typical competitive alpha male) would still react like that. His reactions to my having other male partners broke my heart, partly destroyed my confidence in myself and in others, made both him and myself unhappy. I'm not saying every male reacts like that but I've definitely come across some who do, and that sucks. I'm never ever again starting a relationship with anyone who doesn't have an established track record of being comfortable with their partner having other partners regardless of gender.
 
I think it becomes an issue because of biology. Men are wired to compete with each other for access to women due to the desire (conscious or not) to have kids. You simply can't undo it. The cuckold issue comes from the idea that like it or not, society is patriarchal. Even in America, women typically take the last name of their husband when they marry. So for a woman to have a child with another man means that a man is using his/the family's resources to support a child that doesn't carry his genes. Given that poly is a small segment of society, the idea that a man can be ok with his girlfriend having sex with other guys is not going to gain ground quickly.

For me, I think that whatever you agree on as the parameters of your relationship is right for you. Whatever you don't agree on is out-of-bounds. In my relationship with my husband, GFS, and sister-wives, it just isn't appropriate to consider adding another guy. Our faith doesn't approve of it, and it just doesn't appeal to any of us.

Perhaps I'm just too lesbian, but I have trouble wrapping my head around the idea of women wanting to have sex with multiple men. For me, my husband is an anomaly - literally the only man I've ever been attracted to. I look at it that men are only necessary for continuing the human race, and for that role only one is needed for every several women....we could have a world with a far smaller male population and still be fine. So why the push to have women with multiple men?
 
Not all of us have an agenda that includes maximized spawning. :D

I've sired exactly two children; if world population control is a REAL goal, then perhaps it'd be best to limit men to two-or-less, right?

Anyway, I look at it the other way 'round. Most of the women with whom I've been intimate have had high sex drives, on a recurring basis if not constantly.

Then there's physiology. Some women can rack off one orgasm after another, for a couple of hours. Very few men can orgasm twice in an hour. The "refraction time" after the first usually means he can't physically get an erection for 20 minutes or so; after the second, it can be much longer before the boner renews.

Women describe their experiences to me. Stories of guys who cannot avoid orgasm for five minutes' stimulation seem to suggest their general utility is minimal. Before orgasm, a guy is mostly focused on his penis; after orgasm, he's dazed for up to an hour & might just fall asleep. Between those factors, he's maybe not much good for oral or manual, or pillow talk, or even cuddling. (One poll of women found that the approximate average time from PIV insertion to male orgasm was like 2.5 minutes.)

As Annie put it, a high-sex woman needs four reasonably skilled men just to keep up. (At my peak, I probably managed 5-6 orgasms per day. Then again, I was also in pretty good shape, & had had a decade of "practice" to get to that point.)

And it seems a highly specious argument to make this all about the dingus anyway. ;) It entirely ignores minor stuff like friendship, dating, love, & Romance, so (IMNSO) any "logical" OPP is straying away from stuff that most people believe is central to the very raison d'etre of polyamory. Most of the women I've known want an overall variety of love, of companionship, of relating. And most women apparently prefer intimacy with men.
 
I respect your opinion but I couldn't disagree more! Despite being bisexual like you.

I think it becomes an issue because of biology. Men are wired to compete with each other for access to women due to the desire (conscious or not) to have kids. You simply can't undo it.

Men can "compete" with each other for women. Or, as in pre-patriarchal days (to which, with the modern feminist movement, we are heading) men can get in line and share. You must know that women can far exceed men in libido. Most men, unless very young, have one orgasm and they are done. Older men sometimes can't even get fully erect, or have trouble cumming.

Women's libido quite often increases with age. Once she reaches perimenopause and her estrogen starts to decrease, her libido can shoot thru the roof. This certainly happened for me. In my 40s and 50s, I could wear a 20 something man out. I could have sex with 2 men and my gf in 24 hours and be fine. I could orgasm 30 times in one sex session. It's only since I hit my 60s, my back issues got worse, and I suffered a bout of cancer I am still recovering from, that my ability to be a sexual athlete has decreased somewhat. I hope to get stronger and regain my abilities. For now, the desire is there, it's just I've lost some strength.

So, for 20 years I was able to have daily sex. Most men my age are not up for that. I'd need a young bf or two, and a gf, to feel really satisfied.

The cuckold issue comes from the idea that like it or not, society is patriarchal... So for a woman to have a child with another man means that a man is using his/the family's resources to support a child that doesn't carry his genes. Given that poly is a small segment of society, the idea that a man can be ok with his girlfriend having sex with other guys is not going to gain ground quickly.

