|
AAkasha -> RE: Would you be monogamous with the all-in-one submissive man? (3/3/2010 9:27:26 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
I use that past tense because I've seen or heard of quite a few polyamorous situations more recently that seem sound, balanced and happy. I would, totally, still want the one-one-partnership D/s equivalent of my former vanilla relationships and I think I'd probably give up a lot of what I want, kink-wise, to get that. But, my mind's changed a lot over the last couple of years. I'm more open to other possibilities now.
I fear that some submissive men who deeply desire monogamy and a bdsm relationship might eventually settle for a poly situation because they have not found a Domme woman suited to them who will engage in monogamy with them.
It's not so much about settling but about dealing with the odds for them. I hear that in what sO2 was saying, I feel I hear it in Peon's post but I don't want to project too much. I know that off the boards, I've had men share this with me.
The thing is, that usually, not always, submissive men tend to worship one woman as their Lady. It is tricky, though not impossible, to be devoted to more than one. I would imagine that one would be favoured. I'm going to be a little contreversial here and pull something from the Qur’an: "You are never able to be fair and just between women even if it is your ardent desire…" and I think that if we flip this around, it and change women for men, it would be the same. I imagine that is why in most poly that I've observed, people clearly deliniate a primary over a secondary partner, to avoid such confusion and to manage expectations.
Anyhow, this is a thread about monogamy, not polygamy so I won't go any further on that topic.
- LA
Does non-monogamy mean intimacy (emotional and/or sexual)? Does being monogamous mean you are unfaithful if you lust for another man but do not act on it? What about masturbation? What about viewing pictures of other men in bondage and getting sexually aroused? What if you happen to know the man in the pictures? What if he took the pictures for you? I think defining monogamy is important.
If you met a man that satisfied all your needs, would that eliminate your predatory lust - not for love, companionship or sexual release, but for the mere satisfaction of what it brings in and of yourself?
I guess the bigger question is whether or not you can do casual S&m and have it 1) not become sexual intercourse and 2) not require or create feelings of emotional connection. I might be an oddly wired animal; I can do casual S&m and have the time of my life and never see the guy again, and also never have sex with him. There are grey areas that I am constantly working through (like kissing - where does that fall, is it an act of dominance or an act of intimacy?).
If I take something like *hair pulling* -- which can be seen as totally harmless in a lot of cases - this is a very, very powerful act of dominance for me. Everything from the look on a man's face to the feel of his hair between my fingers. If I was told I could NEVER pull ANY man's hair again I would have a hard time getting my head around that. I like to pull hair. It doesn't mean I want a boyfriend, or want to fuck the man I am doing this to. My husband really doesn't care if I pull hair (to him, it's a trade off, because he likes to keep his hair so short I can't pull it, so he feels he's denying me).
If you go to BDSM parties and play, does that mean you are not monogamous?
Akasha
|
|
|
|
