August 23, 2007...8:26 pm
In which I try and get used to saying I am poly, because I so obviously am.
I’m poly. But I don’t say it much. I am ten million times more out about being dom in my day to day than I am about that.
I don’t really know why that is.
I don’t talk about being poly that much on this blog, because this blog is about femdom being broken. Poly isn’t really broken. It’s more not finished. But I am going to talk about it now. Insofar as I can. Obviously, poly is different for different people. And, you know me, I only have a very passing interest in other people anyway. But this is how and why it does for me.
I live with a wonderful man. He’s not only a dirty devil. That’s just the start. He is very, very attractive with enough Jewishy/desert-dwelling-ancestry blood that his pitch-shaded eyebrows jut out on a huge shelf above his eyes.
Such strong defined monochrome features that he looks better without hair. That’s a good benchmark for an ultra good looking man. If a shaved head makes him look masculine-moody rather than baby-faced.
He has a wonderful, dark-hair-defined body and five piercings that you can only see when he’s naked.
I’m talking about Pan. You knew that.
He’s the smartest man I ever met. He’s supernatural smart. You can’t look directly at him while he’s thinking – it’s too dazzling. If I ever want to win an argument, I go ask him what to say. (If I want to win an argument with *him* – I have to use violence.)
He’s obsessed with sex. He has a higher sex drive than me – and mine could probably power inter stellar travel. He *never* *ever* says no to sex. He would say yes to sex right after he’d had sex.
He just bought a white lab coat from the army surplus because I expressed a vague kink in that direction. Doctors and nurses. Doctor, Daddy, Butch. Totems of male authority. All fall down. Or something. I don’t know. Maybe I just want to pretend he’s Gaius Baltar.
He likes perversion. Any form of perversion. If it would be met with shocked disapproval in the wider world, he’ll do it. I got him into the CB with this. He likes to be tied up. He likes pain quite a lot. He’s a masochist. He’s a pretty good actor and way better at role play than me.
He’s not a submissive.
And I’m a dominant.
There are spots he can never hit. Because even though he is happy to play submission games he is not a submissive. And there’s a difference. I like submissive men. A lot.
After about five years with Pan I think I came to the end of the sort-of-submission he had for me. Don’t make a mistake about this. Pan fulfilled me totally for a long, long time. He holds the record. The gold medal. He crawled and begged and licked my flat patent Mary Janes. He let me piss on him and burn him. He begged me to cut him. We went to Fetish Fairs and clubs. We did the scene a little bit. We bought all the kit I still use now.
This morning, when I told him which nipple clamps I’d used on Jack last night (one of the first pairs we ever bought) he said, ‘Fuck, poor bastard, those are the hardcore ones.’
(Jack later said, ‘God yes, you could connect train carriages together with those.’)
But things shifted. Changed. He changed. Twist my arm and I’ll tell you he got a lot more emotionally healthy. I don’t like that fact anymore than you do. But that’s how that part worked out for him. And then he didn’t really enjoy subjugation in the same way. He didn’t need it or crave it. And I missed that.
You don’t have to say it. I know. He isn’t typical. He – it turned out - was using submission to work through some stuff. Though most submissives aren’t, that was how it happened with him.
And me? I’m dominant. I’d still be dominant even if I cured myself of all my psychotic personality quirks.
And then, his job changed. And he was suddenly incredibly busy. And I came up with this idea (being, as I am, in his recent words, ‘intolerant, attention seeking, high maintenance and annoying’). An idea to keep me out of his way.
Picking up submissive men off the internet and having sex with them in hotel rooms.
It seemed like a good idea at the time. And it was. It still is. Mostly. (Let’s talk about all the when it wasn’t another time.)
Pan was 35 on Monday. And last night, when Jack put his pierced tongue on my cunt for the first time, I could see Pan’s birthday cards on the mantelpiece. I had bought him one with a still from Grease on the cover. A picture of John Travolta dancing around the car singing Greased Lightening.
Some days Pan’s the sun and some days he’s one star in a constellation.
