RE: monogamy-hopeless? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive



Message


AoW777 -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/14/2007 4:42:34 PM)

As the others have said, if monogomy is what you want, you should ask for it. Lots of people get confused in this lifestyle and state the "its not what i want" line.. when in fact..what you want IS and always IS the most important issue of all. If for no other reason that the fact that a Dom that actually cares about you, will not be happy if you are not happy. Its all about negotiation, even if that negotiation is extremely short, or not done consciously. But, trust me, the search for monogomy isn't just hard for the submissive, its hard for the Dominant as well. Esp when submissives are afraid to say they want it, afraid to admit it, for fear of pushing away someone they like.

Good hunting.




touchthesky -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/14/2007 11:43:51 PM)

You havent really said why monagamy is important to you.One of the interesting things in BDSM that one makes alot of discoveries about things you didnt know you could deal with or delight in. My advice to a novice is don't set up hard limits till you have been open to things on an individual basis. There are things i might tolerate from one man because of how he handles himself that is a deal breaker in others. Also , just like in vanilla relationships. you really ought to get to know someone before you discuss getting serious with the, I have learned that the hard way,and recently




Lordandmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/15/2007 10:59:53 PM)

You don't see the contradiction in your reasoning?  If criminal adultery laws are LEFT OVER, as you put it, that means they date from the PAST--when they were enforced.  They're not enforced NOW.  That's the whole point.

Anyway, forget it.  This is pointless.  You can believe whatever you'd like to believe.  Let's go back to complaining about why you haven't been able to find a man who wants a monogamous relationship with you.  That's so much more fun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: novicecourtesan

Lordandmaster:
I have to smile. A lot. I cannot believe you throw adultery statutes at me. If a man was adulterous, up until recently, in most civilizations, they did....um, well nothing. If a woman was adulterous she could be divorced, beaten, etc-. And trust me, no state in the country is going to enforce an adultery statute criminally or civilly.. Those cases are thrown out all the time in courts and most of those laws--if they're still on the books--haven't been used in decades if not centuries. There are dueling laws leftover in many states too  with a similar status--that gives you an idea of the analogy you're applying. Give a lawyer a laugh and ask him the last time he saw an adultery statute enforced against a husband. He won't waste his time looking. (Many of those states, when they did punish adultery, had laws only applicable to wives).




dawntreader -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 4:47:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: touchthesky

You havent really said why monagamy is important to you.One of the interesting things in BDSM that one makes alot of discoveries about things you didnt know you could deal with or delight in. My advice to a novice is don't set up hard limits till you have been open to things on an individual basis. There are things i might tolerate from one man because of how he handles himself that is a deal breaker in others. Also , just like in vanilla relationships. you really ought to get to know someone before you discuss getting serious with the, I have learned that the hard way,and recently


Very good advice…




PhoenixLM -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 4:53:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: trappedinamuseum

I'm sorry I just can't help myself.  Bad historian, bad!

Historically, courtesans were high-balling prostitutes.  Monogamy was not high on their lists.  Geisha is probably a better word for it.

Once again, I'm sorry.  I'll put the smartass to bed now. 



While a Geisha was monogumous her "benifactor" was not required to be so and probably had a wife , if my understanding is accurate they might also have a concubine or two.

But I digress yes monogmy within the lifestle is possible depending on your definition of monogmy. Some people include BDSM activity in that some dont.




novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 6:55:21 AM)

Hi all...

why is monogamy important to me? Well, there are a lot of reasons--I've always been more comfortable with someone when I know I'm the only person they're with. But you're right, that sort of thing takes time. I'm trying to be patient, and I like hearing about successful relationshps. As for setting up hard limits--there are some things I've experienced and some I have not. I tend to go by the situation, but the reality is that I've never been able to trust someone completely when I know that there is someone else in their life. It may change with the situation, but I know that's how I want to start, at least initially.

The names of courtesan and geisha were not intended to signal prostitute or monogamy. I was hoping someone would read some of the earlier posts. I simply like the elegance of it, the attention to detail that the geisha possessed, and the impact of the courtesan. Monogamy, once again, is something I like. It may change in the future as I learn more about bdsm, but it's unlikely to change now.

thanks for all the helpful advice...

n.

