Fidelity.

Fidelity. (Full Version)

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

Message

ExiledTyrant -> Fidelity. (12/14/2015 6:41:36 AM)
I'm going to give this a try and see if we can stimulate some discourse and ignore the spaced invaders... Fidelity is going to vary from dynamic to dynamic, but the essence of fidelity is what is "agreed upon" by all members of the relationship. I am a polygynist with a circle dynamic... if you want to know more about poly dynamics, go look it up... it is a closed circle for I am relationship orientated and my fidelity is with my girls. My emotional, mental, physical fidelity is exclusive to my poly dynamic, my girls. Again, my dynamic is a closed circle. Believe it or not, this is actually a fidelitous relationship. How, you ask? Because I will always keep my dick either in my pants of in them and no where else... ipso facto... fidelity. Fidelity and monogamy are not mutually exclusive. You may be in a monogamous relationship, but it may not be fidelitous. The fidelity of a relationship/dynamic is the key and that fidelity is established and agreed upon by all people participating in the dynamic/relationship. Fidelity is the mitigating factor that will make or break a relationship/dynamic. Fidelity is rooted in trust. This ^ is my fidelity and, hopefully, we can get other dynamics to participate and peel away the delusion that fidelity = monogamy.

Greta75 -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 9:46:19 AM)
What boggers my mind is. Let's say, if you got 10 girls in a poly relationship. You're already rotating your dick inside 10 different girls. What huge offense would it be, to one day, include the 11th? I mean, poly end of the day, there is a limitless amount of women you can devote your so-called "fidelity" to right? A man could say, he'll have 50 women in a poly relationship and he practices fidelity with all of them. It just doesn't make sense. But to be frank, it also doesn't bother me that poly people wants to be included in the fidelity thing. I mean if a man got a whole harem of 100 women and he wants to call that fidelity to them all, sure, go ahead. Some may have 2, some may have hundreds! I guess it's all about personal way of processing it. I don't know why it's important for poly relationships to have fidelity in the first place, since it's already not exclusive to one, but exclusive to many who are included in that little circle. And technically, if a man already have so much women to deal with, and having to rotate among them, I think he'll be too busy to keep meeting new ones, and add on to his harem. Or he could keep adding on, and pledge fidelity to each of them as he adds them in.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 9:51:40 AM)
If I were to stick my dick in the 11th random girl I'd be cheating.

Greta75 -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 9:52:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant If I were to stick my dick in the 11th random girl I'd be cheating. No, you wouldn't if you included her into your poly relationship. There is a limitless loophole.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 9:53:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant If I were to stick my dick in the 11th random girl I'd be cheating. No, you wouldn't if you included her into your poly relationship. There is a limitless loophole. Which would then make it a fidelitous relationship that everyone agrees upon... which is the point you're missing. Fidelity is an agreed upon practice, not "Oh well, he's already fucking 10 of us, wotever..."

Greta75 -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 9:59:32 AM)
I just think it doesn't make any sense at all. I think it's a rationalization to have many women without niggling guilt that you are being unfaithful. I think general definition of the word "Fidelity" is often tied to Faithfulness to A person. And not often used in Poly situations. As per oxford dictionary. I think the word, "exclusive poly relationship" makes more sense.

MisterP61 -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 10:12:08 AM)
Like You said My brother, fidelity is defined by those who are involved. LP has Her boys and there are intimate times for them, that is part of Our fidelity. I know what is going on. LP finds another boy and doesn't tell Me, now we are infidelity territory. (Disclaimer this doesn't happen). Simple communication between all parties and agreements made makes it a pretty Fidelity oriented family

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 10:12:42 AM)
Cuckholds have fidelity in their dynamics, Greta, as difficult as that is for many to people to grasp, they still do.

DesFIP -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 11:20:50 AM)
If you've agreed upon monogamy and are monogamous, then how is it not an example of fidelity? I'm a little confused. Greta, if they agreed that fucking random strangers is okay but falling in love with them is not, then that 11th or 100th other woman would be them keeping their word.