I like this. I like poly. I don’t know if it’s a sexuality for me like being dom or being straight. I don’t even know if it’s a kink. In my case, it serves a sexual need, but it’s mostly meeting an emotional need.
There’s a lot of relationship pain amongst my real life friends right now. And a lot of it seems to be related to people not get enough sex – or maybe enough sexual attention. Meanwhile friends who know various degrees of how Pan and I relate to each, other praise our relationship. Tell me how great it I that we are so open with each other, so happy with each other, so sexual with each other, fuck such a lot. We have a lot of separate interests. We spend a lot of time apart. We don’t even sit and watch TV together in the evening. He plays a lot of computer games. I go online. We’re both freelance so work evenings. If we go out together ina group of friends, we mix; we often don’t talk to each other much unless we’re fighting.
Meanwhile I know what you’re thinking. Does all this poly talk mean Pan is available sexually?
Up until recently Pan didn’t see other women. I guess he didn’t have the same specific unmet itch. And he’s been busy. Orc wars, you know. But recently he has been talking about his fidelity more. It’s harder for men, I think, with this poly thing. Harder to find casualish sex partners or people interested in sexual relationships that will never end with a traditional happy ever after. But I’m very excited about the potential that he might.
Oh, and he has talked about the idea of men as well as women a little too. That’s interesting isn’t it? Still not sure where that’s going.
Or any of it. No one gave me a map. But that’s okay. Because I’m not going anywhere particular and I’ve got a lifetime to get there.
Once a good friend of mine who was in a new relationship told me she had sucked her new man’s cock so well he had said, ‘You know, baby, sometimes I just want to pass you round my friends so they all know what I’m getting.’
I know just what he meant.


57 Comments
August 23, 2007 at 8:44 pm
There you go Jones a new post, all about how you must get what you need, but you still hope that the former squeeze can be happy and anyway even if he isn’t you said a lot of nice things about him. Men have a harder time with this poly thing because, in my opinion, we tend to go for what we want. We may have a few dalliances along the way, but thats nothing, like cross-town taxi cabs to get us to our destination.
August 23, 2007 at 9:13 pm
But things shifted. Changed. He changed. Twist my arm and I’ll tell you he got a lot more emotionally healthy. [...] And then he didn’t really enjoy subjugation in the same way. He didn’t need it or crave it. And I missed that.
Beej, are you associating submissiveness or masochism with emotional health? I mean, what are you getting at with this statement?
Men have a harder time with this poly thing because, in my opinion, we tend to go for what we want. We may have a few dalliances along the way, but thats nothing, like cross-town taxi cabs to get us to our destination.
*blinks*
Toni, I have no idea what you’re on about here.
Is it the both of you not communicating, or is my brain stem overloaded because I just saw Harry Potter OOP with my pre-teen Edgelette?
August 23, 2007 at 9:16 pm
I wasn’t sure whether or not to include that fact about Pan. But that is the truth. I want to be very clear that that is what happened with *him*. I don’t mean that about submissive men in general.
He isn’t submissive, but there was a time in his life when he found submission cathartic. And then things changed for him.
August 23, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Tom, what the hell do I know about relationships? If it lasts longer than a case of Stoly it may have run it’s course as far as I am concerned.
August 23, 2007 at 9:47 pm
I’ve had the same box of mixed liquors (now dusty, still mostly full) since a friend left it with me when he moved out of the country in 2001, so I guess most of my relationships don’t last longer than even a bottle of Stoly.
Thanks for writing more about Pan, Beej. It’s sweet to read about the real stuff and get a bit more of a three-dimensional view.
August 23, 2007 at 9:54 pm
Poly is a complex thing. For me it is. I’m really glad you mentioned it.
August 23, 2007 at 10:29 pm
I really enjoy reading your blog.
I’m a submissive but I’m a feminist so I’m behind a lot of what you have to say about female sexuality. Oh and I’m a poly person myself. Much happier that way.
August 23, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Thank you Nadia
I always like it when new people just tell me they’re reading what I say. Even though I see the stats - sometimes I wonder if there are really that many people out there.
