RE: monogamy-hopeless?

RE: monogamy-hopeless? (Full Version)

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

Message

azzmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 5:58:41 PM)
ya might be lookin at it upside down. those open relationships might not have been good if they were closed. u a strong lady novice. when u meet the right dom i think u will adjust to his needs. master right just hasn't come along yet. do u love anal?

Lordandmaster -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 6:27:07 PM)
So let's see, you've just admitted that men WERE charged under adultery statutes, even though you vociferously (and sourly) asserted that this never happened. And now I'm supposed to tell you about adultery cases in China, Greece, or Rome? Read for yourself. quote: ORIGINAL: novicecourtesan 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.

novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/16/2007 6:50:48 PM)
"So let's see, you've just admitted that men WERE charged under adultery statutes, even though you vociferously (and sourly) asserted that this never happened. And now I'm supposed to tell you about adultery cases in China, Greece, or Rome? Read for yourself." LordandMaster, I am starting to find you very tedious, so I will assume the submissive position your ego if not your argument requires. I believe the original statement which failed to meet your exacting standards of accuracy (which you clearly cannot seem to apply to yourself) was: "Before the 20th century, virtually no man in any walk of life was expected to be monogamous. He was only expected to be discreet" I will amend that statement to read: "Before the 20th century, men were occasionally expected to be monogamous by the law and in some rare cases were prosecuted for adultery, but the MASSIVE MAJORITY of adultery laws in any culture in any time targeted and labeled women exclusively and were used to enforce horribly cruelties from abandonment to murder against disobedient wives rather than to prosecute wayward husbands, who were for the most part left alone if they were discreet." With that amendment, I apologize for any offense I may have given you and thank you for your clearly reasoned, well-supported, judgement neutral and truly constructive insights into this topic. I apologize vociferously for any sourness on my part. I hope that you find many, many, many adultery statutes enforced to your satisfaction. And, of course, I did not actually expect to provide me with noteworthy or even insignifcant "Lyman v. People" adultery cases from Greece, China, or Rome. I did not assume you threw those countries in there without factual basis or to hide empty nitpicking about one fucking sentence unrelated to my large post, to pretend you have a truly valid argument that we can all learn from instead of pointless verbal diarrhea. I am sure your factual basis is impressive and I and my law degree stand in awe of it. You have nothing more to fear from me on this subject.

Magdalena156 -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/17/2007 8:20:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: novicecourtesan 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. :) Or a computer programmer! :D There needs to be more confident, independent subs out there. I got taken for a "top" more than once during munches because, as they said, I am "assertive". I find this to be amusing. I would think that Doms would appreciate the gift of submission more from a woman who is independent for when she submits, she's not doing it out of habit or because she does it for everyone, but because she wishes to serve you. Just my $0.02 worth as always. -m

Magdalena156 -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/17/2007 8:22:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mylittlesub 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. Why do people assume that if someone's monogamous it's because they just haven't explored enough? It's like telling someone if they're gay that they "just haven't met the right member of the opposite sex." I could say this right back at poly people: why are you so certain that you're poly? How do you know that you just haven't met the right one to settle down with? It'd still be just as presumptuous and insulting to those who HAVE explored, thank you, and are happy with their life choices. -m

SimplySubmissive -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/17/2007 8:42:44 AM)
exactly, Magdalena!

completenz -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/18/2007 6:42:07 PM)
Magdalena, you are so right. We respect others choosing to be poly, it is just not for us. i wish we were giving the same respect back. We are monogamous and we are very happy with our life together. hugs c

Lucius -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 2:19:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: venusdiva429 No...you know what, put it in your profile. Big and clear. Absolutely, absolutely, ABSOLUTELY, put it in your profile, big and clear. If it's important to you, if it's a "dealbreaker," put it in your profile. Everyone gains. Men who aren't interested won't waste their time OR yours. It doesn't guarantee that those who still contact you will be suitable, it doesn't even guarantee that they're not lying jerks who plan to ignore your requirements, but at least you know they were aware of what you're looking for before they sent that first message. If you send the first message to someone, you may or may not want to mention it, but if they're interested and have any brains they'll look at your profile and then they'll know. I always appreciate it when a woman is upfront about this in her profile. As I said, it saves Me time. I know not to bother sending a message unless it's to discuss some common interest or something, and that there is no more chance of a relationship than if she were a lesbian. Lucius Alexander House of the Palindromedary