Actually, you are wrong. There are a lot of feminists on this board and in society these days, feminists both MALE and female. And women are no longer fully dependent on a husband for resources to raise children. Most women work outside the home. Most women can get some financial support from their families, from the government (not so much in our stupid country, but in places with social/government support, health care, food, clothing for families). It's like patriarchal times are losing ground and the village/tribe is taking responsibility for mothers and children again. Women can get child support after a divorce. And I celebrate the return of that culture.

For me, I think that whatever you agree on as the parameters of your relationship is right for you. Whatever you don't agree on is out-of-bounds. In my relationship with my husband, GFs, and sister-wives, it just isn't appropriate to consider adding another guy. Our faith doesn't approve of it...

And it's your (Christian I believe) faith that is holding back women regaining their power. This is an unfortunate fact. Your faith (and the other Abrahamic faiths) is largely responsible for robbing women of power and safety in society. You need only read the Old Testament to find how women were robbed of power and respect, and made into chattel, their goddess' altars burned, their priestesses murdered, etc., etc.

Very early Christianity seemed to give women a little more power, but that was soon overruled.

Perhaps I'm just too lesbian, but I have trouble wrapping my head around the idea of women wanting to have sex with multiple men. For me, my husband is an anomaly - literally the only man I've ever been attracted to. I look at it that men are only necessary for continuing the human race, and for that role only one is needed for every several women....we could have a world with a far smaller male population and still be fine. So why the push to have women with multiple men?

Because women can love and desire more than one man, at one time or in succession. Just as you love and desire more than one woman! Don't you think many women might be more straight than you? Or are you so self centered you can't even conceive of that? You may be 90% gay and barely want one guy. Myself, I find it easier to LOVE a woman, but I still damn well like and desire men, male energy, and the penis, and other physical attributes of men. And being poly, I like variety. I could go on, but you hopefully can see my point.
 
I see that this is a dig at me because of that kissing part so I will respond accordingly.

Why we won't do that?

Because we don't have to. We don't no matter how hard you try to force that bs to us.

I am also sick and tired of people like you, telling us how we should feel and act. So annoying, arrogant bullshit coming from you here. Lot of "feminist" babble. That is just sad.
It's not just feminist babble. Even calling it that proves her point.

I'm a guy and I'm sick of guys like that too, especially the ones I come across in real life.
 
I don't know that I would totally attribute this phenomenon to the patriarchy. I think it is natural to feel less threatened by your partner having a desire that you are totally unable to fulfill than one that you perceive you "should" be able to fulfill. So a man whose wife comes home and says she wants to sleep with other women doesn't feel threatened. He knows that he doesn't have breasts or a vagina and so he absolutely cannot be held responsible for his wife wanting to have an experience with someone else because he wouldn't be able to provide her with that experience no matter how hard he tries...A man whose wife comes home and says she wants to sleep with another man, though, feels threatened. What is it that she's looking for that he's not providing?

I think it works in reverse, too, but it's just less common because it is more common for women to identify as bisexual/pansexual than men.

So if a woman starts the poly discussion by saying she wants to sleep with other women, her heterosexual partner feels inclined to say yes because he doesn't feel like she's trying to replace him. If she later says she wants to sleep with and/or build relationships with other men, it is natural for him to feel more threatened. Whether he chooses to act on this feeling by imposing a OPP is dependent on how he handles his feelings of insecurity. To him, he said yes to non-monogamy because his partner presented him with a need (sex/romance with women) that he could not be expected to fulfill. Saying yes to non-monogamy with men means that he is opening himself up to the possibility of being replaced -- at least from a sexual perspective. This is a different fear than the insecurities that come from your partner deriving satisfaction from someone else in a more general sense.

When a monosexual person asks to open up the relationship, the sex/gender of their partner is obvious. If a straight woman asks to open up the relationship, her partner knows that there would be another man in the picture right away and he deals with the fears of being replaced immediately. The same would be true of a woman whose straight husband proposed an open marriage, or a man or woman with a gay partner who proposed an open relationship. In any of these cases, when the monosexual partner proposes an open relationship, there is a clear picture of what they are planning to do with that openness. So when the person chooses to agree, they are either saying yes or no to non-monogamy, since the sex/gender of the potential metamour is already pre-determined by his partner's sexuality.

I will give a little background to my thoughts with my own story....

My husband is queer. When we first were dating and got married, it was common for straight people to comment that they "couldn't imagine" dating someone who was bisexual because "What if they ran off with someone else?" We always felt the need to defend our commitment to each other and the fact that my husband could enjoy sex with both women and men, but could also commit himself to a single person -- even if that person was a woman and would never be a man.

