I've been in the looking-for-a-MF-couple position. It's hard to find an attractive couple that isn't looking for basically a sex worker. Distinguishing yourself isn't that hard. Or just hire a sex worker.
@11: and that, I think, is it. It's not that my partner and I are movie-star attractive, or rich, or fixtures on the party circuit. We just don't hit on people we wouldn't be willing to spend time with socially, and expect to spend time (gasp) talking with them before and (shock) afterward. I'm always amazed at how many people don't seem to get that.
@17, yes, I've noticed this fact... I wished more people would stand for the rights of threesome-creators (the thirds that adventurous couples so long for) to be treated as full human beings.
Just wanted to point out, from the original dialogue, that the straight person is looking for "a hot, safe girl" whereas the gay person is looking for "gay guys."
There's so much to unpack there:
1) She has to be hot, not just normal looking.
2) She has to be "safe," which I take to mean that she's not allowed to make her own decisions around safer sex with other people she might want to date in addition to the couple. If she's even allowed to date other people.
3) She's seen as a "girl" -- young, vulnerable, not a powerful person in her own right.
4) She's expected to play with both the man & the woman; they're not concerned about whether she might be only attracted to one of them. Or not be bisexual at all.
5) They want a "regular" arrangement, right from the start, before they've even met the person.
If a gay couple looked for a "hot, safe boy," someone who would have a regular arrangement to play with them, with both of them, and only with them (or who would in any case let them make all his decisions about safe sex with other people)... I dare say they'd learn that such a "boy" is hard to find.
@26 (EricaP), this is all indeed true, and may have been what the straight person meant in the dialogue. I do point out, however, that some people who are now trying to get into threesomes are a bit too afraid of the 'bad' people they might find. It is thinkable that the "safe" and the "girl" in the original sentence were meant to express the desire that the person they'll find won't be dangerous. They may be trying to assuage their own fears, rather than making assumptions about controlling the person they're looking for.
But then again, maybe they meant it just as you interpreted it. I don't know. Just my $0.02.
@26: Yeah, that's been the general tone of most couples, if not the exact set of requirements. Also, that the male partner would be totally freaked out if his girlfriend or wife had ever been the "third." And that they have a very specific set of activities they want to do. It's gross. I've happily played with couples who were a lot older, or not the most attractive, because they managed to treat me like a human being and not a sex toy.
@28 - I don't think "safe" means "not likely to mug us." It might possibly mean "drama-free" (which in turn means, don't let your real emotions get in the way of our fantasies).
Or maybe "safe" as in STD free? Or not a danger to the primary relationship? I got burned that way. She started out as our girl friend and ended up as his second wife. That's why when ever I've been the Unicorn I'm very careful to be cognizant of boundaries. Don't want any broken hearts!
@30(EricaP), my first idea was more like Lissa's (@31), which I think probably does happen.
You're concerned with couples who just want to control the third, the threesome-creator, as if s/he were a fantasy pawn who had to submit to their vision of what the whole threesome should be like, rather than being an independent voice with ideas and desires of their own. And I agree entirely with you: this is bad, this is too often the case (especially with couples trying it for the first time: they're so afraid of 'what might be wrong' they end up with a wish list so extensive nobody would ever fit it... just like those people who go dating with so many desiderata for their dating partner that they never find anyone 'worthy' of a second date.)
But not everybody who uses these words is like this, I think. Some are more reasonable than their words would lead you to believe.
And again, I don't know this for a fact about the guy who spoke in Dan's kitchen. For all I know, you may be 100% correct about him and his partner.
@31-32, good for you! I hope the couples you've been a unicorn for realized that you were putting such effort into it, and appreciated it.
Perhaps you could give @33 a few pointers about how to find a couple that does respect you as a person and as a unicorn, who does not conceptualize you as a fantasy prop? As a supporter of threesomes, I'd love to see knowledge being shared that would lead to better, more satisfying drama-free threesomes.
As a sometime unicorn, I am struck by the disconnect between dating ads placed by men seeking women - who usually understand that they need to "sell themselves" and talk about what they have to offer to a woman - and those placed by couples seeking women, which more often than not read like they're ordering up a customized sex worker and are all about what SHE will offer them.
Start your ad by putting yourself in your prospective unicorn's shoes. Lead with "imagine a four-handed massage" or "let us pleasure you," not "My wife/hubby wants XYZ and here is exactly what we want you to do for us." Treat it like regular dating - give the woman a motivation to respond - and you will get much, much better results!
No, for some reason they have to feed them oats. I don't get it either.
excellent
@17, yes, I've noticed this fact... I wished more people would stand for the rights of threesome-creators (the thirds that adventurous couples so long for) to be treated as full human beings.
There's so much to unpack there:
1) She has to be hot, not just normal looking.
2) She has to be "safe," which I take to mean that she's not allowed to make her own decisions around safer sex with other people she might want to date in addition to the couple. If she's even allowed to date other people.
3) She's seen as a "girl" -- young, vulnerable, not a powerful person in her own right.
4) She's expected to play with both the man & the woman; they're not concerned about whether she might be only attracted to one of them. Or not be bisexual at all.
5) They want a "regular" arrangement, right from the start, before they've even met the person.
If a gay couple looked for a "hot, safe boy," someone who would have a regular arrangement to play with them, with both of them, and only with them (or who would in any case let them make all his decisions about safe sex with other people)... I dare say they'd learn that such a "boy" is hard to find.
But then again, maybe they meant it just as you interpreted it. I don't know. Just my $0.02.
#23 to place
and
#32 to show
You're concerned with couples who just want to control the third, the threesome-creator, as if s/he were a fantasy pawn who had to submit to their vision of what the whole threesome should be like, rather than being an independent voice with ideas and desires of their own. And I agree entirely with you: this is bad, this is too often the case (especially with couples trying it for the first time: they're so afraid of 'what might be wrong' they end up with a wish list so extensive nobody would ever fit it... just like those people who go dating with so many desiderata for their dating partner that they never find anyone 'worthy' of a second date.)
But not everybody who uses these words is like this, I think. Some are more reasonable than their words would lead you to believe.
And again, I don't know this for a fact about the guy who spoke in Dan's kitchen. For all I know, you may be 100% correct about him and his partner.
Perhaps you could give @33 a few pointers about how to find a couple that does respect you as a person and as a unicorn, who does not conceptualize you as a fantasy prop? As a supporter of threesomes, I'd love to see knowledge being shared that would lead to better, more satisfying drama-free threesomes.
Start your ad by putting yourself in your prospective unicorn's shoes. Lead with "imagine a four-handed massage" or "let us pleasure you," not "My wife/hubby wants XYZ and here is exactly what we want you to do for us." Treat it like regular dating - give the woman a motivation to respond - and you will get much, much better results!