Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: exclusivity


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: exclusivity Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 1:02:08 PM   
SexyBossyBBW


Posts: 1693
Joined: 2/25/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt
From the female perspective, only the desperate have to immediately focus on one person. I've never needed a man so badly I had to settle into a committed relationship before I was ready to.

The fact that I do better focusing my attention on one at a time doesn't mean I'm desperate. I also only read one book at a time, or only have one movie going on at a time. Maybe you think that's desperate also?

To me it's a question of being able to focus and see what's there. It's mindfulness, not desperation.
I agree with you Celeste completely. I have dated more than one man in the past. I find that my focus is scattered, and too much of my time is spent dating, and too little time doing my own thing. There is also the problem of, forgetting who am I seeing today, and what was his name again?
I should add, that I mean exclusivity happens only after I've met a person, and we agree, we like one another, and both wish to explore a relationship.

I would argue that seeing many people, ensures one is never without a date. If one were desperate, that would be one way to ensure one is always available. Of course, I'm not saying anyone is desperate. Simply answering the implication that wanting one, and preferring the same, does not in any way=desperation. M

< Message edited by SexyBossyBBW -- 4/19/2011 1:06:16 PM >

_____________________________

"..touching was and still is and always will be the True Revolution" Nikki Giovanni
"Only when there are many people who are pools of peace, silence, understanding, will war disappear." -Osho

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 2:49:26 PM   
NuevaVida


Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline 		NG:

I appreciate the dialogue. Oddly enough, the "play partner" I had two years ago was a bit of a different experience for me. We got together with the idea of a relationship but quickly found while we liked each other, we weren't compatible long term relationship material for each other. But we enjoyed each others company and the sex was fantastic. But we were both free to see other people.

Still, it was lacking real fulfillment, as you suggested. We both knew it was a short term thing but it filled some odd gap for both of us. Looking back, I'm actually surprised the man above me continued his interest in me, although I'm glad he did :). Such an arrangement was rather out of character for me, but apparently was what I needed at the time.

I'm a believer that things work out as they should when people do what feels right for them. We all have our paths to take and I'm not a huge fan of categorizing someone into a negative box if theirs is different than mine. After all, I took a weird turn and ended up exactly where I needed. Go figure ;)

_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.



(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 3:11:30 PM   
tiggerspoohbear


Posts: 19141
Joined: 6/27/2010
Status: offline 		~FR~

In my late teens and early twenties I did more than my share of sleeping around with just about any and every guy who showed interest.  Having started this in my last year of high school I became the h/s slut.  Low self-esteem which has plagued me much of my years. 

I no longer resort to that, it's just not who I am anymore.  I've grown up a lot in 30 some yrs and value myself more now.  But that's me, not aimed at anyone else.  I can chat with more than one Dominant at a time, I have done so on more than one occasion.

I live in the middle of nowhere, I'm practically a hermit, but I'm not desperate and I'm not out of touch with reality.  If it's going to happen, then so be it.  If not, though I may be lonely at times, I don't mind being alone.  That once again, is my choice to do so. 

I've been with a few Doms who've expected me to be exclusive to them, yet they didn't make me the same promise.  As the saying goes I won't be the option to someone who can't make me a priority.  I'm not built for poly, been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.  It ended badly and I'm not willing to subject myself to that.  I know who I am, and that's a monogamous human being. 

I don't expect all that from someone I'm just meeting for the first time, but if we were to decide that we'd be exclusive after getting to know each other well, then I'd expect the same from him.  I only offer what I expect in return.  Not for everybody, but it's for me.


_____________________________

"RABBIT IS GOOD, RABBIT IS WISE".

"I'm a baaa-aaad pussycat".


(in reply to SexyBossyBBW)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 3:14:18 PM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss

I've dated one person at a time... sometimes three dates in one day, but each date was with only one other person.



_____________________________



My fave Thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_2626198/mpage_1/tm.htm

One time "Phallus Expert Extraordinaire"

(in reply to sunshinemiss)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 4:11:44 PM   
sunshinemiss


Posts: 17673
Joined: 11/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ChatteParfaitt

Oh I think we are having plenty of issues with language in this thread, and not just with UK/US nuances in meaning, but male/female as well.

