RE: What if.....

RE: What if..... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 8:53:41 AM)
~FR~ I'm throwing out this point if anyone desire to consider. If going by the definition of a poly relationship does not mean sex is involved. Therefore every single person on this site is partaking of a poly relationship with the many people they interact on the forums and the friends they have here and in real life. Considering the fact that> A relationship, by it's exact definition is the interaction between two or more individuals. This includes non sexual, friendship, acquaintances, boss/employee dynamic, etc. Thus, anyone who claims to be monogamous isn't being completely accurate unless they interact in one form or another with just one person only.

KatyLied -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 8:56:17 AM)
I've read various definitions regarding poly. I feel fine with my understanding of the word.

KatyLied -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 8:58:26 AM)
Perhaps for you. I don't have loving, intimate relationships with every single person I come into contact with. Yeck.

ownedgirlie -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 8:59:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 ...I got the impression you were targeting certain people though so it's confusing how serious you were. I had the same impression, after her post which said she created this thread to invite certain "experts" to answer (or, take the bait, I think she said). At that point, it no longer seemed a viable, serious thread; rather a game of sorts.

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:05:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: scifi1133 hiya smlg how have you been....been gone for awhile so i havent seen you. oh you know me - CM's #1 troublemaker causing an uproar here and there ...how are you doing? get any snow in VA yet?

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:12:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied Perhaps for you. I don't have loving, intimate relationships with every single person I come into contact with. Yeck. I understand where you are coming from Katy. I was just taking a point and then projecting that point to show it could also have a broader meaning. Personally, I can engage in a poly relationship and had also limited myself to a monoigamous relationship, so I have lived both sides at one time or another. I learned long ago that being monogamous is not right for me. Maybe it's a character defect, as some have told me, I don't know. The only thing I know for sure is I am most balanced being poly and that's whats important for me.

domahpet -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:21:48 AM)
wow 5 pages and none of em even bothere to grace us with their Word im sad and i fail to comprehend the reson the op had to get smashed the way she did on her relationship with her daddy... wtf business is it of yours and what it has to do with the topic? people that do that irritate the hell out of me, to the point id even use a swear word! but only in my head :)

KatyLied -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:41:45 AM)
To be able to form attachments and love many at the same time is a character defect? That obviously came from someone who is clueless. I think that people are wired for poly or monogamy, it's just the way they are.

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:48:42 AM)
From the few who passed that opinion in my case, neglected to realize that fact. I believe that a more accurate measure of a person is accepting we may not personally agree with a person's life or how they conduct their life but to accept the fact they have their own path to walk and that path is not my path.

CalifChick -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 9:53:41 AM)
FR ~ I didn't say (or I hope I didn't say, because I didn't mean...) that sex was required to make it a poly relationship, or without sex it was not a poly relationship. Samba's relationship includes sex, as she stated previously, but now says it wasn't sex. And no, I don't get that. If that means I don't think outside the box, then so be it. Saying "there's sex" and then saying that doesn't mean sex... well wtf do I know then??? I have had strictly mentor relationships in my life - usually work related. I would not call that poly. That's the only reason I brought up sex, as one, and only one, indicator of intimacy. Being married to someone and having a work-related mentor relationship with someone else (just one example) doesn't fall into the realm of poly. Cali

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 3:04:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CalifChick FR ~ I have had strictly mentor relationships in my life - usually work related. I would not call that poly. That's the only reason I brought up sex, as one, and only one, indicator of intimacy. Being married to someone and having a work-related mentor relationship with someone else (just one example) doesn't fall into the realm of poly. Cali Non sexual friendships is a type of relationship The dynamics between co-workers is a relationship A doctor has a relationship with their patients in a non sexual aspect (overall) An emplyee has a working relationship with their employer These are but a few types of relationships. Thus taken these in context we have a poly relationship in one form or another. Keep in mind that poly as defined by the Marian-webster dictionary as> Main Entry: poly- Function:combining form Etymology:Greek, from polys; akin to Old High German filu many, Sanskrit puru, Latin plenus full — more at full 1: many : several : much : multi- <polychotomous> <polygyny>2 a: containing an indefinite number more than one of a (specified) substance