Fast forward several years when we are thinking of opening up our relationship to polyamory. What's the impetus? Well, I have a crush on a female friend and Glasses comments that if we had an open relationship then that would give him the opportunity to date men as well. So we opened up the relationship with kind of the assumption that I would be looking for female partners and he would be looking for male partners. But of course when we made our OKC profiles, we listed ourselves as being "interested in" both men and women because, well, that's who we are.

And lo and behold, I found I was getting a lot more attention from men than I was from women and I found myself meeting and clicking with Ponytail and Laptop pretty much immediately. When I told Glasses about the guys I was chatting with, he said that he had an initial uncomfortable reaction, but that he thought it "obviously makes no sense." It totally made sense to me that he might have different feelings about being open to other women than to other men and I offered to slow down and just be open to women initially. But by then (literally it was like 90 seconds later) he was already shrugging it off and saying he didn't think it mattered.

This is a guy who had identified as queer for over 10 years at this point. A guy who routinely questions gender roles and assumptions about sexuality. The fact that he immediately discounted his discomfort as not making any sense is a product of the fact that he thinks about this stuff all the time.

A regular old cis straight guy? I think it is not all that crazy to assume that he would have a harder time processing those worries of being replaced and coming to the same conclusion.

For my part, I can say that I felt a lot more comfortable with the idea of my husband being with another man than I did with the idea of him being with another woman. Again, I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with feeling that discomfort and anxiety -- it's what you do with it that matters. As it turned out, Ginger is trans (FtM), so even though there's (technically) another vagina in the picture, I don't really have the same fears of replacement that I might have if he went out and found another cis-gendered girl like me. His other love interest was an ex-girlfriend, so even though I might have felt some fears of replacement when she entered the picture, I didn't. She might have had the ability to replace me sexually, but she was a known entity and I had a very strong sense of what I offered (emotionally) that she doesn't. So my fears were mitigated there too.

Now, if Glasses ever ends up just clicking with an amazing new cis-gendered girl, I think (I know) that I would have a harder time with it. I'd like to think I would process those feelings and handle them in stride the way that Glasses handled them when I went on my first date with Ponytail. But I know that those worries about replacement would be there and I acknowledge them fully.

The fact that this phenomenon is more common amongst men whose bisexual female partners are wanting to open their relationships to men as well as women doesn't really surprise me. But since I am proof that the reverse happens too, I think that the the imbalance of the occurrence may have more to do with statistics (numbers of openly bisexual men versus numbers of openly bisexual women) than misogyny.

ETA: Obviously, in the cases where someone couples their expressions of discomfort with other misogynist rhetoric, then, as Glasses and I always say, "I blame the patriarchy."
 
Last edited:
Oh and there's also a pregnancy risk that comes from sexual contact between opposite-sex people (if they are both fertile). I know that, for myself, my biggest fear when I first opened myself up to relationships with men other than Glasses was that I would get pregnant and not know who the father was.

With modern birth control methods that seems like a far-fetched risk to some, but after only 10 months of polyamory I found myself in that exact "nightmare" situation. Six weeks after the miscarriage and I'm still somewhat anxious about being in the same room as an ejaculating penis. :eek:

I can see how some folks might feel a lot more comfortable with their partners sticking with same-sex relationships for that reason.
 
I respect your opinion but I couldn't disagree more! Despite being bisexual like you.



Men can "compete" with each other for women. Or, as in pre-patriarchal days (to which, with the modern feminist movement, we are heading) men can get in line and share. You must know that women can far exceed men in libido. Most men, unless very young, have one orgasm and they are done. Older men sometimes can't even get fully erect, or have trouble cumming.

Women's libido quite often increases with age. Once she reaches perimenopause and her estrogen starts to decrease, her libido can shoot thru the roof. This certainly happened for me. In my 40s and 50s, I could wear a 20 something man out. I could have sex with 2 men and my gf in 24 hours and be fine. I could orgasm 30 times in one sex session. It's only since I hit my 60s, my back issues got worse, and I suffered a bout of cancer I am still recovering from, that my ability to be a sexual athlete has decreased somewhat. I hope to get stronger and regain my abilities. For now, the desire is there, it's just I've lost some strength.

So, for 20 years I was able to have daily sex. Most men my age are not up for that. I'd need a young bf or two, and a gf, to feel really satisfied.



Actually, you are wrong. There are a lot of feminists on this board and in society these days, feminists both MALE and female. And women are no longer fully dependent on a husband for resources to raise children. Most women work outside the home. Most women can get some financial support from their families, from the government (not so much in our stupid country, but in places with social/government support, health care, food, clothing for families). It's like patriarchal times are losing ground and the village/tribe is taking responsibility for mothers and children again. Women can get child support after a divorce. And I celebrate the return of that culture.



