I trust that the milk, eggs, and all perishables were in the refrigerator when that tawdry conversation occurred.

I call them neeeiiiiggghhh-bors. ;-)

I call them neeeiiiiggghhh-bors. ;-)

They take turns riding them?

@5

No, for some reason they have to feed them oats. I don't get it either.

Well I do like apples!

And if wishes were horses, we'd all be in mmm threesomes.

More Bigness!

(They're really not that hard to find, people.)

Ther're called horses because everyone has ridden them.

(insert obligatory horse penis reference here)

hehehe, "insert"

also, too, "gay guys," though you lose the neat symmetry of the joke.

@6 I deserved that.

@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.

*wheeze*

@6
excellent

See: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/contr…

I chortled.

Or Ponies, not all men are created equal...

@23--I still can't stop laughin' :-)))

@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.

Unicorns do exist. :-)

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.

RIght on, @26.

@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.

@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!

Also I want a pony.

#22 for the win

#23 to place

and

#32 to show

@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 straight, hot woman in an open marriage, I can tell you it is impossible to get laid. Everyone just seems to think I should sleep with women.