Monogamy

Monogamy (Full Version)

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

Message

clwangkai -> Monogamy (1/13/2008 3:50:13 PM)
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

Amaros -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 3:54:17 PM)
It takes two to form a monogamous dyad - if a third party becomes involved, it can still be a dyad, but it's no longer technically monogamy.

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 3:54:21 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 That's the way I see it. I figure I'll be doing quite well if I have one -- the right -- submissive. Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Kink)

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 3:59:15 PM)
I had a couple ask me if I had any bi submissive females that would want to serve them and i said that anyone I talk to is monogamous and they then tried to convince me that if she served only one of them but had sex with multiple others it would be monogamous

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:00:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Amaros It takes two to form a monogamous dyad - if a third party becomes involved, it can still be a dyad, but it's no longer technically monogamy. Ah...now all the references to "Dyaddy's Little Girl" make sense! ::groan:: Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Puns)

machiavelli4110 -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:00:45 PM)
Monogamy is the custom or condition of having only one mate in a relationship, thus forming a couple. The word monogamy comes from the Greek word monos, which means one or alone, and the Greek word gamos, which means marriage or union. I believe your current situation is an open relationship. Poly infers that all individuals participate with each other.

adoracat -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:01:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirJohnMandevill quote: ORIGINAL: Amaros It takes two to form a monogamous dyad - if a third party becomes involved, it can still be a dyad, but it's no longer technically monogamy. Ah...now all the references to "Dyaddy's Little Girl" make sense! ::groan:: Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Puns) thwaks you with the bad pun pillow ye gods! kitten, giggling

Amaros -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:01:48 PM)
Monogamy applies to the entire dyad, not just to one partner, there is a definition for multiple simultaneous monogamous relationships, it's called polygamy.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:05:06 PM)
Well polygamy usually entails marriage as a legal term. Monogamy is one sex partner, though often broadened to mean one intimate partner. If you are having sex with more than one person, it's not monogamy. It could be casual sex, it could be sport fucking, it could be swinging, it could be your form of polyamory, it could be all of the above. But it's not monogamy.

breatheasone -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:05:12 PM)
I am married...have been for 24 years. Daddy and I have been seeing each other since April of 07. I consider myself monogamous with both.

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:08:50 PM)
are you seeing other people? If so, by definition that isn't monogamy

LadyHathor -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:13:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: clwangkai I had a couple ask me if I had any bi submissive females that would want to serve them and i said that anyone I talk to is monogamous and they then tried to convince me that if she served only one of them but had sex with multiple others it would be monogamous *Some will try to make you believe the moon is made of green cheese too---keep your head about you, your relationship is what you define it as, what you believe and what you can live with.*

Amaros -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:19:51 PM)
At the same time, I suppose if one were involved in more than one dyad, it might be possible for it to subjectively feel mongamous with each, there are words and definitions and then there are emotions - it all depends on how hung up you are on definitions. A woman having relationships with more than one man is polyandry, more than one woman, polygyny, though as LA correctly points out, these terms are generally applied as social definitions of forms of marriage arrangements, which typically include reproductive dynamics. Whatever you call it BAO, it sounds beautiful. Poly is alooser term, as is swinging, though they don't mean quite the same things of course, again, it really just depends on how hung up you are on objective terms.

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:21:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: clwangkai are you seeing other people? If so, by definition that isn't monogamy why? because you say so. i have 2 monogamous relationships with 2 separate Dominants. my relationship with Daddy is completely different from my relationship with my SO/dom. oh btw - we're quite happy too.

Amaros -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:24:23 PM)
...subjectively speaking. Objective definitions are necessary if we don't wish communication to break down entirely.

agoodgirl4Daddy -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:30:52 PM)
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....

Amaros -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:30:56 PM)
I can see how you might concieve of such arrangements as forming multiple monogamous dyads, given that each distinct dyad is essentially monogamous and assuming they are seperate - but there has to be a new term for it - multiple monogamy? i.e., as opposed to serial monogamy. And again, as I say, definitions and labels have nothing to do with how it works for you, but if somebody says they want a monogamous relationship then that's what I'm going to expect - if they then say they're going to keep seeing other people, then it gonna be time to renegotiate. The important part to me is whether they tell me about it upfront or not, I like to know what the situation is - if I find out down the line then I'm going to feel like they're misrepresenting themselves.

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:34:19 PM)
yes you may have two monogamous relationships but if you have two relationships then you yourself aren't monogamous

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:35:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: agoodgirl4Daddy the person having 2 Dominants is POLYAMOROUS...the Dominants may be Mongamous...but the person with 2 "partners/Dominants/Daddies/etcetcetc" is HARDLY MONOGAMOUS!!! how is it polyamorous if the 2 dominants are NOT (and i strongly repeat the word NOT) co-dominating said submissive?

clwangkai -> RE: Monogamy (1/13/2008 4:36:55 PM)
no they aren't but you are with two different individuals...that isn't monogamy...monogamy refers to the individual not just the relationship.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02