Some of my best friends are submissive feminists.
August 23, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Nu, and ‘Pan’ is a Jewish name? Oy.
(Very sweet post. Good luck with the poly-thing—its a hard one to get to work in the long term…
August 23, 2007 at 10:41 pm
what if I just want to have sex with a lot of people.
Can I be poly or am I still just a man-whore.
August 23, 2007 at 10:46 pm
I think, to be strict, poly means having relationships not just fucking around.
A man-whore charges.
I believe you are a stud.
August 23, 2007 at 11:11 pm
You are on a roll here!! This blog is turning into one of my favorite diversions….intelligence, humor, romance and raw sex!! What more could a voyeur ask??
I always enjoy the read then going away and seeing what “sticks” in my mind. Here it was the comment that you were implying submission was inconsistent with mental health….I got it that you were talking about Pan, not generalizing. I also wondered if since he is not submissive, does he consider himself to be dominate….and since he “evolved” how has that affected your sexual relationship. You say it is still HOT HOT HOT…but is it vanilla (whatever that means!) hot or kinky hot??
And since he’s open to the possibility of a MFM does he consider himself bi…or just curious?
OK…next….tell us about Jack and the clamps….have the two men met….and if so was it cool for all?
August 23, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Different strokes for different folks. Why shouldn’t some of us take this literally?
August 23, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Polyamory is a wonderful concept. I think it’s hard to make work in practical terms, but it makes such sense. Why on earth would we expect one lover to meet all of our emotional (and physical) needs?
August 23, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Trivial Pursuit Question 3007 edition: in which century did scientists first combine feminism with quantum physics to produce the earliest working examples of modern polyamorous relationships?
Or.
Don’t an awful lot of people live dishonestly in latent/ partially latent polyamorous networks anyway…
And.
Is bad sex ever worth it in a polyamorous relationship? Is bad cooking?
Mind you.
Most blokes can’t keep up with the birthday cards monogamy obliges them to send, polyamoury is a game we can never win. Let’s face it, the way boys have run monogamy it’s practically becoming a breach of human rights.
But.
Polyamoury is a general label for something that is specifically different for everyone who experiences it. It’s a word that doesn’t swing any weight of real meaning behind it other than to be an arguing point.
Well.
What else would a domme be but poly? Whether she said it or not. Hmmm. Possible firecracker.
But.
Why the label??? In your biography they will call them lovers… at least they will if it is written in monogamous times.
August 24, 2007 at 12:07 am
Interesting post bitchy. I never would have been able to put the feelings behind the word. I feel that most language concerning sex always creeps me out, but in reality if I think it through, I like the behavior more than the word that describe it. Poly just reminds me of some sort of large octopus or something.
I like to keep, in my words, a stable. For very similar reasons, I am needy, whiny and demanding. If I spread that out over a few men, I then don’t overwhelm them and I also spare myself the devastating heartbreak that comes with breakups.
Feliz Cumpleanos to Pan!
August 24, 2007 at 12:09 am
Sleeptalker, you are right, but the BSDM world loves it’s labels and polyamorous is just another one. It is even more the case in other cultures. In Japan it was openly accepted and in Thailand it is unsual for a successful man not to have a Mi Anoi, (second wife), I am not sure about China as I have not lived there but based on my business travel I am sure it is even more prevalant.
August 24, 2007 at 12:38 am
Polyamoury is a general label for something that is specifically different for everyone who experiences it.
Sleeptalker, every label is a general label for something that is specifically different for everyone who experiences. That’s kind of how the language works.
Labels are best used as tools to start exploratory discussions.
Meanwhile I know what you’re thinking. Does all this poly talk mean Pan is available sexually?
Damn. That was exactly what I was thinking.
August 24, 2007 at 2:46 am
oh and bitchy, if you ever hook up with baltar, put in a good word with starbuck for me, would you?