OsideGirl -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 11:38:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 I just think it doesn't make any sense at all. I think it's a rationalization to have many women without niggling guilt that you are being unfaithful. Fidelity is a promise. You can keep a promise to multiple people. Cheating is defined as: quote: to break a rule or law usually to gain an advantage at something : to take something from (someone) by lying or breaking a rule : to prevent (someone) from having something that he or she deserves or was expecting to get So, it's the lying not the multiple partners that qualifies as unfaithfulness. quote: I think general definition of the word "Fidelity" is often tied to Faithfulness to A person. Only in your mid: The US Marines uses the phrase "Semper Fidelis". There is a large investment firm "Fidelity Investments". Many fraternal organizations use "fidelity" as a key word. quote: And not often used in Poly situations. Considering that poly situations aren't common, not shocking.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 1:14:23 PM)
You basically wish to shag all women of your choice, or who will tolerate such malarkey. I am not being cheeky, how many are you shagging ( I can chose better word if you wish me do so – how many do you have personal contact with be it a shagging or playing or cuddling). I am just curious as to why you are not seeing to all these wanton wenches. I am a remnant of time. In my experience only cheats try and justify themselves with malarkey and try and make words like poly - swinging acceptable. Few people are designed for that lifestyle – I am – you are not – I am damaged goods but none of it appeals to me since I was 18 years olde….and I learnt then no there was nothing truly in it for me and my pack of wilde wenches For I am older than time I pay attention everywhere Most swingers relationships disintegrate Most poly relationships disintegrate with their primary partner Most attached people try and gather a stable My experience of all fetish sites and swinging sites is that 99%, who have mailed me, are in a relationship and seek malarkey and their partner is unaware.

LadyPact -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 1:14:58 PM)
I'm glad you started this one. This is something that you (ExT) and I have talked about before and I know we are very close in our ways of thinking. Disclaimer. For you monogamous folks, if you're monogamous, BE MONOGAMOUS. There is not a thing wrong with only wanting to be sexually intimate with one person if that is the way you are wired. Not all poly people are trying to be a^^holes about it. If that's your happy, do that, and don't let anybody tell you that you have to be something else. On to poly fidelity... I function best at poly fidelity. Also sometimes known as closed poly. That means only sexually intimate with those within a certain group. I know. Leather folks have a certain rep for wanting to screw anything that moves but that doesn't quite work for me. (I really suck at the one night stand thing and I used to have a cuck for a submissive.) I prefer to have a limited number of sexual partners and I don't go beyond what MP and I have agreed to since we decided to become poly. Contrary to opinion, poly people can cheat. Your partner may know that you have additional partner X. That doesn't mean that you might go to the bar and pick up person Y. Person Y wasn't exactly a part of your agreement. In my opinion, that's crossing the poly fidelity line.

OsideGirl -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 1:22:18 PM)
I'll go one step further - we have a "semi-open" relationship. Sex doesn't equal love, if that were the case, there'd be a quite a few guys from my 20s.... Sex does not equal intimacy either. It's the mental stuff that equates to love and intimacy. Several years ago, we came to the agreement that if one of us wanted to play outside of the marriage, it was okay....as long as certain criteria were met. First being that it wasn't done without permission and we both had the right to veto without repercussion. (And of course, safe sex was practiced) This means that doing it without permission or getting tangled up in an intimate relationship would be considered cheating.

shiftyw -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 2:41:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl I'll go one step further - we have a "semi-open" relationship. Sex doesn't equal love, if that were the case, there'd be a quite a few guys from my 20s.... Sex does not equal intimacy either. It's the mental stuff that equates to love and intimacy. Several years ago, we came to the agreement that if one of us wanted to play outside of the marriage, it was okay....as long as certain criteria were met. First being that it wasn't done without permission and we both had the right to veto without repercussion. (And of course, safe sex was practiced) This means that doing it without permission or getting tangled up in an intimate relationship would be considered cheating. This is exactly how my relationship works. Fidelity is important not the monogamy.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 2:56:50 PM)
I'm not poly, never been, however I can have nonsexual BDSM play without being poly, it's what we agreed upon and we both can live with without it causing problems or jealousy. Each relationship is different and as long as there are clear rules and people abide by the rules, to each their own.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 5:49:15 PM)
still waiting on a credible list of this ones wenches For I will show em man, and thrash em with mighty slipper, and bereft them of muffin he has boasted of his reality now let us see if he can live up to an iota

