U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-11-2019, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
3,449 posts, read 1,714,338 times
Reputation: 3695

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
A couple of observations that you can take or leave. Statistically speaking, ethically non-monogamous people have lower rates of STI transmission than monogamous. As counter intuitive as that is, generally, there is no need for funkiness around STI communication, testing... The concept of "fluid bonding" is taken very seriously and all partners are considered/consulted. That is not to say that ethically non-monogamous people are universally morally superior. Like any group, there are jerks and game players....

I, personally, don't see how the poly community people are going to change your dynamic much, frankly. It seems to me you will just be adding new variables to the equation that have nothing to do with your fundamental feeling that your bonding over sex is so strong.
True, but that is why many insist on requiring their partners to be tested (have a current blood test) before being intimate. I'm a guy, and I do. Can never be too careful...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 08:49 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 587,518 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by personone View Post
Yeah, protected sex is safer, but not completely safe. Still some risk of infections carried with it.
Yeah, I don't know why people just say, "slap a condom on, you'll be fine!" and that's that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:51 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 587,518 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiluvr1228 View Post
Excellent post! I've had men and women tell me I'm too old fashioned because I won't have sex with someone until I know them well. I'm not sharing my body with someone I don't trust or have strong feelings for. If that makes me old fashioned, fine.
Wish I could quote Wasel (Can't find her post in the billions of pages here, lol), but 100% dead on with her explanation.

Now the tables are turning that casual sex is encouraged, and those who are not willing to partake in the nebulous hook up culture are the squares and prudes for doing so. That they are "uptight" and how being poly is SO much better. Or so they would have us believe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Continental Europe
695 posts, read 116,586 times
Reputation: 1099
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisTown123 View Post
Wish I could quote Wasel (Can't find her post in the billions of pages here, lol), but 100% dead on with her explanation.

Now the tables are turning that casual sex is encouraged, and those who are not willing to partake in the nebulous hook up culture are the squares and prudes for doing so. That they are "uptight" and how being poly is SO much better. Or so they would have us believe.
I don't think poly is all about casual sex? I think it's more about the relationship side of things, except being open to more than one at once.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:17 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 587,518 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
I don't think poly is all about casual sex? I think it's more about the relationship side of things, except being open to more than one at once.
Well...it's just sugar coating it really. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...when then obviously it's a duck.

So I am thinking that the OP, who is talking of a monogamous relationship and when polys chime in, they really don't have much room to be chiming in on a topic regarding monogamy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:25 AM
 
13 posts, read 570 times
Reputation: 15
Some woman have casual sex nowadays just to prove a point that they can be just like men and nobody can tell them what to do with their body.

Of course not every man is the same nor woman but to pretend there are no differences between genders and to ignore that as a whole women are less built for casual sex encounters then men would be ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Continental Europe
695 posts, read 116,586 times
Reputation: 1099
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisTown123 View Post
Well...it's just sugar coating it really. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...when then obviously it's a duck.

So I am thinking that the OP, who is talking of a monogamous relationship and when polys chime in, they really don't have much room to be chiming in on a topic regarding monogamy.
I am the OP. I am monogamous but I have considered poly relationships and may experiment with this if I get an opportunity in the future. Anyway, it's all getting a bit mixed up in this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:56 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 587,518 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
I am the OP. I am monogamous but I have considered poly relationships and may experiment with this if I get an opportunity in the future. Anyway, it's all getting a bit mixed up in this thread.
Yeah, we just wound up mixing worlds here. lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Colorado
12,112 posts, read 7,437,635 times
Reputation: 21768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
The only thing I felt owed was civility & not to be treated disrespectfully
Yes, and you have a right to be unhappy with someone treating you discourteously. It isn't too much to ask of anyone, and should not require a RELATIONSHIP to receive. But some people are jerks. You didn't do anything wrong. Under the circumstances, even if he spooked at the whole home cooked meal situation, he was being stupid. Like was he scared you'd put an addictive drug in the mashed potatoes?

Sadly some people are flakes. But I don't think that it's all about a women are X, men are Y, feelings are Z, can't do casual, kind of a thing. It's just having an unfortunate encounter where you hoped for more consideration than what you got. I'm sorry it went down like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stockyman View Post
Great post. Lots of guys are actors waiting to get the sex and run after we get it. Pump and Dump. Too bad too many people end up falling for this ruse and end up as another story of conquest for the guy to brag about to his friends and saying how easy it is.
I think that this is a stereotype built on a cultural idea that it's ok for men to do this and not for women, and once you un-link breeding from it (since we now have birth control and all, and women also earn our own money at our own jobs) the need for society to cling to this diminishes. I mean again, I've had plenty of guys get attached and want more, when I didn't feel a zing the first time we had sex, no good connection there, and I did not want a repeat performance. I haven't gotten all attached to every single person I've ever had sex with. Sometimes it was the guy getting "clingy." Thing is though, it's only "clingy" when it's one person and not the other doing it. If both people arrive at the same station at the same time, ah...then it's "love."