For an example, when I said I was "in the market" I think some males conjure me up there on the auction block, going for the highest financial bid, when what I mean is, if a potential lover caught my attention, I would be open to seeing where things went.

I see dating as meaning "I'm willing to go out to dinner with you, and see where things go." For me at least, it doesn't mean you get to follow me home and fuck me silly. For others it very well may. But dating to me means getting to know a person in a romantic way.


I would agree with this with one caveat. I don't necessarily mean romance. Sometimes dating for me is geting together with someone I know I don't have a romantic interest in nor does he have an interest in me, but we still enjoy each other's company as a man and a woman. We flirt, we laugh, we waltz, we walk arm in arm. To anyone outside of the two of us, we look romantic, but in fact it is just affection plus a healthy dose of male/female energy. Some of my very best dates were with gay men.

quote:

And I am going to take my time with that. Not b/c I am incapable of committing, but b/c when I commit, it means I'm serious, I'm in for the the long haul. I think most everyone has a big grey area for the time between "let's see where this goes" and "we are officially committed as a couple."

How long that take surely depends on the people involved, how close they are in terms of getting to spend time together, and how often they get to meet to have that getting to know time.


Oh yes. When I get involved, it becomes very clear that this is IT. And oh yes, it takes quite a bit for that to happen. With Mr. The One, I resisted him for months but we still went out to lunch as colleagues and I got to know him. I specifically DID NOT flirt with him and such. If I hadn't been so nervous about falling in love with him (rightly so evidently ) I could have been dating him for quite some time.

quote:

I do take issue with the idea that a female should take herself off the market b/c a dom deigns to talk to her. Or that dating a female is "doing her a favor." Perhaps that is others reality, it is surely not mine.


Yes, to me that smacks of ugly arrogance. It's also unrealistic. The only way I could possibly see myself not actually dating (if I were in the USA) would be if I were sick or depressed. I've never gone without dates - that is until I got to Asia. That's been a new experience!

Dating is to some degree an extension of friendship. To put a rush on that, to become committed before meeting, before the chemistry develops is rather like forcing an issue. For me it has to happen organically or else it is false.

Also, it's not just that a man I speak with has chosen me, it's that I must choose him as well. Anyone I've been involved with did just what you say in one of your posts... waited until I figured it out. Then, I was absolutely their fiercest supporter, most loyal friend, and most passionate lover - because I knew in my bones what was and was not.

best,
sunshine

_____________________________

Yes, I am a wonton hussy... and still sweet as 3.14

(in reply to ChatteParfaitt)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 5:19:11 PM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Although I prefer to communicate face to face, I think I prefer to analyse a woman through written communication. You (general you) could argue it either way with reference to body language etc. Depends on the premise from which you start; I believe the way you (general you) thinks takes precedence over mannerisms and execution.


i consider communication in this realm as a preliminary step and one i utilize when making an assessment. However, it is not definitive in the sense that the individual is assuredly this or that, but merely one who 'appears' to be these things. Nonetheless i have encountered a select few who are consistent in their presentation to the degree where i'm relatively certain that they're pretty legitimate. In most cases (read: all) we've been well acquainted for years and routinely engage outside of this realm. i'd be hard pressed to formulate a similar opinion with someone that fell outside of the parameters mentioned. But exceptions do exist.

quote:

Yes, absolutely. I take your point, although, pedantic as this may seem, I wouldn't use the term 'hold in reserve'. That's irrelevant, though, in terms of the crux of your point; yes, I'd wait until I've found something in her that has caused me to feel she's a diamond. And, in the interests of clarity, I'm not holding women on a pedastal here. I understand as well as anyone that we all have strengths and weaknesses, but, still, those weaknesses can be to your taste.


i don't believe i possess an inability to wait if i feel the individual is well worth doing so. However, i've discovered that my experiences were unique as were the individuals i became involved with. It was necessary for me to recognize they were the exceptions rather than the rule and to approach new situations realistically. In my opinion there are relatively few that are willing to interact in the manner mentioned and disciplined enough to do it for some duration without unrest or outright abandonment. i don't feel that's wrong per se, but merely an aspect of their constitution and respective dating practices. Denial and patience are areas where i excel. It isn't difficult and that's why planes and telephones exist.