August 24, 2007 at 7:12 am
Can we please be courageously honest for 5 seconds and admit that some of us kinksters are just as fucked up as anyone else, maybe particularly in the emotional/sexual arena? That maybe there are psychological reasons or histories that got us where we are, that make us want to beat the shit out of someone we love or be humiliated until we weep? And that for any given individual, moving through some of these and possibly into less-outre terrain might be emotional growth, for them, and not an indictment of what other people do in their bedrooms/dungeons? That even though no one better try to take away our right to do the crazy stuff, god damn it, introspection about what we do sexually can be just as valuable as the thought and self-assessment we can apply to the rest of our life?
>> … But things shifted. Changed. He changed. Twist my arm and I’ll tell you he got a lot more emotionally healthy. […] And then he didn’t really enjoy subjugation in the same way. He didn’t need it or crave it. ….
August 24, 2007 at 8:01 am
Polyamory is an awful combination of Latin and Greek. OK- so is “television”, but then what is all that “y” on the end? There is no such word as “amory” is there?
Polyerotism would sound a lot more comfortable to my ears-multiamorous perhaps too but what would the noun be?
Sorry-just relieving my inner pedant.
August 24, 2007 at 8:06 am
A certain class of pedant that *really* hates the combo of Latin and Greek. I am not sure why it is so distasteful. I don;t like the short form ‘poly’ much as ‘poly’ on its own is so empty of meaning. But, well, context.
Really, though, really, I live in a world full of words that offend me. If I’m going to lie in front of the tank that is language as it is commonly used in sexuality, it won’t be for that.
August 24, 2007 at 8:13 am
Em
Basically what I think is this. People often do the same sorts of things for all kinds of different reasons.
Pan certainly still enjoys pain in a sexual context, but he doesn’t want pain to block other feelings now. Sometimes I worry that I exploited something about him when we first met. But I was young and in some ways, I think, we exploited each other.
August 24, 2007 at 11:32 am
I think, to be strict, poly means having relationships not just fucking around.
It Depends. My definition of poly is about being open to multiple emotional relationships; but it doesn’t have to exclude fucking around
(Which is, at least in theory, my approach - I’m poly, and can’t cope with more than 2 partners, but messing around a bit with other people on a friends-with-benefits level is also fun. Personally I don’t do stranger-one-night-stands, as I don’t get on with them, but it would in theory be legit within my relationship agreements.)
I think if someone is just fucking around then that would be more like an open relationship, which is arguably related to poly but kind of off to the side a bit.
One of my partners has always been disinclined to get involved with anyone else, due to his being lazy
but that’s changed recently, which has made me really happy. So I know what you mean there.
Poly suits me way better than monogamy ever did. I was rubbish at monogamy, and I never really got the point of it.
August 24, 2007 at 11:54 am
I does, right now, seem very weird that I would have a relationship with Pan based on the fact we didn’t have sex with anyone else. Just odd.
August 24, 2007 at 2:24 pm
You forgot one of the major signifiers of poly: it’s really only poly if the women get to to fuck around too. If it’s one guy trying to convince his wife that it’s exciting and edgy for him to try to get a girlfriend (or, god help us, a “sisterwife”
but freaking out and slamming the whole thing closed the moment she gets a boyfriend, then it’s just the same old harem structure that has been boring the shit out of girls for 10,000 yrs.
One other thing, la fille: My boyfriend and I are monogamous, for what we define as monogamous, but that sure doesn’t mean that I depend on him to meet all of my emotional and physical needs! I have friends to gossip with and get grad school advice from and get backrubs from and go dancing with! The fact that I don’t fuck ‘em doesn’t mean they’re not vitally important in my life. Monogamy doesn’t have to mean an emotional and physical desert island with just the two of you on it for the rest of your lives.
August 24, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Never been tempted to try polyamory personally, screwing up one relationship at a time keeps my plate plenty full.
August 24, 2007 at 4:22 pm
vito excalibur - it’s true that one of the things I occasionally think is problematic about poly is the emphasis it can place on romantic/sexual relationships over other relationships.