***
LordandMaster

States have never enforced adultery laws against husbands and they never will. That's the inequality, and that's the point. The law might have asked the husband to remain monogamous, but there was no punishment or even embarassment if he didn't. Most of those laws you refer to specifically enforced adultery only against wayward wivesw, never husbands. Hence my original point that before the 21st century, there was little to demand that husband be monogamous and faithful, law or otherwise, and nothing to enforce it.

I know I promised not to write on the subject, but this really needed a reply: "You can believe whatever you'd like to believe.  Let's go back to complaining about why you haven't been able to find a man who wants a monogamous relationship with you.  That's so much more fun." Excuse me. Did I ask you to be here? Have you contributed to the conversation in any way? Find something more fun if you don't like being proven repeatedly wrong.






Lordandmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 7:26:42 AM)

Oh please.  Look up Lyman v. People, a famous case in Illinois from the turn of the century.

You don't think adultery laws were enforced against husbands in Greece, Rome, China?  Sounds like you haven't read a thing.

And I thought you said you weren't going to respond.

quote:

ORIGINAL: novicecourtesan

States have never enforced adultery laws against husbands and they never will.




novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 7:55:05 AM)

LordandMaster:

I confess the subject of adultery laws does interest me, and you have finally brought something substantive to the table with that case. It does not prove your point at all, but at least it seems to be a fact rather than an attack at my grad school, my reading, my attempts to discover whether monogamy fits into my lifestyle. I wouldn't mind your disagreement, however vehement, if you wouldn't undercut yourself by launching that one last personal missive at me. It makes me take you much less seriously. That said, it does seem to be goading me into writing, so if it works, it works.

To the rest of you: I am happy to move this to another thread if it is annoying.

There is a case of Lyman v. Illinois, and a very few others, including Spencer v. State. The enforcement of extraodrinary adultery in that time had to be "open and notorious." A wife trying to leave her husband for his discreet affairs could bring the cause under the ordinary adultery statute. Guess what her chances were? And the "enforcement" usually was no more than a slap on the wrist--while a woman could be sent to an asylum for wanting a divorce.  Lyman v. People is not a "famous case."

The most famous and typical case of adultery was Beecher-Tilton case in the mid 19th century. If I recall, the case only came to the attention of the court because of the very famous people involved--preacher Henry Ward Beecher, sister of Harriet Beecher Stowe, feminists like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Henry Ward Beecher cheated on his wife with the wife of his best friend, who then brought the action. Henry Ward Beecher's own wife stood loyally by him; she did not bring the action, and would have been condemned for leaving him. The cuckolded best friend brought the action once it became a political and religious issue and there was too much public and damning evidence to avoid it. He would have been the Jimmy Swaggard of his day except that the first court couldn't reach a verdict and a second court exonerated him. I think he continued his life pretty much as before, married to the same woman, screwing around--so much for enforcement of the adultery statute.

I would love to hear of adultery cases being enforced against husbands in China, Greece or Rome. But I don't think throwing one instance at me is going to prove your case. That's like saying that black men in 20th centuyr American get off for murdering their wives despite overwhelming evidence, and pointing out the O.J. Simpson case to support it. One extraordinary case does not disprove a longstanding pattern of conduct.

As I said, I find the subject interesting, but it is way off point. I have no idea how we got here. The closest I can get back to point is what I said earlier: monogamy has very rarely been enforced, by law or society, for men, before the 20th century. So being inspired by historical women, it's hard to find a class of woman who had a truly mutual sexually monogamous relationship with a man.

This is where I launch all sorts of personal attacks against you for your ignorance. Oh, wait...that's not me....




azzmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:12:56 AM)

a lawyer thats a sub? oh hell no! not unless i keep a gag in its mouf




novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:20:56 AM)

I'm guessing there's dom out there who would love to coax a confident, independent not-practicing-but-still-knoweledgable lawyer into submission...I'm almost sure of it :)

and gags are fine. :)




azzmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:26:18 AM)

doms don't coax. you gotta lot 2 learn. so u cool wit gags. that a start.




novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:31:06 AM)

Coax may have been the wrong word. Convince? Seduce? I leave the word to you. Of course I have a lot to learn, I'm a novice. And a challenge. But what can I do? I gotta be me.... :)




azzmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:36:22 AM)

if u was happy with how u was u wouldn't be lookin 4 a master to bring out the woman in ya. u wanna be TOLD and u know that girl. that why u don't like that fake that didn't cum thru. u wanna real man not some wish washy wannabe





novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 8:40:52 AM)