quote:

I don't have a system where I apply method to these things; it's a case of following my intuition. At what point? When I think: "you know what, I really like this person".


i encounter men that enjoy the 'idea' of owning me. For these reasons it's necessary for me to be forthright and avoid drawn out situations that are ill fitting for both parties. i find those that enjoy presenting an aura of mystique or other evasive practices are generally bothered by this. They enjoy the dance where i abhor it until i discover if he's a worthy consideration.

quote:

Easily, without breaking sweat. It boils down to my principles and values. There's something appealing about two people discussing ideas and needs away from some coffee shop inhabited by people reading the same types of books, saying largely the same things, and looking the same; prompted by some sit com or other, and crying out for a small portion of authenticity. Doesn't have to be a coffee shop, granted, the point is this: what and how you think counts, not the setting.


While i appreciate the human essence when encountered, i'm unable to make the same association with an individual i've never met in person. Chemistry and other important elements must be solidified and allowing myself to 'connect' so to speak with the individual on the screen without those realistic engagements is foolhardy. Nor are these things hammered out in one meeting. It is my preference to proceed at a pace that leaves little question about the feasibility of undertaking ownership. i must have a clear idea who i'm interacting with before an agreement can be made.

quote:

Would you mind being more specific in terms of what you mean by 'without guarantee'?


The comment reflects the fact that no matter how compatible or likable the individual appears from afar, there's no guarantee that will transfer over when meeting in person. There's always the probability that it will not.

quote:

'Easy to reconcile the time': it certainly is. And the process is a pleasure, not a painstaking chore. It's not simply a case of reasoning it out and determining what course of action will result in the required outcome, there's the added ingredient of actually enjoying that option far more than the alternative.


i don't have the frantic angst some possess about being unattached. i believe things happen in their rightful time and i try to make use of this season in my life in a positive fashion.

quote:

Is this a conclusion you've arrived at recently, a long held principle, or something else?


No, it is something i became aware of several years ago. i've known for some time that i required a needle and that reality is reflected in my countenance and selectivity. i haven't rested on my laurels in the space between and that merely widens the gap. But in a roundabout way this makes the process far easier. We recognize that which we possess without great effort. It isn't a matter of seeking him. His essence would be hard to miss.

Namaste,

~porcelaine


_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 6:52:35 PM   
aromanholiday


Posts: 307
Joined: 4/12/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

I wouldn't get involved with anyone who didn't meet my standards; in other words, my version of good. But, if you equate hesitation to taking your time then that's me, and I can't force any woman to take herself off the market - it's her call.

Call it setting your stall out or call it arrogance, but my expectation is that she comes to me as someone who is off the market and I'll let her know when I've decided we're ready to take things a step further.

And, I hold absolutely no anxiety around her 'being snapped up'. 'Good women' are like me in character - they prefer depth over breadth - so in the event she is thinking about 'being snapped up', then that's not my queue to bend over backwards to accomodate, it's my queue to shove her in the direction of where she needs to go, and that ain't with me.


What you're saying makes perfect sense to me. I naturally and immediately go off the market if someone comes on my horizon who seems capable of providing me with what I need. I don't meet that sort of person very often, to put it midly, so when it happens my interest is very, very much in-depth. Why would I jeopardize a possibly spectacular thing just to get some slight satisfactions from flirting or comparison shopping or (may lightning strike me if I ever do this) showing him that I am "quite the package" because other men are interested in me? No, no, no, Wrong! My primary interest at that point is in showing _him_ what an incredible package I think he is and how lucky I feel to be allowed in his presence. Worship of him, not of me, is the whole point...isn't it? While I will hope to engage his interest in me as well despite how unworthy I typically feel around someone like that, I will only do so with things that are inside me, such as my ability to serve or my level of understanding. To me, it would be height of stupidity to attempt to engage the interest of such an individual with a crass show of my popularity with other dominants or any other form of shallow display or coy, indirect game-playing. But until the time that I meet someone like that, I keep my self enclosed, intact, and, for the most part, hidden. This works well for me, as I don't get burned out dealing with the shallow, the confused, or incompatible-but-trying-to-force-a-fit types.

