Quote:
Originally Posted by theGreat1
Definitely not an option. Otherwise, why not just be single?
|
Probably because some people want to engage in such activity with a partner that is close to them and they wish to share the experience closely with. It is a shared experience with someone you love - not just throw away sex with random partners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains
Well, that's big of you  So you get an extra woman, but your wife doesn't get equal treatment with an extra man?  |
Sexual experimentation is not about tit-for-tat trades. There should be no "If I do this - then you should be expected to do that" involved in it.
In other words in this case a threesome involving a man - and one involving a woman - should be considered independently on the merits of whether they want to do it. If they both want to do the former. Great. If they both want to do the latter. Great. If one of them does not want to do one or other or both of them. Great too.
The "equal treatment" is in - on a case by case basis - evaluating together whether a sexual scenario is one all the partners involved wish to engage in or not. There is - therefore - nothing wrong with a partner of any sex suggesting they would like a threesome with a member of the opposite sex - but not a threesome with a member of the same sex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains
lol, well, it's always been my experience that with the right man no "third parties" are necessary  |
I do not think it is a question of necessity though. Things do not have to be necessary to want them - desire them - or consider them. You can be perfectly and wholly happy with your sex life with your partner(s) - but still consider scenarios such as this all the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains
My point was, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander
Only agreeing to bringing in an extra woman seems a bit hypocritical. |
But what is good for the goose does not have to be good for the gander. And there is nothing hypocritical about it. You are just conflating the scenarios where you should not. Any given person has a list of scenarios that will - and will not - be a turn on for them. For many men a threesome with two women is in the "will" column - but a threesome with two men is in the "not".
There is nothing hypocritical about knowing what your sexual turn ons are - and are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains
I especially understand that many men who want to incorporate an extra women into the bedroom activities are either too homophobic or have too fragile of an ego to let an extra man in instead. |
It does not have to be ego or homophobia. It is merely the knowledge of what does - and does not - turn you on. Homophobia refers to being against homosexuals or homosexual activity. Not being homosexual or into homosexual acts yourself is not homophobia. At all. Its a sexual orientation.
Conflating not wanting to engage in gay sex oneself with being homopobic is really way off the mark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentropa
Castrated? Wouldn't it be hard to have sex then?
|
He said in the OP that English is not his first language. I am going to assume he did not mean castrated but was referring to a vacectomy or something. The context he used it in would not make sense any other way. And context is everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains
Any man who can't be comfortable with this has little right to expect his wife should be comfortable letting him get an extra woman.
|
He has every right to expect that. As does a woman in the same situation. You have every right to list to your partner(s) the sexual scenarios you are interested in and ask which ones he, she, or they would be happy to share with you.
This idea you have of "If you engage in one you should expect to have to engage in the other" is just plain wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
Fantasies are driven by lust/tittilation. Reality is driven by emotions
|
Agreed. The advice I give to people generally on topics like this is not to try and force the fantasy into reality. Often it crashes and burns. Rather what people in a relationship should do is talk about what they will do if such a scenario arises naturally on its own. What signs and keywords will they use to signal consent/interest or rejection of the idea to each other. What their boundries will be.
Then if such a scenario arises naturally - go with the flow as and how it feels right to.
But more often than I care to count - I have seen people try to arrange to have fantasy scenarios come true - arranging the where - the who with - the time and place - and the result is so forced and unnatural that it ends horribly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonnenwende
Well if you are going to have a threeway, you are, at the very least, temporarily opening up the marriage. It isn't like you get to sleep with a third person and it somehow doesn't count as extra-marital.
|
I think you might be in danger of just aruging over the definition of terms. Perhaps why you are talking past each other here is because for many people "open marriage" means engaging in extra marital affairs on your own time. That is - for example - if the guy meets some woman on the steet and goes back to a hotel with her then thats ok. You can sleep with anyone at any time within certain rules and boundries.
Whereas a threeway really does not fit that definition. Thats a shared sexual experience together and is quite different.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