Lucius -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 2:31:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: novicecourtesan There were numerous courtesans who were faithful to their lovers through thick and thin There is a difference between being faithful and being monogamous. Lucius Alexander House of the Palindromedary

novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 3:57:29 PM)
quote: There is a difference between being faithful and being monogamous. Lucius Alexander House of the Palindromedary No argument here. In particularly divine moments, they intersect. Never as ordinarily as people would believe.

rainasmiles -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 4:18:59 PM)
i have found that there seem to be many more men interested in monogamy than not. for the most part i speak with men who are in their mid forties and up, many of whom have actually stated that that they are seeking the "last great love of their lives". i think it is easier to find monogamy among the "older crowd" but certainly there are men of all ages here looking for one good woman. though it may sound incredibly "cliche", it's true. if it's worth having it's worth waiting for.

HatesParisHilton -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 5:16:33 PM)
Novicecourtesan: what are you offering to a male that inspires monogamy? By MALE needs and standards, not female ones?

JustUsTwo -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 5:26:25 PM)
Over a year ago, I posted an ad on CL and had the amazing grace to find the magnificent monogamous Dominant man I was explicitly looking for, but not before sorting through quite a haystack who hadn’t bothered to read my post or who thought I could be convinced I wanted things I didn’t want. Clearly, from all you've written here, you know who you are and what you want. Yes, that can change with time, we are always evolving. But the man to whom you bare your tenderest soul should first and foremost meet you where you are, without the condition that you need to change for things to go further. And vice-versa. Some people are monogamous, some people are not. In the BDSM scene, it is easier to be explicit about being polyamorous and/or non-monogamous (not the same thing, I know). The advantage of that is that people have their cards on the table. The One you seek will find you. Don’t settle. What you want already exists for others and is possible for you, as you can read from many of the answers to your post. While you seek, don't fret, just polish your dream and let it shine. She

novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 5:35:33 PM)
quote: Novicecourtesan: what are you offering to a male that inspires monogamy? By MALE needs and standards, not female ones? um....didn't realize I needed a sales pitch and a business plan....just thought there might be a suitable monogamous male out there who liked what he saw... If you're implying that men are inherently not monogamous unless bribed or sold on the idea, then I'm pretty much at a loss. And I don't agree with it. I know many men who have been dissatisfied with more than one partner (serially or at the same time) and haven't made it an object of pursuit. Many men stick to monogamy out of societal training or family tradition. Other than what I've put in my profile, I have no other incentive to lure them away from the bright lights of poly....

HatesParisHilton -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 5:44:51 PM)
so you choose to not answer the question, and instead evade it by non-answering with a "standing on the soapbox in Central Park" reply. That is exactly a manner of interraction that would make many a male steer clear of a monogamous relationship. All business plans are a poterntial relationship, all flirtations are defacto sales pitches. You've chosen your user pic for the reaction it would receive/engender and you know it, even if you don't choose to admit it. That is "packaging", that is business, that is love and sex and kink. Also, if you know so many men that are into monog, why do you need to raise this question on collarme if it is such an easy to find state of affairs?