And it's your (Christian I believe) faith that is holding back women regaining their power. This is an unfortunate fact. Your faith (and the other Abrahamic faiths) is largely responsible for robbing women of power and safety in society. You need only read the Old Testament to find how women were robbed of power and respect, and made into chattel, their goddess' altars burned, their priestesses murdered, etc., etc.

Very early Christianity seemed to give women a little more power, but that was soon overruled.



Because women can love and desire more than one man, at one time or in succession. Just as you love and desire more than one woman! Don't you think many women might be more straight than you? Or are you so self centered you can't even conceive of that? You may be 90% gay and barely want one guy. Myself, I find it easier to LOVE a woman, but I still damn well like and desire men, male energy, and the penis, and other physical attributes of men. And being poly, I like variety. I could go on, but you hopefully can see my point.

Well, we certainly have different opinions on it. I think that's part of what is nice about poly... different forms for different people. Your ideas are very valid, however I don't believe in a universal kind of feminism.

I question the necessity of the male libido for sexual pleasure. I guess some people prefer that "male energy" but I actually don't care for it. I find the female touch plenty effective. I think our view of sexuality differs quite a bit. I see male sexuality in terms of procreation, and female sexuality in terms of pure pleasure. Ever notice how so many women complain that their men just aren't good at it? Standard PIV sex just doesn't do it for 80% of the female population.

I too welcome the village/tribe idea. However, when the tribe is run by the state and our "elected" officials, I loathe it and distrust it. And that's what most women are dependent on when it comes to being single parents, because the standard of living in the US has fallen and it is impossible to raise kids alone without help. Unless you are part of an effective small community (ie. church, social circle, commune, etc) then you become dependent on the state. I absolutely reject that as a viable option...but that comes down to politics. Also, women who work outside the home seldom get the choice of how and where their children are educated, unless they have a good career. The patriarchal model of men working and women staying home has an advantage in this. There's quite a bit of female power in raising your children exactly how you want them raised. I was fortunate to be able to educate my younger sister at home, and I want the same chance of a quality education for my children. Thankfully, I have a sister-wife who stays home and will educate the children so I can continue working without worrying about what crazy ideas Uncle Sam is feeding them. Most women are not that lucky.

I even wonder about the whole "career woman" ideal that is so important these days. I don't consider having a career to be "freedom." My job is ok...but the only reason I don't quit is because I grew up poor and it made me a bit greedy. I have the continual urge to feather my nest a bit more, even though I don't need it. My husband has told me that whatever I want to do is fine with him - work, quit, start a business, learn to fly... I find that freedom comforting. I just couldn't do that if I was single. Poly has an even greater advantage than a heterosexual monogamous relationship. With more adults under one roof, the money goes farther. Women who want to work can do so, and those who want to stay home can do so.

In the end, I guess it comes down to values and personal preference, and then sticking with what you signed up for.
 
You make excellent points, Ms, but I think it is the underlying issues that Meera is addressing. Not the thought one would be replaced, but the thought that a woman is somehow unclean if she participates in anything with another man. Like, how do these guys find all these virgins? Or does their ownership somehow cleanse them?

Mary's husband is one of those guys. It pisses me off. Not because we can't have a full on sexual relationship, but because I think she deserves better. Misogynists don't treat their women very good.
 
Majormerrick, you're right, it does have to do with biology. As far as I know, monogamy dates back to early agriculture. I'm not an expert on this, but I've read that as long as humans were hunter-gatherers, females were mostly responsible for looking after children, and because people were nomadic there was nothing or very little to be passed on to the next generation, so knowing which male had fathered which child was unimportant. When agriculture started, land became a good to be passed on, and parents wanted to make sure it was passed on to a child carrying their genes. Hence the ban on sex outside of marriage.

This ban was/is also a tool for insecure males who think of sexuality as a "performance": if their wife is denied the right to ever have had another male partner, they cannot be "compared". Of course this makes no sense to me as I have never thought of sexual acts as "performances" and never made value judgments on my partners, but I understand a lot of people have been taught these toxic ideas and have internalised them.
A regular old cis straight guy? I think it is not all that crazy to assume that he would have a harder time processing those worries of being replaced and coming to the same conclusion.
Yup, definitely.

Majormerrick, when you say you have "trouble wrapping [your] head around the idea of women wanting to have sex with multiple men", well I see what you mean but for me it's not about that at all. First, I understand that gender is a partner selection criterion for a lot of people and that's fine, but it does not feel like a criterion to me. I feel attracted to a person, and that's person's gender is only one of the many things about this person that I am interested in, it's not a criterion. So I don't want sex with multiple men, I want sex with people whom I feel sexually attracted to, and they may happen to be male or female or transgender etc. The number of people I can feel attraction for at any given time is not defined, there have been times in my life when I was feeling attracted to a dozen people and other times when I was feeling attracted only to one.