However: firstly, I think that’s largely a product of a more general societal tendency to do that (i.e. with monogamous relationships as well); and secondly, the flipside is that multiple romantic/sexual relationships can also generate closer webs of other relationship as well. e.g. friendships with your partner(s) partner(s) (and so on…).
August 24, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I tried being poly last winter and had the time of my life, but got absolutely no work done. Has anyone else found difficulties at that very practical level?
“Polyamory” was a clumsy attempt to remove the marriage from “polygamy.” Speaking of empty syllables, how about that awful shorthand word “homophobia,” which really means “fear of things that are the same”?
August 24, 2007 at 5:11 pm
A question for the poly-experienced: How do you determine who will be a primary partner, and who will be secondary? Is it a matter of their chronological appearance in your life, or other factors? In my (brief) experience, the primary person is someone you would bet the farm on, and with the secondary partner you don’t think about the farm.
August 24, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Has anyone else found difficulties at that very practical level?
God, yes. You have to be ruthless.
In fact, I think that is going to be Pan’s big problem. He doesn’t have time to sleep as it is.
As for your other question. I probably don’t have enough experience with primary secondary to answer. I kind of did that with Pan and X, and maybe I will/am with Pan and Jack but it is totally too early to presume that.
So, how do I know who the primary is? The primary is Pan. Always. Forever. He’s the one.
August 24, 2007 at 6:54 pm
The nearest I got to a polyamorous relationship was with a married woman, (I didn’t know she was married when she initiated the relationship), who was absolutely desperate to get pregnant by me. She intended that her husband would never find out and was convinced that the possible colour combinations would be similar to her existing child and she had already found out I had the same blood group as herself, I think she drew a sample one time when I was passed out. Her husband was a relatively succesful New Zealander but for some reason she was convinced a child from me would make her life complete. Needless to say I didn’t comply, but is it considered polyamerous if one of the participants is unaware of the existence of the other one?
August 24, 2007 at 6:57 pm
I don’t know. I would assume not.
August 24, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Damn!
I know you didn’t write this for me but it comes almost as a gift as Alexandra and I struggle over polyamory, if our relationship can incorporate it or if it might spell the end our love.
So, I’ll thank you anyway.
August 24, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Sardax, a friend of mine actually coined the term, you want me to ask her what that ‘y’ is doin’ there? B^)
My personal definition for poly is ‘who the fuck cares it’s only a label’.
I run into people all the time who want to debate what is or is not ‘poly’ - they want to slice things up into ’swinging’ or ’screwing around’ or ‘poly’ or whatever the fuck else. It’s a great lot of silliness, like trying to finely slice ‘fantasy’ vs. ’science fiction’; we all have our own opinions on the matter, sure, but what the fuck difference does it make?
The bottom line is, whatever works; nobody but you gets to make up the rules you live by.
August 24, 2007 at 11:14 pm
But I would like to ask Big Daddy Elvis if Sardax is really female.
(My own sources report the origin of the term polyamory as being created by by two different people in 1992 but that lexicographical detail isn’t essential.)
August 25, 2007 at 3:37 pm
This makes me.. uncomfortable.
I’m a hypocrite. I can imagine myself having sex with many other people without emotional commitment, but would be extremely upset if my wonderful partner decided she needed something extra. What, me not enough?
Like I said, I’m a hypocrite.
More importantly, perhaps. That’s not how I want a relationship to be. I _want_ to be the everything for my partner, and for her to be the same for me.
Oddly, I can imagine sharing a partner, with her controlling us both, and me pleasing her/him because i want to please her- but I’m not sure that’s poly. There’s no relationship there.
As for cuckolding? That’s.. well that wrongsexygrosssexyhorriblecruelsexy. Not sure what that means.
August 25, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Britspin, you are not a hypocrite - that is how all men feel. Jones, you are about my age. Don’t you ever feel the urge to settle down and have children? My lifestyle, whilst vanilla, really wasn’t appropriate for the stability that, I believe, children require. I do often wonder if the decisions I made and the experiences I have had offset the whole family thing. I am sure this will seem like a pathetic question to all the kinky people here, but I did have a very normal, well up until I was 14, Catholic upbringing.