_____________________________

"Isn't it odd how we misunderstand the hidden unity of kindness and cruelty?"

My profile is not turned off. It is broken and I am too lazy to make a new one.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: exclusivity - 4/19/2011 7:06:57 PM   
sunshinemiss


Posts: 17673
Joined: 11/26/2007
Status: offline 		To: agirl -
thank you for posting without the bold. I can't read your words in the regular size font with bold, and I do enjoy very much your posts.

Best,
sunshine

_____________________________

Yes, I am a wonton hussy... and still sweet as 3.14

(in reply to aromanholiday)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 1:59:29 AM   
Ariane23


Posts: 88
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Like NG, I don't do casual. I also am not compatible with people who can do that especially with multiple people. I don't ask anyone to freeze their life for me either. If they are the kind to date multiple people at once, they could be friends  but not a possible partner for me. Compatibility for me includes wanting to focus on one person at a time.



So what happens between seeing an attractive person across the room and making a commitment? You don't go out on a few first dates to get to know each other?

It takes time to really get to know another person.

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 6:28:59 AM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		Ariane, I have never felt it necessary to go out every night in a week. I am capable of taking myself to dinner, to a movie, and so on. I can also go out with friends. If the person isn't someone who inspires more than a slight interest, I won't accept a date.

And as I said, if I was seeing Mr Attractive that night, it wouldn't be a hardship to tell someone else that I'm busy for the next week. Which is more than enough time to have three dates and several long phone calls with Mr Attractive, enough for me to know if I wanted to see him again. Although I usually know after the first date if I want to see him again. Any guy that I have dated multiple times holds a great deal of interest for me.

Can you say that when you date a different man every night of the week, they all appeal to you as people you can envision spending years with? Or are they just guys to go out with so you don't sit home? Because that's fine if you want to be out all the time and not alone. But it doesn't work for me.


_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to Ariane23)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 7:07:40 AM   
ChatteParfaitt


Posts: 6562
Joined: 3/22/2011
From: The t'aint of the Midwest -- Indiana
Status: offline 		You are willing to be exclusive with someone after dating for a week, and you are taking the moral high ground?

I have noticed that is a trend in your posts, to attempt to be inflammatory by taking things out of context, reading all kinds of things into people's posts that are not there, and then using a moral cudgel to bash them with your misconceptions.

It's not very becoming.

Here are some examples from this thread alone:

Most people I know who are dating numerous people at once aren't really ready for a monogamous long term relationship. Thus they spread their intimacy about to prevent committing to one.

The you managed to take this bit of prose: "From the female perspective, only the desperate have to immediately focus on one person. I've never needed a man so badly I had to settle into a committed relationship before I was ready to. "

and mangle it into:
The fact that I do better focusing my attention on one at a time doesn't mean I'm desperate. I also only read one book at a time, or only have one movie going on at a time. Maybe you think that's desperate also?

To me it's a question of being able to focus and see what's there. It's mindfulness, not desperation.

I think the operative phrase in my post that you ignored was "before I was ready to."

When I ignored your inflammatory remarks, you came back with this.

I don't think it's wrong for other people to date casually and multiple people. It's simply wrong for me. And it's wrong for me to date someone who doesn't have that same approach to life as I do, it just means we don't see eye to eye enough to be able to have a relationship.

What I do not understand is why those of you who do date casually and with multiple partners think that those of us who don't operate that way are bad. We aren't. We simply are not compatible with you.

No one said your point of view was bad, this is you reading things into others posts that is just plain not there. You appear to be unable to handle any post that doesn't agree with your way of the moral high ground, and interpret it as criticism.

Can you say that when you date a different man every night of the week, they all appeal to you as people you can envision spending years with? Or are they just guys to go out with so you don't sit home? Because that's fine if you want to be out all the time and not alone. But it doesn't work for me.

No, that would not work for you, b/c you are so much better than us. Anyone who dates more than one man at a time does so for the sole purpose of filling up their dance card b/c they can't stand to be alone. If only we had your moral fortitude.

