Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: open relationships


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: open relationships Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 6:25:15 PM   
elegantalexis


Posts: 237
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
What it takes is open communication and trust.  Sir and Ma'am are honest with Alexis and I.  We are honest with Sir and Ma'am.  They are trusting us to care for their property and we are trusting them with our lives.  Tis the situation that you are stating that there are no rules.  We have rules to be honest and trustworthy.  Sir is also honoring my rule of safe sex because I come from a nursing background (which is why Ma'am and I get along so well).

What I am seeing in you (LATEX) is a total lack of communication and pettiness towards those who dare to pursue an open relationship.  Tis all I can say at this time.

Shahar

_____________________________

Subbies to 12 cats...

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 7:15:19 PM   
YourhandMyAss


Posts: 5516
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
And what if one day your fantasies and desires led you to want gang bangs or 3 somes. It's not about not being satisfied by one man alone, for all people, for me, One man is not capable of fufilling the roles of my fantasy, cause well I want gang bangs and 3 somes, and I want to fuck and Dominate certain select women, and unles he can duplicate himself AND change gender, he just isn't going to be able to fufil those desires or fantasies alone, with just uno numero number one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RainydayNE

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressDolly


I have never found myself wanting another male sexually when I already had one pleasing me in this way, as I wait until I find a male who I am very much engaged with mentally and physically. If the chemistry isn't in all the right places (sexually, emotionally, intellectually, etc.,) I just don't bother at all. Given this, it is easy to see why I also tend to stay satisfied with one (1).




i can agree with this. i just don't feel like i need more than 1 person.
i dont think being mono has anything to do with some perceived "insecurity," or "immaturity," or "selfishness" or "fear."
alot of people are ticked off with latex for his opinion, but people make equally negative assements of why some people prefer monogamy.

(in reply to RainydayNE)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 8:06:59 PM   
RainydayNE


Posts: 978
Joined: 10/21/2008
Status: offline
if they do change (well he knows the "scope" of things i think about, and that's all that really matters) then i'll deal with it then. as it stands, i'm mono to him. people change all the time, and i never said anything about ALWAYS being the way i am now. =p to i'm not saying "open relationships are bad! boo!!" i'm saying that people are getting their panties in a wad when similar things are said about mono people all the time on "alternative lifestyle" boards and nobody bats an eyelash =p

(in reply to YourhandMyAss)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 8:10:29 PM   
kidwithknife


Posts: 193
Joined: 9/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RainydayNE
i'm saying that people are getting their panties in a wad when similar things are said about mono people all the time on "alternative lifestyle" boards and nobody bats an eyelash =p
Um, not in this thread though.  (Ok, I did.  But I made absolutely clear I was being sarcastic in the same thread).

Surely you're not seriously arguing that people should defend a position they don't hold?

I mean, I will if you really want me to.  But it seems a bit futile.

_____________________________

We went to see the fall of Rome - I thought it would please us
To watch how the mighty go in a blaze of hubris
But I just stood there hypnotised by all the beautiful madness


(New Model Army, Into the Wind)

(in reply to RainydayNE)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 8:10:34 PM   
AquaticSub


Posts: 14867
Joined: 12/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RainydayNE

i'm saying that people are getting their panties in a wad when similar things are said about mono people all the time on "alternative lifestyle" boards and nobody bats an eyelash =p


I don't know what forums you are talking about but I think if you check out on the thread on closed relationships you'll find that at least some of us do "bat an eyelash" regarding those who choose to bash monogamy.

I have not seen people acting in this manner on the boards frequently though I would be very interested in having it pointed out to me - or at least know on what boards this is common so I may continue to avoid them.

_____________________________

Without my dominance you cannot submit. Without your submission I cannot dominate. You are my equal in this, though our roles are different.-Val

It was ok for him to beat me but then he tried to cuddle me! - Me

Member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair

(in reply to RainydayNE)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 8:32:44 PM   
slavegirljoy


Posts: 1207
Joined: 11/6/2006
From: North Carolina, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: YourhandMyAss

It's not about not being satisfied by one man alone, for all people, for me, One man is not capable of fufilling the roles of my fantasy, cause well I want gang bangs and 3 somes, and I want to fuck and Dominate certain select women, and unles he can duplicate himself AND change gender, he just isn't going to be able to fufil those desires or fantasies alone, with just uno numero number one.

i just love your openness in your posts and, i hope that all of your fantasies will be fulfilled soon and your sexual appetite continues to thrive.  For me, being in various relationships, over the years, that included other sexual partners (couples and single women) was never about needing more than 1 or about fulfilling any fantasy. 
 