August 26, 2007 at 1:30 am
Maisy:
A question for the poly-experienced: How do you determine who will be a primary partner, and who will be secondary? Is it a matter of their chronological appearance in your life, or other factors?
I don’t “determine” relationships, in the sense of defining them in advance or categorising them; I observe what patterns they fit.
If a relationship fits the whole life-partner, intense life commitment, regular mundane life interaction, day to day stuff, then I call that a primary relationship.
If the relationship does not wind up tending towards resembling a marriage, then I call that a secondary relationship.
My husband (one of my primary partners) does not do heirarchy; he has three partners. I have no idea if my liege (my other primary partner) does hierarchy at all, but by my standards he has two primary partners and no secondary partners.
Toni:
Needless to say I didn’t comply, but is it considered polyamerous if one of the participants is unaware of the existence of the other one?
Where I come from, we call that “cheating”. (If the ground rules of the relationship system are monogamous, then it’s “cheating in a monogamous relationship”. If the ground roles of the relationship system are polyamorous, then it’s “cheating in a polyamorous relationship”.)
Oy. And I had a poly-related post in my queue of things to blog, too. Maybe I’ll bump that up a notch or something.
August 26, 2007 at 3:36 pm
I tried poly. I think you’re coming at it from an interesting angle (like you always do). My poly relationship imploded and one of the reasons I think it did is because there was too much emphasis on having relationships and too much processing. Like, we were talking things through so much that there wasn’t time for anything else and by the time I would be with someone new I had talked all the romance out of it. And anyway, my ex didn’t actually want me to see other people, she just wanted to see other people. But I think it can work. You in particular can make it work. I’m definitely still open to it. I encourage my current partner to have sex with other people, though we haven’t officially made it part of our relationship and as you mention above poly and non-monogamy are different things. I wrote this piece about it, you might need a subscription though to read it.
August 26, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Dw3t-Hthr, I thought it was cheating as well, once I found out the woman in question was married, I tried to extricate myself but these things are not so easy all the time. I wasn’t prepared to get her pregnant and have her dupe her husband, even my hypocrisy has limitations! It wasn’t the first time but I remain amazed by the lengths women will go to get what they want. I am aware that the fact that she considered that I would do what she wanted without a second thought reflects rather badly on my personality.
August 26, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Toni - I had a Catholic upbringing. I’m not sure that background necessarily lends itself to a more conventional adulthood.
In fact, to my mind, ‘raised Catholic’ sounds largely like a euphemism for ‘kinked to all fuckery.’
But that’s just me.
Also, if all men feel like britspin - about wanting sexual freedom for themselves, but not for their partners (and I think all is an exaggeration there - though I’d grant you a vast majority) - that doesn’t mean it’s not hypocritical now, does it?
August 26, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Good point Jack, maybe the reason I am not into S&M is the beatings I got from the good Christian brothers when I was a child - still, builds character! and as far as Britspin is concerned, I think just as many women also want the freedom but would rather that their partners didn’t have quite so much.
August 26, 2007 at 8:59 pm
True, maybe we should say that wanting personal freedom and unfree partners is just a very common human hypocracy.
August 27, 2007 at 5:44 am
toni? I’m wondering if you’d really be so infinitely curious about kink and s&m, as evidenced by the attention you pay to the blogs covering such subjects, if you weren’t “into it” on some level. Humans rarely spend time on things they aren’t “into” (unless there is a paycheck or coercion involved, which doesn’t appear to be the case here). It’s ok to admit it here, too.
August 27, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Sue, I am interested in all aspects of sexuality but, while I enjoy the writings of Jones and some of the other posters, I am afraid to admit that I am a victim of circumstances more than anything else. Due to tragic stupidity I have been housebound for much of the last 16 months. Much of that time was in a wheelchair and dispite being only recently released, I seem to have fractured another bone already. Perhaps my interest is in some way related to the unrequested pain I have experienced over the last 20 years, (I am 37 now), but don’t worry I am not the kind of person that would be afraid to admit my desires, or deny them.