I know you have been here awhile, and I know there are those who respect your viewpoints. I admit I have considered putting you on ignore, but I haven't because every now and then you actually say something that is so spot in, it's brilliant. And I like that.

I do wish you could come down from your moral heaven and join the rest of us mere mortals, however.



_____________________________



(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 7:12:21 AM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		What part of "I don't focus well on multiple people" don't you understand?

I really don't get it. You folks who date multiple people at once feel threatened by those very few of us who can't do that. Why? Just move on to someone you are compatible with instead of putting NG, leadership, SexyBossyBBW, and me down. We don't threaten you because we operate differently.

And you started the negativity by saying that anyone who didn't date multiple people at once were all desperate. I'm ending it by putting you on ignore because The Man does not permit me to be upset by online stuff.


_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to ChatteParfaitt)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 7:23:18 AM   
LaTigresse


Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline 		Using fast reply...

I honestly believe it is just a case of personal choice. Myself, I am not a casual dater per se. If I have lunch with someone, coffee......I don't really see that as 'dating'.

Dating in the context of having sex with someone I am not extremely interested in.........that's just not my cuppa. For some it's totally within their comfort zone.

I think the problem lies when others either bring their own personal comfort zone/morals, into the discussion. Assuming that everyone else does or should, share a similar mindset and conveys that attitude within the discussion.


_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to ChatteParfaitt)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 8:36:11 AM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ariane23
So what happens between seeing an attractive person across the room and making a commitment? You don't go out on a few first dates to get to know each other?

I honestly do not understand why this is so complicated to understand. Either I am available at the moment or I am not. If I'm not then the person is attractive in a theoretical sense. If I am available, then they are attractive in an dating sense. At that point I walk on over and say "Hi". If we end up having a decent conversation and things look promising then I'm no longer available because now I'm focused on her. If she had told me during the course of this conversation that there was some other guy then she's not available in my head. The moment she said it she would've changed categories in my head and so the remainder of the conversation will proceed differently. We'll laugh for a while, say goodbye, then move on. When she said that she would not move into a maybe category... "Well, she's hot and she doesn't sound so excited about this other guy so I can win her if I try". That's not how my head works. In my ears it's more like hearing a woman say she's married... it's the end of the line for any romantic interest.

At no point here have I taken myself or anyone else off of any market. Nor have I committed to anyone and I don't expect her to have committed to me. All that's happened is that I've turned my attention to the woman and so there's no attention left for any other women. Any partner compatible with me would operate similarly. If they were ever on any "market" then they're not the right partner for me. If there was "this other guy" then a woman compatible with me wouldn't even be talking to me (with romantic intent).

As I read this thread I'm really beginning to wonder how deep this difference goes. I would've expected it to be just a surface "dating style" thing but I'm really beginning to wonder if this gets way down deep into something different than just style or approach. In my head I keep wanting to connect it to "monogamous" although I know that's not quite right.


_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to Ariane23)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 8:38:40 AM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

I really don't get it. You folks who date multiple people at once feel threatened by those very few of us who can't do that. Why? Just move on to someone you are compatible with instead of putting NG, leadership, SexyBossyBBW, and me down. We don't threaten you because we operate differently.


With all due respect i have no reason to be threatened by an individual i've never met whom i'm unlikely to cross paths with in this lifetime. Furthermore, to assume that a postulation of keystrokes that could be wholly false would upset my self awareness and esteem is so preposterous that it leaves me to wonder what's truly amiss. A difference of opinion doesn't equate that one is threatened. For it has been my observation that yours are frequently in contradiction to the subject matter. Does this imply the same where you're concerned? Or are you merely echoing what's true for you instead?

If one is putting this whole thing under the microscope i'd sincerely question why anyone needs to garner superiority through this medium and would kindly recommend offline exercises that would address the vacancy. The whole notion of someone being threatened is far too asinine to debate. i often find that those who articulate these statements have an intrinsic need to be envied.

Namaste,

~porcelaine

_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 8:45:55 AM   
ranja


Posts: 2111
Joined: 11/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

If she had told me during the course of this conversation that there was some other guy then she's not available in my head. The moment she said it she would've changed categories in my head and so the remainder of the conversation will proceed differently. We'll laugh for a while, say goodbye, then move on.