For me, in my relationships, it has always been about:

1) my not owning my partner or his body and, therefor, i have no right to tell him what he can and can't do or with whom or how many he can do it with.
 
2) my wanting my partner to be as happy as is humanly possible and wanting to help him achieve that happiness in any way i can, including helping him (when asked to) have sexual enjoyment with other women.
 
3) my wanting to experience as much as life has to offer, including sexual enjoyment with other women.
 
4) my being subservient to my partner and always doing whatever he wants, regardless of whether i want it or not.
 
5) my belief that monogamy is forced on people by society and that people are not, by nature, monogamous and that trying to live a monogamous life is harmful to the person (causing undue stress, guilt feelings for having lust for another, for example) and harmful to a long-term relationship (causing anger and hurt feelings just because one partner has sexual desires for another, for example).
 
joy
Master David's erotic-domestic slave

_____________________________

Don't ask yourself what the world needs; ask yourself what makes you come alive. And then go and do that. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive. ~Dr. Howard Thurman

(in reply to YourhandMyAss)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 8:44:20 PM   
kidwithknife


Posts: 193
Joined: 9/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slavegirljoy 
5) my belief that monogamy is forced on people by society and that people are not, by nature, monogamous and that trying to live a monogamous life is harmful to the person (causing undue stress, guilt feelings for having lust for another, for example) and harmful to a long-term relationship (causing anger and hurt feelings just because one partner has sexual desires for another, for example).
Parts one to four are entirely valid and I have no problem with them.

Part five is highly contentious, and unless you have some real academic studies to back it up, I'm calling bullshit on it.

Sorry, but people who justify their own relationship choices through a combination of attacking the relationship structure of others and unsubstantiated pseudoscience get right on my tits, whether they're mono or poly.

(Actually, that's why I identify as "non-monogamous" rather then poly.  Yeah, I'm defining myself by what I'm not rather then what I am.  But I prefer that then being seen as a fellow traveller of tiresome zealots).

_____________________________

We went to see the fall of Rome - I thought it would please us
To watch how the mighty go in a blaze of hubris
But I just stood there hypnotised by all the beautiful madness


(New Model Army, Into the Wind)

(in reply to slavegirljoy)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: open relationships - 12/10/2008 10:30:19 PM   
slavegirljoy


Posts: 1207
Joined: 11/6/2006
From: North Carolina, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kidwithknife

quote:

ORIGINAL: slavegirljoy 
5) my belief that monogamy is forced on people by society and that people are not, by nature, monogamous and that trying to live a monogamous life is harmful to the person (causing undue stress, guilt feelings for having lust for another, for example) and harmful to a long-term relationship (causing anger and hurt feelings just because one partner has sexual desires for another, for example).

Part five is highly contentious, and unless you have some real academic studies to back it up, I'm calling bullshit on it.


Maybe you overlooked the first two words of that sentence, "my belief".
 
But, even though i did say that it's my belief, here are some excerpts from the academic and professional community that support my belief.

ethics news & views
Center for Ethics, Emory University — Igniting the Moral Imagination of Twenty-First Century Leaders
September 01, 1998
Dr. Thomas R. Insel Shares Research Findings on Mammals & Monogamy at Herndon Lecture

In a study done by ethnographer G.P. Murdock (1949) of 849 human societies, 83% were found to be polygynous; 16% monogamous (serially); and 1% polyandrous. The implication is that humans are most likely to be monogamous in a serial way (not mate for life).
http://ethics.emory.edu/news/archives/000231.html
 
 
More evidence shows that humans are not naturally monogamous
Washington | May 09, 2007 2:15:01 PM IST

 
A review by Florida Atlantic University researchers Todd K. Shackelford and Aaron T. Goetz has lent support to the growing body of evidence that humans are not naturally monogamous.
http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/world/20070509/655380.html