Majormerrick, it's true that from a biological point of view one male can impregnate several females and so a smaller number of males with a greater number of females could perpetuate the species. However I question the necessity of procreating in the first place. There already are too many humans on the planet; as a species, we're doing a lot of harm to each other and to other species. A gradual, peaceful decrease in human population seems a good idea to me, and that's one of the reason I am not having children. I agree with you, Ravenscroft, limiting to two or less children per couple sounds like a really good step.
The way you describe male sexuality, Ravenscroft: I don't fully agree with this. Surely some men do function like you describe (not having an erection for 20 minutes after orgasm, etc.) but not all; in my experience, it's a lot more varied. But I do agree with you, it's not all about sexuality, and certainly not only about PIV penetration, there's a LOT more to any relationship – if it does include sex at all, which often but not always the case.
 
I'm a gender queer cis woman in a poly relationship with a (trans) female. We are both poly, both pansexual. We've been doing this for 9.5 years.

I've mostly dated men since they just hit on you like 99% more than women do (on Fetlife and OKC). I feel really lucky to have found a woman partner right off the bat when I started practicing poly.

I did have a 3 month relationship with a super attractive cis female a few years ago. She had a vagina. My partner is pre op. They both have breasts, smooth skin, dress femme etc.

The idea that in any poly relationship, a man could "replace" a man or a woman could "replace" a woman is ludicrous. What are we, clones?

Just because 2 partners have a penis or a vagina doesn't mean one can replace another. The 2 same gendered people look different, sound different, their faces are different, their penises or vaginas are different, their heights are probably different, their hair is different, their family backgrounds are different, their hometowns are different, their hobbies are different. Even if their penises or vaginas are the same shape and size, or their breasts, ass, etc. (which is highly unlikely), they have different sexual skills. Sure, one man might have a better sexual skill set. But a woman might have a BETTER sexual skill set than a man, since she doesn't rely on PIV to get a person off.

If I had a jealous husband, he'd damn well better be jealous of my gf lol. She knows how to touch me, how to kiss me, how to woo me, how to listen to me and comfort me, how often to snuggle me or say I love you, how to cook for me, how to find me presents I like, how to help me decorate the home, how to charm me and make me laugh. And we talk. We talk talk talk talk talk. We stay on the same page through excellent communication. Women are socialised to be better communicators. Everyone knows this.

So all you men out there who are OK with your wives dating other women but not men, stop kidding yourselves. A female partner for your wife is just as much of a "threat," even though it might make you hard to think of them having sex together.
 
Last edited:
As a rule I don't recommend OPP; however, I do think there is an endless variety of people out there, and OPP might work for some. Misogyny may be a separate issue, it is slowly dying out but is still a thing, and may manifest itself in a number of ways.

P.S. Personally I'm not very excited about a woman having sex with another woman. I don't have anything against it, I'm just not especially turned on by it. FWIW
 
Interesting thread. Yes I would imagine many, if not most, men would have a very hard time with "their woman" (this is put in quotes and worded this way for a reason) having sex with another man. Yet this same man wants the opportunity to stick his dick in other woman.

Here in lies the challenge our current culture faces and the corresponding options (with Option 3 being the poly option):

1) Stay in a sexual box - "You don't sleep with other men and I won't sleep with other woman."
2) I will cheat - because it is easier to be dishonest than to confront my feelings of insecurity, inadequacy and jealously.
or
3) Become an independent human being, mitigate your co dependent dysfunctional self, work on your self esteem issues, overcome jealousy, overcome years of cultural programming and learn how to truly love. Then learn how to be truly honest in a relationship and develop strong communication skills all the while breaking down barriers and years of cultural programming. Then commit to and develop a lifestyle that is likely to be heavily judged by the cultural norm as odd, weird or wrong. No small feat.

The challenge is that the drive for sexual exploration is very strong in the average human, yet the willingness and/or ability to actively pursue the goals outlined in item 3 are not present in most individuals. So what the hell let me just cheat.

What I find interesting from the OP's original post, is that there are many Men that say they will be ok with an open relationship, yet when it happens they freak out. Does this happen with women as well? I would think so. I guess all this points to is a space where people think they know themselves and when really tested, they find out that they were really being dishonest with themselves. I guess this shouldn't really come as a shock to accept this in human nature, that people really don't know themselves.
 
Back
Top