RE: Monogamy

RE: Monogamy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:16:46 PM)
but even then she missed the true meaning of your post...at least in my mind

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:18:17 PM)
she stated and i quote "My point in posting this is that if your relationship changes in the future, or if you consider adding a third Dom to your life" - and i rightly so replied correctly. the only way my relationships would change with my two is if one of them or me dies. end of subject on that ...not this topic. also to address your "and you call me close minded? you just epitomized the definition of being narrow minded...and yes if they are cool with that then so be it...i guess the saying "ignorance is bliss" is true" - frankly i don't have to consider any options you offer. i do have and reserve to the right to refuse when your opinion doesn't really count and/or matter ...especially since you're trying to force your ideologies and beliefs on me.

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:19:53 PM)
i don't think that i have at all...i have said that if you want to believe that then so be it...why are you so defensive? What is your fear? Why fight so hard about this? Why the attitude of you against the world?

camille65 -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:28:48 PM)
They are monogamous to you, but you aren't to just one of them.

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:36:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: clwangkai i don't think that i have at all...i have said that if you want to believe that then so be it...why are you so defensive? What is your fear? Why fight so hard about this? Why the attitude of you against the world? because i can be - is that a sin? if so, i would suggest beating me with wet noodles however you need permission from my dominants first. don't expect an approval either.

xxblushesxx -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 5:37:49 PM)
What everyone is attempting to say is that you cannot change the definition of a word simply by wishing it were so. If I went to a doctor and he said I am morbidly obese (I'm not, this is just an example), and I came home to my hubby who happens to LOVE extra pounds on women (also, just a made up example), and he told me I was perfect just the way I am, that would not change the fact that I am, in fact, morbidly obese, and that I will have health issues because of it, and other people may look at me in a different way. You may, in your own circle call yourself whatever you like of course, but when having an intelligent discussion in English, than English must be observed. I also, always enjoy your posts. I just have to chime in that I disagree with you in this one case. ~Christina

littlebitxxx -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 6:02:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: clwangkai Is it really possible for a person to have two sexual partners but only serving one to be considered in a monogamous relationship? If so, how? Them being with multiple partners makes the relationship poly does it not? Would love to hear some feedback I'm thinking too many people put too much stock in labels and definitions. Who really cares what it's called if the people in it are happy doing it. And to outsiders, you'd probably have to explain exactly what you mean anyway even if you used the 'proper' word. IMO

CalifChick -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 6:11:31 PM)
So if you have multiple personalities, and multiple monogamous relationships (god that hurt just to type it), does that mean you're busier than the average literate person? Cali

princessleather -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 7:05:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: agoodgirl4Daddy oh....FFS!! if it's a DUCK..call it a duck. having 2 Dominants does not equal MONOGAMY.... the person having 2 Dominants is POLYAMOROUS...the Dominants may be Mongamous...but the person with 2 "partners/Dominants/Daddies/etcetcetc" is HARDLY MONOGAMOUS!!! this is just silly!! and..hey..if it makes people happy and helps them justify their choices ...by all means call a DUCK a cow..a pig...a platypus..whatever.... Some people are just delusional ... .. [sm=ofcourse.gif]

DrDoo -> RE: Monogamy (1/14/2008 3:21:07 AM)
i'm flabbergasted to hear that standard dictionary definitions don't apply in the bdsm world!! [sm=whoa.gif]

PanthersMom -> RE: Monogamy (1/14/2008 5:50:56 AM)
unless someone changed the definition, monogamy means one partner, period. PM

breatheasone -> RE: Monogamy (1/14/2008 6:24:54 AM)
That depends on what the meaning of the word is, is........LMAO.........[:D] Sorry...I just couldn't resist.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125