Social monogamy is a term referring to creatures that pair up to mate and raise offspring but still have flings. Sexually monogamous pairs mate with only with one partner. So a cheating husband who detours for a romantic romp yet returns home in time to tuck in the kids at night would be considered socially monogamous.
Some scientists view both social and sexual monogamy in humans as a societal structure rather than a natural state.
"I don't think we are a monogamous animal," said Pepper Schwartz, a professor of sociology at the University of Washington in Seattle.
She added, "Monogamy is invented for order and investment – but not necessarily because it's 'natural.'"
http://www.livescience.com/mysteries/080319-llm-monogamy.html
 
 
The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People
Author: David P. Barash and Judith E. Lipton

David Barash and Judy Lipton. David Barash is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington in Seattle, and Judy Lipton is a psychiatrist and a Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

85% of human societies are non-monogamous

Really in our culture, lifelong mateship is not now the rule and never has been.

People tend to date and mate as adolescents, and then they marry, and then they divorce, and then they marry again – and then within those who are married, psychologists estimate that somewhere between fifty to eighty percent of the males, and fifty percent of the females, cheat. So I think it is an uphill battle. People aspire to, or promise monogamy, but it’s really quite rare.
 http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/mind/s611249.htm
 

Infidelity Dissected: New Research On Why People Cheat
ScienceDaily (Sep. 13, 2008) — The probability of someone cheating during the course of a relationship varies between 40 and 76 percent. "It's very high," says Geneviève Beaulieu-Pelletier, PhD student at the Université de Montréal's Department of Psychology.
 
The first study was conducted on 145 students with an average age of 23. Some 68 percent had thought about cheating and 41 percent had actually cheated.
 
The second study was conducted on 270 adults with an average age of 27. About 54 percent had thought about cheating and 39 percent had actually cheated
 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080908185238.htm

quote:

Sorry, but people who justify their own relationship choices through a combination of attacking the relationship structure of others and unsubstantiated pseudoscience get right on my tits, whether they're mono or poly.


i'm not justifying anything.  i am stating my feelings, my opinions, and my beliefs, about relationships.  i didn't attack the relationship structure of others.  i stated why i have had non-monogamous relationships.
 
joy
Master David's erotic-domestic slave

_____________________________

Don't ask yourself what the world needs; ask yourself what makes you come alive. And then go and do that. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive. ~Dr. Howard Thurman

(in reply to kidwithknife)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: open relationships - 12/11/2008 6:54:19 AM   
beargonewild


Posts: 22716
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Well said slavegirljoy! 

_____________________________

Do Not Rile da Chosen Bear

Promiscuous boy you already know
That I’m all yours what you waiting for?

Resident MANWHORE ~1000 Bear pts~

10 NZ points
Whips~n~Cuffs

(in reply to slavegirljoy)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: open relationships - 12/11/2008 12:43:54 PM   
CallaFirestormBW


Posts: 3651
Joined: 6/29/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LATEXBABY64

open bdsm relationships

Do they really work or is it some excuse not to commit to anything is it a form of being selfish or to open. after all ds suppose to be a higher form of trust. if your other is doing everything and kitchen sing and your ok with it what does it say about your values or take on things. do you not like to commit kinda of like congress lol

I think open relationships are where people just give up and are tired of being treaded on by bad people so they just give in kinda like the sheep to wolves t hing
whats your take


As usual, the OP has his particular bias against poly relationships showing... however, though I know it may make little difference to the author, perhaps someone else will find value in responses.

quote:

Do they really work or is it some excuse not to commit to anything is it a form of being selfish or to open.
Like any other relationship poly/open relationships take work. Because polyamory is a committed triadic-or-greater relationship, with emphasis on the 'committed', it isn't an escape from commitment -- in fact, it is an expanded level of commitment, with more requirements that need to be met, just by virtue of adding the needs of one or more additional people to a dyadic relationship.

As for 'selfish'... well, all I can say is that, for me, polyamory is the antithesis of selfishness... I am able and willing to respect the love that my companions have for me enough to -not- be selfish, and to feel comfortable and safe in letting them express their love and affection for someone -else-, without feeling like it means that they don't love -me-.

As for "too open"... as long as one is in healthy relationships that nourish all the people involved, is there any such thing? That's like saying there is "too much good", or "too much love"... Huh?

quote:

after all ds suppose to be a higher form of trust. if your other is doing everything and kitchen sing and your ok with it what does it say about your values or take on things.