Was it a "pump & dump" when I hooked up with a guy and then never wanted to see him again? It's happened more than once. The difference is, I don't view those men as trash, disposable, or with any negative connotations. It just wasn't a great connection and it wasn't worth continuing. Better though, was when there was a friendship that came first and continued after. I know some say that doesn't work, and I know I had some complications with it when I was in high school, but as an adult I've found it can work just fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisTown123 View Post
Yep...opening up Pandora's Box. (The Bolded) It appears the polyamory crowd seems to be immune to this or has made themselves an exception.
What are you even on about? The "polys" and all this. Far as I know, despite others saying that I am not the only "poly" here... I'm not even poly right now, first of all, not really, but as BirdieBelle pointed out I'm just the one here speaking to that (at ridiculous length ) from prior experience.

"The poly crowd" has, often through reading, training, and adopting a different set of ethics, realized that sex, feelings, and relationship expectations and commitments are NOT the same thing, and can stand on their own. Feelings happen, you cannot prevent them if they're gonna. But they don't mean you HAVE TO DO ANYTHING. You should, optimally, use your brain to make your choices, no matter what you are feeling. That includes the choice to have sex, the choice to have a relationship, the choice to be exclusive or fidelitious, the choice to fluid bond or not, all optimally made with conversations and negotiation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
Sonic Spork said the polyamorists encourage emotional ties as part of their sexual relationships.
Yes. Poly-AMORY, multiple LOVES. It's the swingers who are all about the sex. Many polyamorists aren't even into casual sex, or if so, it's usually not truly NSA/ONS type stuff, it's at least FWB. The reason I've talked about this here so much is you (OP) mentioning that poly could be a good fit since it might meet the high sexual needs by having multiple partners, but having feelings and relationships allowed, not just casual sex. Anyways, "casual" needs some defining. Just hooking up is one thing. FWB, is another, (sounds like OP's person was not as much of a friend as she thought he was)...there are relationships that are considered to be relationships, but they are not aimed in a march to marriage and so on.

I could be sitting here *gives TT123 a look* saying that "monos" just limit themselves too much, either you're a wife or you're garbage, no in between. At least "polys" can see that there are other options to be had. But I think that distinction is...well. Silly at least.

So anyhow, my experience with poly was quite nice. A bit much for my time and energy levels, but certainly something I'm glad I have experienced. Get really really good at using Google Calendar lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
Another reason to wait and take time when dating I think.

Perhaps we can develop the "pow" or the "whoosh" over time, or at least something not too distant from it. Lol
I used to think that what you're calling the "pow/whoosh"...you either felt it or you didn't, really soon. That had been my experience. Until the man I am with now. I felt curiosity, I felt ongoing levels of interest, sure. But I did not feel pow, whoosh, bonfire, lusty loving feels for him until we'd been having sex for about 5-6 months or so. What was good about the way we started (largely because I was poly, it took the pressure off) is that I did not have to be committed to him when I was not sure. I don't have a desire to commit to someone that I'm never going to love. I'm not going to automatically love a man just because we're having sex. I was with my ex for 18 years and never felt any pow, whoosh, bonfire stuff for him. I tried to make it work anyways, and I suffered a lot for it, and so did he. Never again! So we kept it "casual" ish...but love was permissible, and there was no boundary drawn around it saying that it was not ALLOWED to develop into something more. Also though we did not start having sex until we'd been...I dunno, kind of involved...we were non-sexual "play partners" in the BDSM party sense...for 2 months before we became more of a "thing."

If anything that's one of the differences between the more limited monogamous viewpoint and the poly one, is that "casual" to a monogamous person can mean "no feelings allowed, run away if any should start to appear!" and poly people might be more open to just seeing where something goes.

So the issue I see with the whole waiting to have sex thing, with more typical monogamous dudes, is being pressured by a man who needs to know if this is going somewhere. Seems that even if a guy can accept you don't want to jump into bed, he wants to jump into exclusivity and commitments and over-the-top promises that it's premature (in my opinion) to be making. They're all like, "I want a guarantee I'm not wasting my time!" Oh, your precious time. The hell else would you be doing with it, watching Seinfeld?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carly1983 View Post
I have to say this is one of the minus points for me, for polyamory and I'd have to give it more thought as to whether it would be acceptable to me. If you're in an exclusive, monogamous relationship you are less likely to catch something. If you're sleeping with someone who's also sleeping with someone else, who's sleeping with someone else, you have less control over the infections that could come your way, if one person involved is being less than honest or aware.
The standards set for these things are often a bit more strict actually, as somebodynew mentioned about STI stuff, not because anybody is superior to anybody else but because if you are trying to protect someone you love, you make more of an effort, than if you're just out there for yourself. And communication standards HAVE to be higher with poly, just to even make it work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:37 AM
 
2,145 posts, read 587,518 times
Reputation: 1408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork View Post
I'm not even poly right now
Yeah, had meant to address this, there's just some inconsistencies there. First your poly, then you're not, then it could shift again.

Quote:
Many polyamorists aren't even into casual sex, or if so, it's usually not truly NSA/ONS type stuff, it's at least FWB.
Quite contradictory, first you say polyamorists aren't into casual sex", but then follow that up with "even so". Then you throw out out the FWB, which is obviously casual sex. You just admitted it with the "even if so". So basically, "even if we DO have casual sex, it's at least FWB".

Kind of feel like a Hollywood detective here, "So which story are you going with?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top