My Ice Cream Analogy

IrisAwakened

New member
My husband was having a tough night with the poly talk, last night. So to further describe where I was coming from I made up an analogy, which explains my feelings perfectly. Perhaps it can help someone too?

Picture that you have a huge dish of chocolate ice cream. It is the tastiest chocolate in the world, you would never replace it. Upon first taste it is incredibly flavorful and awesome! But after eating it for a few minutes, the taste isn't as significant, although it is still delicious, you can't taste the subtle undertones in the chocolate anymore. You know it is still yummy and you love it, but if you tasted a scoop of vanilla, which would taste incredibly yummy at first too, then the chocolate flavor would stand out more. You could better appreciate the chocolate and its undertones again, while also enjoying the vanilla and its undertones as well. Vanilla could never replace chocolate, but chocolate cannot give you what vanilla has, and it shouldn't try, chocolate is delicious just being itself. Why would you just eat only chocolate and risk taking it for granted, not fully appreciating the flavor anymore?

This can be taken further, I am sure. Perhaps it doesn't suit you all, but it is me to a T! Strangely, this example annoyed my husband, lol. I was SO excited when I thought of it! I think it just makes too much sense to him, perhaps he is in denial. Hope you enjoy it!
 
When I had "the talk" with my husband, I used this kind of elaborate metaphor to describe my feelings about monogamy, and he liked it so much he's used it to explain our marriage to other people...

Imagine you're shown into a wonderful room. In this room are all the things you love: every video game, book, album, movie, whatever it is for you. All the clothes in the closet fit and are flattering. The bed is soft and comforting, like it was designed for that crick in your neck. You love your room. You love it so much, in fact, that you might never leave. And not leaving is fine. You can stay.

Then imagine that someone says to you, "do you love this room?" And of course you say "oh yes, this room is lovely." And this someone says, "Well, if you want you can stay forever, but if you ever put so much as one toe outside the door, it will lock behind you and you can never ever come back."

That means that in order to stay in the room, you agree that you will never play any other video games, read any other books, wear any other clothes, sleep in any bed other than the ones in that room. Meanwhile, you can look out the window and plainly see that there IS life outside the room - you just can't be a part of it.

That's monogamy. It's not that what's in the room isn't appealing. You love the room, and everything inside it. It's that you're voluntarily saying "I will live in one room forever." So my husband and I decided to go ahead and take the locks off. He's still my room, and I'm still his. But, to belabor the metaphor even further, there is now the possibility for adding rooms to the house.

Anyway, that's my take on it. And it worked for us. :D

There we go. My only critique of this one is that she forgot the bathroom.
 
Oh! I love it! Ha, bathrooms, right! Both analogies seem to fit my situation. I just want the freedom to experience life and love to their fullest, not replace something that I currently love. It feels good to have a little support on this issue :)
 
I love them both! Thanks, IA and TP. :)

JG
 
My gf used that when I first started dating her to explain it. I HATED hearing it. I started asking questions and it turned out that it was really different, he sees a side of her that I never see really. They have debates about random things, talk about psychology ....etc. It kind of made things difficult telling me that she has this other side I never get to see.
 
I don't even like the child analogy. The kind of "love" people have for different foods or even children (you don't want to fuck your children, I hope) is not the same kind of "love" you have for a sexual/romantic partner. Not saying that you can't have more than one, but the analogies suck.
 
when my wife used the food analogy on me I asked ....so what do you see me as ???? What do you see yourself as..... in my eyes ....what is your bf in this??

The kid analogy fell apart when I pointed out that her younger sister seemed to be the acknowledged favorite with her parents.

The obvious flaw that I pointed out to my wife is that if you follow it out you would have double digit partnerships if you had a diverse palate.
 
Last edited:
What I meant was ....if you ddn't have the same meal twice in several weeks....then you need to change you eating habits or pick up 20 or 30 new partners and I'll see you in 10-15 days in the rotation.
 
What I meant was ....if you ddn't have the same meal twice in several weeks....then you need to change you eating habits or pick up 20 or 30 new partners and I'll see you in 10-15 days in the rotation.

And if everyone involved is down with that plan...why not?
 
I guess then the analogy works.....but that wasn't the conversation I had....

I was speaking from my own experience...that's all.

Derby. What food are you in this? Have you asked?
 
Last edited:
I find that neither analogy works for me either. I just have a lot of love to give, and didn't want to limit how many people I can share it with... I don't see it as anything else other than that sentence at face value. I do of course realize that we're all different with different motivations, but that's just my personal take on it.
 
My problem with both analogies is that they involve things that are not at the same level. I.e. both ice cream flavors and the things in the room are material things, while the receptor in the analogy, the person, is a human being.

I'm currently in the ice creams position, but I really disagree with being reduced to a flavor, a thing - I want to equally taste and being tasted, experience and being experienced.
 
My problem with both analogies is that they involve things that are not at the same level. I.e. both ice cream flavors and the things in the room are material things, while the receptor in the analogy, the person, is a human being.

I'm currently in the ice creams position, but I really disagree with being reduced to a flavor, a thing - I want to equally taste and being tasted, experience and being experienced.

YES! I love what you said. Very nice.
 
My problem with both analogies is that they involve things that are not at the same level. I.e. both ice cream flavors and the things in the room are material things, while the receptor in the analogy, the person, is a human being.

I'm currently in the ice creams position, but I really disagree with being reduced to a flavor, a thing - I want to equally taste and being tasted, experience and being experienced.

It might help to remember that this is intended to be an illustrative analogy--a way to help someone wrap his or her head around a new concept--rather than a comparison or a "reduction to a flavor."

MT
 
While I am glad to hear many points of view on the subject, MT couldn't have summed up my thoughts better. Thank you MT for pointing out that this is a mere analogy, not a truth about my depth of feelings for people (because, if it were that shallow, I would just go out for ice cream).
 
Back
Top