This is exactly why if a girl is looking for a mate and keeping options open she should not volunteer info like this unless she wants to make it abundantly clear she is not interested in any more than a friendly chat.

Unfortunately many women think they should be totally honest about any interactions with other males because if the new one they are talking to is 'the one' he will be patient, understanding and prepared to listen to all the experiences of his new interest without any judgement... this is a wrong perception in my opinion and experience

< Message edited by ranja -- 4/20/2011 8:47:01 AM >

(in reply to leadership527)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 8:57:57 AM   
ChatteParfaitt


Posts: 6562
Joined: 3/22/2011
From: The t'aint of the Midwest -- Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

As I read this thread I'm really beginning to wonder how deep this difference goes. I would've expected it to be just a surface "dating style" thing but I'm really beginning to wonder if this gets way down deep into something different than just style or approach. In my head I keep wanting to connect it to "monogamous" although I know that's not quite right.
from leadership

I made a statement that got grossly misinterpreted "if your dating style is to date one person at a time, then you are desperate."

I, in fact, never said that or anything close to that. When you take statements out of context, it is easy to misinterpret them, however. My use of the term desperate had nothing to do with dating style so much as a poster's contention that a female should focus on him before he even knew if he wanted her. When you violate reciprocal levels of commitment, especially early on in a relationship, it does appear desperate to me.

If you are both on the same page in terms of the "I focus on one person at a time while I get to know them."  That is a reciprocal level in my opinion.

Somehow I guess I did not make that clear, or people choose to misinterpret it.

In any case I do find it amazing that some need to wield a moral cudgel so as to bash those who don't agree with them. And there has been quite a bit of that in this thread, by more than one poster.

I haven't gone through and reread all the posts, but I don't remember a post by the "I date multiple people camp" that bashed the other side, unless you include mine. And that wasn't a bashing, I assure you. It was a pursed lip and a raised eyebrow.




_____________________________



(in reply to porcelaine)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 12:19:15 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline 		What you're saying makes perfect sense to me.

Yes, although a shame I can't tell cue from queue. More haste, less speed.

Why would I jeopardize a possibly spectacular thing just to get some slight satisfactions from flirting or comparison shopping

Perfect.

Worship of him, not of me, is the whole point...isn't it?

A woman could worship me in her mind, although it's not something I seek, providing it doesn't jeopardise her capacity to have a discussion with me from a point of equals, with the confidence to tell it how she sees it. I can't learn from her in the areas in which I have an interest? No use to me, then. I dont, however, see the two as mutually exclusive; nor do I take any satisfaction from being 'worshipped'.

< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 4/20/2011 12:24:13 PM >

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to aromanholiday)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 12:36:35 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

NG:

I appreciate the dialogue. Oddly enough, the "play partner" I had two years ago was a bit of a different experience for me. We got together with the idea of a relationship but quickly found while we liked each other, we weren't compatible long term relationship material for each other. But we enjoyed each others company and the sex was fantastic. But we were both free to see other people.



Apologies for the delay. I looked in, but didn't have the time to put something together.

I should clarify the following: my reality has no bearing on what I think anyone else should do; people should follow their nose.

There's a lot to be said for friendship and pleasure, so wouldn't knock that at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

I'm a believer that things work out as they should when people do what feels right for them. We all have our paths to take and I'm not a huge fan of categorizing someone into a negative box if theirs is different than mine. After all, I took a weird turn and ended up exactly where I needed. Go figure ;)



We're like minded, then. I have strong opinions, but they're open to revision. Weird turn? I think I've read a few of your posts and know some of the details. I think it holds true that when you've experienced extremes and come out the other end, life can seem a doddle.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to NuevaVida)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: exclusivity - 4/20/2011 1:33:12 PM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt
I haven't gone through and reread all the posts, but I don't remember a post by the "I date multiple people camp" that bashed the other side

Honestly I ignored whatever was going on in the "bashing" subthread. I'm more intrigued at the difference in perception and dating strategy and what that might or might not mean about how someone who's different than me sees the world.


_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to ChatteParfaitt)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: exclusivity Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
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

0.109