Finally! An argument I can agree with!




mylittlesub -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 1:18:52 PM)

NC, I would agree with the poster who pointed out that you might want to be careful about making monogamy a hard limit until you have fully understood and explored your BDSM likes/dislikes... it certainly sounds as if, by your own admission, you have a great deal of exploring and self-discovery to do.  That's a beautiful thing!  But don't limit yourself to something that you might have simply taken on because of our society's own pressure to be monogamous.  I know for me, I found that my own desire to have a monogamous relationship in the past stemmed from my own insecurity and need to feel special, cherished, and loved without question.  When I found out that you can have all that with OR without monogamy - I stopped focusing on the monogamy itself and began to pay attention to my own needs with or without societal labels.  And I'm much happier for it. [:D]

Another thing you might find interesting - my Master notes that in my becoming comfortable with an open relationship - I have bound him tighter to me than any gestures of jealousy or possessiveness ever could.  Makes a great deal of sense, when you think about it... after all, the poem "if you love something, set it free", has a great deal of merit.  Trust is really the issue behind it all, isn't it?  That, and feeling like you are truly treasured for who you are.





Magdalena156 -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 2:30:05 PM)

Stick to your guns and don't settle for less--you'll only be unhappy in the long run.

There are plenty of mongamous Doms out there and I hear from them all of the time.  Just keep your chin up and keep looking.  :)


-m




Magdalena156 -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 2:32:03 PM)

People often talk about being "wired" for poly but not monogamy.  I believe the same goes in reverse.

I don't know what her opinions and feelings are on the matter, but I do know that poly is out of the question for me for that reason.  It's just how I am.

Have I tried poly?  Yes.  I wound up in hopelessly shallow relationships as a result because I was unable to give any more.  Simply put, once I fall in love that's that.  Not everyone is like that emotionally.


-m




softcoresicko -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 3:08:24 PM)

novicecourtesan,

I don't think your desires are hopeless.  I too am hoping to find a monogamous relationship within the BDSM community.  While it might be hard at times, from what I know about myself, it seems the best way for me to be happy.  I will agree with those posters who have noted that given the demographics of this site, you shouldn't have too hard a time attracting suitors (whether or not they will be at all appropriate is another question); there are a great deal more males than females around here.  Just keep looking, and stand by your principles, including monogamy, if that is what you want. 

Good luck, and I hope you find that for which you are looking.




touchthesky -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 3:15:44 PM)

if monogamy is what u really want i say go for it. But in being new u do owe it to urself to experiment. Or you could look at it this way. Start casual, and see if the man will fit ur criteria as you get to know him. No way u can tell in a few emails or convos. I used to think monogamy was the most desirerable. Now i know i would like at least 3 men completely enchanted and not bearing to touch anyone else. However i know that is not reasonable so my thing is " sorta monagamy" a primary cardholder u might say with play privilges on both sides to keep things from gettin dull




novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 3:19:11 PM)

I hope no one has taken my predilection for monogamy as dismissing poly. I don't, at all, for the future, as I learn more. But it's just plain hard for me to focus on someone--let alone surrender to someone--who isn't monogamous, at least just starting out as a novice. I do have a lot to learn, and maybe poly or an open relationship is in my future, but since it has seemed so alien to me even in vanilla dating, I'm starting out with something I know I like. I think I might be "wired" for monogamy, since any open relationship I've been in has felt pretty shallow and made me miserable.

That said, I like the idea of feeling cherished and valued outside of a monogamous relationship, and that acceptance does more than jealousy and possessiveness can do. I was researching an article on polyamory a while ago and it really opened my eyes to the different ways people can love each other, not just sexually. As I said, it may be in my future, but I'm going to learn to crawl before I walk, and for now, I know that a monogamous relationship would make me feel most comfortable to try out some very new things...

and touchthesky...that is sort of my plan, to keep things really casual as I learn, and not get involved too quickly. I'm open, but I am definitely more comfortable with someone who is smitten by me as I am by them...and yes, can't bear to touch anyone else...

thanks for all the good advice and experiences....!




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125