August 27, 2007 at 7:07 pm
I’d be terrified to think there was stuff you were holding back, Toni.
August 27, 2007 at 7:18 pm
C’mon Jones, I haven’t even told you the good stuff yet. Although I thought you would get a kick out of the rattan torture when I was in Laos. Getting my knucles broken with a hammer in South East London is a good story as well.
August 27, 2007 at 7:20 pm
It doesn’t work like that, Toni. You have to buy me a box of chocolates first.
August 27, 2007 at 7:25 pm
But I don’t like chocolate!
Damn all this time reading a femdom blog and I appear to have learned….nothing!
On an unrelated note, which 80’s video is more femdommish, (taking into account my limited understanding of the phrase), Don’t You Want Me by the Human League or The Reflex by Duran?
August 27, 2007 at 7:30 pm
I like Don’t You Want Me - the song. But the video that turned me was Wild Boys with Simon Le Bon strapped to the windmill thing.
Fuck that was exciting.
August 27, 2007 at 7:36 pm
I forgot all about that, (I was in a band in school when Duran were at their peak), also wasn’t John Taylor strapped to the bonnet of a Cadillac with a screen in front of him flashing the words “girls”…”cars”. Cool video, also seem to remember that Hungry like the Wolf had some hot girl slashing the band with her claws.
August 27, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Excellent post, Bitchy.
There are spots he can never hit. Because even though he is happy to play submission games he is not a submissive. And there’s a difference. I like submissive men. A lot. If you change the word ’submissive’ to ‘dominant’ in this paragraph, you have exactly summed up my love for Apollo, and the reason I’m poly. There are spots he can never hit - and doesn’t try to. Luckily, there are men (and women) out there who can
xx Dee
August 27, 2007 at 7:59 pm
<3
August 28, 2007 at 8:28 am
Sardax: it was done that way to rhyme with “monogamy”.
There are lots of ways to do things. The big distinction is with “cheating”. All participants know what’s going on. It requires a degree of self-confidence to kiss your SO goodbye and say “have a nice date.”
Then there are shades of distinction. Classically, “swinging” is having no-strings-attached sex with other people, usually as a couple. The more classical “poly” is having significant emotional bonds with other people, often NOT as a couple. (I like and talk to my SO’s other SOs, but as a family friend, not a lover.)
But there are actually all kinds of gradations, and it ends up being something of a continuum.
For an example of someone who’s been on both sides of the fence
http://twistedmonk.blogspot.com/2005/05/note-are-you-sure-that-you-are-ok-with.html
(It’s a rather fun kinky soap opera if you want to read the whole thing, as most of the participants have blogs.)
Now, all of this is applying adjectives to a RELATIONSHIP. For a PERSON to identify as polyamorous, that just means that they like that kind of relationship. (In roughly that same way that’s it’s really a sex act that is homo- or heterosexual, but people apply the term to themselves, too, based on the kinds of sex act they seek out.)
August 28, 2007 at 10:02 am
Maisy: the practical thing is Hell Yes a problem. I have a couple of times wound up with three partners & it was bloody difficult to manage. (Realistically, two for me is copable with). I’ve got a couple of friends-with-benefits type dates that I’ve been trying to set up for months now & not found time/energy for.
I don’t do primary/secondary, because my brain doesn’t work that way. My relationship with each of my partners is different, though, & the extent to which the life-stuff is shared differs (I live with one of them, so…). But that’s just me; other people manage things differently. It depends on the people & the relationships - there’s no “one way” to do it, really.
September 9, 2007 at 1:32 pm
My primary partner is the most wonderful, amazing man I’ve ever encountered, and I constantly wonder what I did to deserve him.
He’s also monogamously minded and extremely vanilla… and in my times of frustration, I’ve wondered what I did to deserve THAT.
This is his first relationship that has a degree of open-ness, and I’m constantly worried I’m going to fuck it up and make him slam the monogamy boundaries back into place. Baby steps…
Leave a Reply