novicecourtesan -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 7:25:11 PM)
quote: so you choose to not answer the question, and instead evade it by non-answering with a "standing on the soapbox in Central Park" reply. That is exactly a manner of interraction that would make many a male steer clear of a monogamous relationship. All business plans are a poterntial relationship, all flirtations are defacto sales pitches. You've chosen your user pic for the reaction it would receive/engender and you know it, even if you don't choose to admit it. That is "packaging", that is business, that is love and sex and kink. Also, if you know so many men that are into monog, why do you need to raise this question on collarme if it is such an easy to find state of affairs? HatesParisHilton, your screen name indicates that you spend time hating people you do not know. I am responding, as I generally do, when challenged by people who are accusatory about other posts but show a startling lack of insight into their own. 1. I choose not to reply to that question, partially because it was posed so badly (what am I "offering?" Isn't posting a profile enough?) and because your division of male vs. female monogamy irked me. Sociologists, biologists, anthropologists and behaviorial scientists are still debating about how gender affects issues of monogamy and your division seemed simplistic and vaguely accusatory. I try to think of a relationship as mutually beneficial. If "it" is not in them--"it" being monogamy, a steady job, staying sober, living in New York City, whatever--I cannot grow ""it" in them unless they want to. What you are seeing as evasive is actually the illogical assumptions of your own question: that I have some plan to sell or bribe someone into monogamy, when I cannot possible enter into monogamy with someone who does not already want it. 2. Additonally, the information you seem to require about my sales pitch (6 hour cocksucking? expertise in shibari? a collection of wigs and disguises to make him think he's being poly? homecooking every night?) is none of your or this board's business. I do not post my bargaining points and packaging plans on message boards, since I think it is crass to do so, only less slightly crass to request it.My qualifications for monogamy will be evaluated by the men who choose to write to me and to whom I choose to write back. I'm so sorry if that invades your need to know. You may see putting a profile online as the same as being in a bargain basement market tagged for the year-end sale, but I would prefer to do my selling, negotiating and bargaining behind closed doors. No doubt you will see this request for privacy as another evasive manuever; please remember that sometimes evasion is not shame or guilt but just an attempt at good manners and discretion. I cannot help what you think when I choose not to answer you. Learn to take rejection and move on. 3. A relationship may involve aspects similar to a business plan--self-advertising, negotiation tactics--but it is reductive to say that a relationship is de facto a business plan. Not every relationship is mapped out with the same forethought of an entrepreneur launching a new product. Sometimes you're just out there, humbled by your mistakes, trying to keep your eyes open and your spirits up for the right guy(s). 4. Whether I know a million men into monogamy or just one, I was unsure about how monogamy is viewed in bdsm, or by those who are interested in it. Notice the novice in my name. I was wondering if it is largely seen as an archaic boundary or had similar or different meanings than the vanilla. I was wondering if there were different views between monogamy and sexual fidelity and faithfulness to a spouse or lover (there seem to be). I came here for general information about bdsm to help me learn more and hopefully find the relationship(s) I want. Now, my question: 5. Since you know my intention on posting--what exactly are you here for? Other than asking personal questions in hopes of eviscerating my (obviously) personal interpretation and answer, or pouting and making assumptions about me when I think your question is insubstantive? You are welcome to suggest what I should be offering to attract a monogamous guy. Try to use actual facts instead of invective.

SimplySubmissive -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/19/2007 8:41:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HatesParisHilton Also, if you know so many men that are into monog, why do you need to raise this question on collarme if it is such an easy to find state of affairs? Her post has led to a long interesting thread with lots of different, thought provoking views. I personally have enjoyed the debate. Thanks novice! ;)

adaddysgirl -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/20/2007 5:35:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HatesParisHilton Novicecourtesan: what are you offering to a male that inspires monogamy? By MALE needs and standards, not female ones? Can you really believe that monogamy is 'inspired'? So, if i am the most perfect person in the world for someone, he would never stray nor want anyone else? What about Masters who are perfectly content with their slaves yet want to bring in another? What are they inspired by? Personally, i think this is a ridiculous concept [8\|] DG