CalifChick -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 3:12:18 PM)
Bear, are ya just fuckin' with me? If so, then whip it out and get after it! [sm=whap.gif] You know that wasn't about people you know. If it's about people you know, then every person on the planet that knows more than one person in some fashion is poly. Polygamy, polyamory, whatever you would like to call it. One person, having relationships with two people, both of which are more intimate than a professional mentor. Cali

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 3:24:36 PM)
Cali, what I am trying to do is to present a few other ways of looking at the OP's post. If I was out to fuck with you it would be quite clear in how I had posted if this was the case. I am simply trying to continue a good serious conversation. Secondly, I am hoping to portray a fact that not all posts automatically become reduced to name calling/flaming etc. My wish is to see less suspicion when a fellow poster, nyself included, tries to present an opinion based on their belief, not to convert, nor to yell, name call or blast anyone. I have a sense of sorrow when I am trying to carry an intelligent conversation and it is met with suspicion.

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 3:40:19 PM)
Calif, you have to admit - for my very first serious post, not one poster who replied was flamed. strange as it sounds everyone of us shared an opposing opinion in a calm and intelligent manner like bear stated and it was respected by me and others ...which makes me wonder if i had posted this in the general forum, would my original thought be treated with dignity as it is now? ok discuss amongst yourselves

TreasureKY -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 4:17:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sambamanslilgirl Katy and Treasure - what's the BIGGEST sexual organ inside your body? once you have actually answered that question, then you'll understand there was NO (nor has there ever been) any sexual contact between us. sex is like dessert after a 7-course meal but i'm not saying if we cyber either. oh Treasure, i commend you for digging up my old responses. please indulge my curiosity for a minute, what point were you trying to prove other than you didn't understand/comprehend a single word. There's no misunderstanding on my part, sambamanslilgirl... I think my point was abundanty clear and stands very well on its own without further elucidation. As for your comments regarding the "BIGGEST sexual organ", I'm guessing that you are referring to the brain... though there is quite a few sources who claim that that particular distinction belongs to the skin. Nevertheless, I have no idea why you seem to think that has anything to do with understanding whether or not you and your Daddy have sexual contact. I can only assume that you're simply trying to illustrate that the sexual aspects of your relationship with your Daddy that you've described in prior posts was all in your head.

lusciouslips19 -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 5:45:41 PM)
But wait....there is another book. It was unearthed in the Mohabi dessert. This book say its lights the way for all twue followers.... Who ya gonna believe?

beargonewild -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 5:55:36 PM)
Ghostbusters? Ok ok I confess, I believe in the one true way of The Chocolate God!

pagankinktress -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 5:57:51 PM)
I'd read the book just to read it, but I'd take from it what resonated within me and discard the rest.

lusciouslips19 -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 6:28:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild Ghostbusters? Ok ok I confess, I believe in the one true way of The Chocolate God! I personally would like the chocolate god to be a chocolate easter bunny! Instead of crossing ourselves we could shake our tail or wiggle our ears as a sign of devotion.

AquaticSub -> RE: What if..... (1/15/2008 8:08:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild ~FR~ I'm throwing out this point if anyone desire to consider. If going by the definition of a poly relationship does not mean sex is involved. Therefore every single person on this site is partaking of a poly relationship with the many people they interact on the forums and the friends they have here and in real life. Considering the fact that> A relationship, by it's exact definition is the interaction between two or more individuals. This includes non sexual, friendship, acquaintances, boss/employee dynamic, etc. Thus, anyone who claims to be monogamous isn't being completely accurate unless they interact in one form or another with just one person only. While we have relationships with many people, most people have few relationships that they would list as "being in a relationship" or where they would consider someone their partner/dominant/submissive/daddy/mommy/etc. While I understand this point of view, I simply disagree with it. Have mutiple mono relationships does make one monogamous, regardless of it they involve sex or not. As we have seen, some dommes decide to not have sex with their slaves/subs, yet they would consider themselves to be in relationships.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625