D/s, and polyamory, are both requiring of greater measures of trust. Having both in one set of relationships adds some extra burden to the participants to be honest, open, forthright, and straightforward with one another. Having either or both active in a relationship precludes situations where there is sneaking, lying, deceit, and dishonesty, since those do not foster healthy relationships.

As far as what it says about my values: I believe that it says that I value love enough to not hinder mine or others' expressions of love just because they choose to be in a relationship with me. I believe that it says that I am capable of honesty, forthrightness, and boundless joy, and am capable of sharing those with the only boundaries being the health and happiness of the people I am with. I believe that it says that I am open-minded, analytical, trustworthy, and trustful... and I believe that it says that I walk my talk... that love is not a finite resource, which must be hoarded and metered out carefully to keep from running out, but is, instead, a boundless, bottomless well, from which one can pour continuously and never run out of love to give.

quote:

I think open relationships are where people just give up and are tired of being treaded on by bad people so they just give in kinda like the sheep to wolves t hing
whats your take


Well, my take is that some people do, indeed, get involved in open relationships for all the wrong reasons -- but that doesn't make the concept bad... it just makes the expression flawed. Those cases are shaded by the large pool of individuals who make open and poly relationships work, and who are in them because they believe that love is a constantly renewing resource that is not limited by the number of bodies or the number of hearts between which it is shared... and which actually grows stronger the more often it is exercised.

The greater measure of poly relationships thrives outside the realm of D/s. The people involved in them have nothing to do with BDSM, WIITWD, or power dynamics. While open relationships and poly are potential adjuncts to D/s relationships, poly is its own entity, and it is my take that it should be considered as the separate entity that it is -- either a person is wired to embrace open/poly existence, or xhe's not. If xhe's not, no amount of 'mastering' or coercion is going to make that poly household come together. No rules will keep bitterness, hatred, resentment and anger from filling the household. No individual's -will- can force people to come together as a family where there is no desire or inclination, no matter -how- many porn novels make it seem like they will. It is abjectly wrong to attempt to manipulate another person's love by attempting to coerce that person into an uncomfortable and unrealistic situation. If one must say "If you love me, you'll let me bring in this other person, even though you said you you were monogamous.", then love is not the emotion being discussed.

On the other hand, for those who -are- poly, and who look forward to shaping a household or connections that will welcome many loves into their lives, no social recrimination or bad-mouthing from the misunderstanding outside or malcontented intentionally ignorant will keep them from loving whom they love. In the same way that no monogamous person can or should be forced into poly, no individual who knows that xhe is polyamorous should be forced into monogamy to suit someone else's idea of what is 'right'.  "If you love me, you'll be monogamous with me" is a cruel statement, lacking in compassion, and denying the -essence- of the person to whom it is spoken. In a sense, it says "I love you, EXCEPT for your polyness, which you will have to deny if you want my love." Either you can love the whole person, not in -spite- of hir flaws, but embracing those as parts that make that person who xhe is, or there is infatuation there, perhaps, but there is not love.



_____________________________

***
Said to me recently: "Look, I know you're the "voice of reason"... but dammit, I LIKE being unreasonable!!!!"

"Your mind is more interested in the challenge of becoming than the challenge of doing." Jon Benson, Bodybuilder/Trainer

(in reply to LATEXBABY64)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: open relationships - 12/11/2008 2:19:21 PM   
urlittleprincess


Posts: 149
Joined: 12/18/2007
Status: offline
poly is not part of my emotional makeup and it is not part of our relationship.  He does not share and neither do i...oh hell, we went to a christmas party last weekend, and another man told Him that he thought i was beautiful...that was enough to Him to keep me by His side all night...i like the possessiveness...when in a relationship, i am committed to that one and expect the same in return...in my relationship becoming involved with another whether emotionally or sexually would be cheating.  to walk into my bedroom to see Him receiving a blowjob from some other woman or engaging in other activities would be the end of the relationship for me.  it just isn't right for me but i know this about myself...and kudos to those who practice poly successfully.

(in reply to kiwisub12)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: open relationships - 12/11/2008 9:01:50 PM   
DomDG


Posts: 63
Joined: 8/30/2007
Status: offline
slavegirljoy:

A great presentation!  Great research!  way to go.




_____________________________

D
A sub with too much time on her hands should spend more on their knees.

(in reply to slavegirljoy)
Profile   Post #: 72
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: open relationships Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094