LadyPact -> RE: Fidelity. (12/14/2015 10:35:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I'm not poly, never been, however I can have nonsexual BDSM play without being poly, it's what we agreed upon and we both can live with without it causing problems or jealousy. Each relationship is different and as long as there are clear rules and people abide by the rules, to each their own. Just my personal opinion on the matter. Nonsexual BDSM play isn't part of what I count as poly. That's a whole other category that I consider casual play partners. Some people consider all BDSM play as sexual but I just don't see it that way. To me, swinging a flogger at someone doesn't meet the criteria of physical sex. For what MP and I have agreed between us, it's not a poly relationship unless at least one of three criteria exist: * Some form of physical sex. That doesn't mean only PIV. It also includes oral, strap-on, manual manipulation of the genitals, etc. As the old joke goes, I have a much broader definition of sex than Bill Clinton but if you'd take the whips and restraints out of it and vanilla people would call it sex, I'm probably counting it as sex. * Established D/s. Away from play, I'm controlling at least some aspects of the other person's life. * Some kind of romantic emotional attachment. For me, it doesn't have to be all three. I can do D/s without the emotional/romantic attachment. I can do sex without love. (Not my preference, but I know I'm capable.) While the BDSM and D/s elements are our primary reasons for being poly, I know I can be in love without the kink. (Something you and I were talking about recently.) Other people's definitions of poly may be different but the above is the crux of what works for MP and I.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Fidelity. (12/15/2015 2:27:43 PM)
People are either faithful, or they are not. Tis that simple dear readers i am always truly appalled by the majoirty of "genuine" people in the “lifestyle” who claim-represent it to be the norm. It is not the norm. There are exceptions to every rule...This differs from pantaloons excuses & malarkey justifications to frolic amok with wenches galore, all wanton in their fine bespoke corsetry. Dear reader, You can look at this many ways as I believe all (profiles – albeit I guffawed at many words and self justifcations) above me credible – therefore no need for the tar and feathering...not that i have had a notion to delve. Therefore on the face of it, dear reader, I am the heinous anomaly – or perhaps my kind have all been scared away.

LadyPact -> RE: Fidelity. (12/15/2015 2:46:39 PM)
Do you happen to have a problem with poly people?

LadyConstanze -> RE: Fidelity. (12/15/2015 3:03:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I'm not poly, never been, however I can have nonsexual BDSM play without being poly, it's what we agreed upon and we both can live with without it causing problems or jealousy. Each relationship is different and as long as there are clear rules and people abide by the rules, to each their own. Just my personal opinion on the matter. Nonsexual BDSM play isn't part of what I count as poly. That's a whole other category that I consider casual play partners. Some people consider all BDSM play as sexual but I just don't see it that way. To me, swinging a flogger at someone doesn't meet the criteria of physical sex. For what MP and I have agreed between us, it's not a poly relationship unless at least one of three criteria exist: * Some form of physical sex. That doesn't mean only PIV. It also includes oral, strap-on, manual manipulation of the genitals, etc. As the old joke goes, I have a much broader definition of sex than Bill Clinton but if you'd take the whips and restraints out of it and vanilla people would call it sex, I'm probably counting it as sex. * Established D/s. Away from play, I'm controlling at least some aspects of the other person's life. * Some kind of romantic emotional attachment. For me, it doesn't have to be all three. I can do D/s without the emotional/romantic attachment. I can do sex without love. (Not my preference, but I know I'm capable.) While the BDSM and D/s elements are our primary reasons for being poly, I know I can be in love without the kink. (Something you and I were talking about recently.) Other people's definitions of poly may be different but the above is the crux of what works for MP and I. Well, apart from rule 2 we're in complete agreement, I do control some aspects of the lives of others and there is a friendship but no sexual or romantic attachment, they aren't going to lick anything of mine and nothing enters me and if I touch their bits, it's not for rub and tug but usually to stick a needle through ;) I wouldn't call it casual play as it's based on a lot of trust and a long standing relationship, just not a romantic or sexual one, they might masturbate thinking about what we have done, but they don't tell and I don't ask and they don't do it when I'm there, in fact I prefer to not think about it. Apart from the whipping and such, we're simply great friends, one needs goal posts and tasks and I give them, makes his life easier. I recently had the discussion with one person, as I was worried he might be getting romantically attached but he assured me it's more the ideal of the knight and the lady who will never be his, he called it "courtly love", which is pretty much non-physical, and I told him as long as it doesn't interfere with him being happy, I'm OK with it as long as he knows it isn't ever going to change.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625