JustUsTwo -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/21/2007 10:56:59 AM)
My beloved posted a reply earlier in this thread and I realized that I had some comments to add from the perspective of a monogamous male Dom. First of all I’m pretty sure that I’m wired this way. Just as some are wired poly, I’m wired mono. There have been times in my life where I was not looking for anything that touched on serious and I didn’t lack for companions but that was diversion (rebound, general life unsettlement, rock n roll, etc.) All in all my return-to state was to seek a single partner. There is an inner contentment that I feel when my attentions are focused on one woman. Mind you it isn’t that I stop looking, I just stop looking to find and more importantly I stop noticing when other women notice me. On a practical matter I have other things to do with my time than pursue women. For many men this is a favored pastime and the OP would be advised to steer clear of men who have boredom as a chronic problem. I sometimes wonder about the number of men who are raised with absentee fathers and what impact that has on this subject but haven’t developed any insights. Also worth noting is a possible cultural bias against mono among men in NYC. I have observed a tendency among most men who move here to be novelty seekers of the first order. Besides, as there is an ample supply of party girls, it’s kind of easy here for any guy who has a moderately presentable act to get over, so it’s easy to get used to. That’ll be 2 cents please He

HatesParisHilton -> RE: monogamy-hopeless? (2/21/2007 7:15:15 PM)
"5. Since you know my intention on posting--what exactly are you here for? Other than asking personal questions in hopes of eviscerating my (obviously) personal interpretation and answer, or pouting and making assumptions about me when I think your question is insubstantive? You are welcome to suggest what I should be offering to attract a monogamous guy. Try to use actual facts instead of invective." I think you've overreacted and succumbed more to hyperbole in labelling my 2 replies as "invective" than yuou've actually succumbed to male dom desires, but I grant that is a suppostion. It does lead to my reply and suggestions to you as asked for: 1: You have stated that you are a "novice", and are basically "learning the ropes" (pun intended). One actual fact, if you search the threads here or ask others that have been in the game for a while, is that dom men often will not wish to become monogamously intertwined with a female sub whom is "topping from the bottom". I suggest you take a good honest look at what that term would mean from a male perspective and then ascertain if you might be exhibiting traits of said behaviour already, if indications of such show up in your e-mails to prospectives doms you'd like to spend time with. 2: Bear in mind that more than a few prospective doms you might be interested in and are conversing with may be reading these boards, and your replies here, and taking them into account for themselves RE how they might choose to reply to you. Men lurk too. 3: A previous post of yours indicates that you have been in the "law business", and your replies to myself would underscore that, har har. I would suggest without making a "slam" that you carefully monitor any potential expressions of yourself with doms you like that would be GREAT to have as a legal representative but shithouse to have in a sub-partner. Such as using semantics to swing an interraction in a semiotic fashion that might serve to win a "point" but not serve to find the relationship you are looking for as per what you've said in this thread plus "fake doms" thread. 4: The trials and rigours of maintaining a good monog d/s relationship are more and harder than a basic vanilla one; I'd suggest that in your posts and profile you re-write/edit to reflect that you understand this, since a good malemonog fdom will need this understanding, or at least a clear indication of the heartfelt desire to understand such. Going back to point #1, right now all roads lead not to Rome but "topping from the bottom", again only my opinion, but as you've acquired opinions of myself in the very short term, such is fair. as for my reasons for being here, threy are oddly similar you yours, just from the other end of the relationship superhighway. by reading and posting here, I gain a fairly accurate barometer of potential relationships (and myself prefer monog, IF what a man gains from it is equal to what a woman does), can ascertain "which way the wind is currently blowing" ala these socio-sexual/anthropological-in-practice partnership, etc. I also see how many people from areas that mean something to me post and "get into it" versus having virtually NO prescence on this (or any other) site. Quite valuable. Your replies and choice of thread topics themselves have been very informative in this regard, but I hope you do not take that as a "slam" since it is not. Observation is important, as yuou know from your own stated career path. I can look at your posts, other posts, and it's like a sailor using a sextant and star-position on a black night sea. The land and island paradises are out there, but so are the reefs, dear darling duckie dolly doll. For BOTH genders. So with that, if I offended, such was not my intent, but posting on message boards always carries a caveat when being honest that you as a legal eagle are likely well-conversant with, especially in the firelds of ancillary rights and int.prop.: "including but not limited to". Har har. With that, hope you find the right guy. no sarcasm.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875