nocutename
Berkeley, California
report this user
Feb 28 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@125: P.S. Hunter, regardless of whether you do the same or not, I intend to be as civil to you as I can be.
Feb 28 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@123: Hunter, I copied and pasted what I had read. Clearly, I didn't read enough, or put enough time in to paste even more text. I assure you anything I missed was inadvertent. I wasn't being duplicitous. But I'm getting tired of your pointless references to my ability or wont to copy and paste amounts of text that you find somehow not de rigueur, or de trop (is that enough French for me to pass muster for what constitutes "educated and respectful for you, or is it too much, proving that I'm obnoxious?). And with this new charge that because I didn't do something you would do, I am "being deceptive," you're beginning to sound like a poster who calls people--usually women--with whom he doesn't agree "liars" and "shitstains."

I also don't why you are trying to drag this battle over what "cuckold" is on and on and on. For one, thing, what's it to you?

I don't know why you're trying to resurrect the kind of stupid battle you had with mydriasis years ago, but I haven't tried to engage in that fight the way she did. I haven't used every possible opportunity to belittle you or make any distaste I may feel for you (generally none; occasionally a bit) based on our differing responses to particular issues bleed into every exchange between us. If you read all of last week's comments, you'll see I offered you an olive branch @229. Your response @232 was to sneer at my pasting a large swath of text--but apparently now the problem is that by only going 14 words in to one definition (which was all I saw on my initial screen), I wasn't somehow prolific enough.
In any case, I have no desire to participate or to drag the readers of these comment threads into a prolonged insult and baiting exchange. I have better uses for my energy and I don't like to create a world of discord. So I'll say it more clearly: I would like to apologize for anything I said--intentional and unintentional--to offend you in the past and I would like us to attempt a more civil relationship going forward.
More...
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@114: Yup. Like parental software that blocks websites for "sexual content," and prohibited people from looking up sites having to do with breastfeeding because "breasts."
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@111: Lava, are you calling DDD a poly bastard?
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
BTW, discussion still going strong with some new developments (LateBloomer has been 86'ed and had to change his identity) over at last week's comment thread ("The Past is Never Dead").
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
Compersion. Candaulism. I love the specificity of all these words, but they only work if people know them. I guess that's the issue with "cuckold": many more people have heard it than have heard either of the two "c words" above. I have only recently heard of compersion, and I had never heard "candaulism" before. I thought it would be exactly what my partners were experiencing, but when I Googled it, Wikipedia gave me this definition:
"Candaulism is a sexual practice or fantasy in which a man exposes his female partner, or images of her, to other people for their voyeuristic pleasure.

The term may also be applied to the practice of undressing or otherwise exposing a female partner to others, or urging or forcing her to engage in sexual relations with a third person, such as during a swinging activity. There have also been reports of a woman's partner urging or forcing her into prostitution or pornography. Similarly, the term may also be applied to the posting of personal images of a female partner on the internet or urging or forcing her to wear clothing which reveals her physical attractiveness to others, such as by wearing very brief clothing, such as a microskirt, tight-fitting or see-through clothing or a low-cut top."


So it sounds like while candaulism is indeed a description of a certain practice, it also doesn't fit what either my former boyfriends or Ex-LateBloomer felt or did. If candaulism refers only to the sexual thrill of having others get sexual pleasure of your female partner, but doesn't take into account that your partner is doing whatever she's doing because she wants to, too, because she gets off on it, and the new guy(s) get off on it, and the male partner gets off on it then it also is the wrong word.

Which brings me to this: While I like precision in language, I hate jargon. I also hate people describing themselves in terms of the acts that they like (or even the motivation behind the acts). That's probably why I find myself thinking that I don't really understand Philophile: I would never describe myself or anyone I know as a "cuck." I have had boyfriends who got a thrill out of sharing me with other men. Their thrill was a combined result of controlling me (but with my complete willing consent); of voyeurism; of watching or participating in my sexual pleasure; of giving the "gift" of me and my sexual responsiveness to others. There is no one word to sum all that up. And even if there was, to reduce these individual men, whom I loved, to one word that describes one aspect (and only one) of their sexual interests, seems far too reductive and almost robotic to me.
More...
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@109: Wasn't that what Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech was all about?
Feb 27 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@ 101, et al.: If what you want is good sex that has the potential to keep getting better because you and your partners know each other's responses, "mehs," turn-ons, limits, etc. then it behooves you to forge relationships with a group of casual sex partners whom you'll see repeatedly, get to know, perhaps get to like as people even though you may see them only for the specified purpose of having sex.

If what you want is to see yourself as a Casanova, or to add ever more notches to your bedpost, you do what DDD is doing. It's a different kind of thrill. It satisfies in one aspect if what you want is the validation you get from confirming that you are sexually attractive to a lot of people--and that is a very important psychological need for a lot of people. It does not necessarily lead to especially fulfilling sex (at least if you have any non-traditional kinks or turn ons, and for a lot of women, many of whom have a hard time reaching orgasm during the one-night stand), and if you're a less than very attractive man, it can be hard to sustain the kind of success DDD just saw.
It is a trade off.
More...
Feb 26 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@101: Perfectly said, Holmes; thank you!
Feb 25 nocutename commented on Savage Love.
@246: LateGreatB: How are you being blocked from posting? I see far worse stuff all the time. Plus your last comment wasn't pulled