Regarding whether everyone and their brother needs to know the details of of your monogamish or polyamorous relationship with your lover(s), I can see where at first blush one might say no. On the other hand, for many of us, even when we live in a city, our social circles often intersect, or are even piled on top of each other. Consequently, if people assume that the relationship that they see you in, be it a formal marriage or a long term regular squeeze, meets the cultural stereotype of monogomy then evidence of a deviation from that preconception might lead to the assumption that you are cheating on your SO. Inasmuch as cheating is a form of dishonesty and (hopefully) people still recoil from dishonesty, not letting on to the nature of your relationship is can hurt your standing in your community.
Oh yeah, and if you date within your community you may be losing out on some good opportunities with people who assume that you are monogamous and who might not want to be stepping on your SO's action or exposing themselves to inconvienent drama. Our worlds are often a lot smaller than we think they are.
It is interesting to see everyone lay into CCG's man. Is he not just forcefully expressing his desires? IIRC, last week, many here were arguing that the line between persuasion and manipulation is a fine one, and that some manipulation is kosher. But, of course, that only applies if you are a sexually-adventures wannabe poly, not if you are an emotionally-needy guy.
I don't get it: the anti-monogamists say that "it's not natural" to be monogamous, implying that people should live up to their natures. Well, if this guy's nature is that he is more emotionally needful than most, why all the hate?
Ah, now, cockyballsup; you just want me to quit testifying and go to bragging. Suffice it to say that I am a middle aged emptynester who is comfortable with a 40 hr/wk job, can walk to work if I so choose, and prefers to date women who live within a few blocks of my house. It's not a complicated life and leaves plenty of time for sex drugs and rock n roll.
mydriasis (last @ # 113), there is always a danger in these forums of giving the impression that one is commenting on some previous commenter's personal situation specifically when all you really intend to do is comment on facts or scenarios that might apply to a broad range of people. To the extent that I came across as opining on you and your guy's thing I apologize. That was not my intention.
I agree with what you said, but I'm not conflating monogamish with polyamory. I also dislike monogamy, sexist polygyny, and the cultural value that sex should be about love. Intellectually, I get that monogamy and sex only in the presence of love works for other people, but I wish it didn't and I wish there was less of it. I'm just recording the same reaction to monogamish. It's not a productive, useful, or kind reaction I'm having, so maybe I shouldn't have posted about it, but I did.
There is a spectrum between monogamish and polyamory, and spectrums of relationships inside those two categories. Some poly people don't have primary partners, and in some poly relationships people don't ever meet their lover's other lovers. To me, the big difference between monogamish and polyamory is the importance of the pair bond, and I dislike the pair bond, so that means I dislike monogamish.
My spouse was talking to a friend about our relationship, and the friend told em that, from what they'd heard from friends, swinging was better than polyamory, because couples stayed together longer with swinging than with polyamory. This value system assumes that the pair bond is the most important thing, and relationships that lead to the longest chronological pair bonds are better. I disagree, and see this as a monogamy centric viewpoint. To me, the ideals of monogamish seem too much like the ideals of monogamy.
EricaP, my current exclusive GF would tell you that I sit on my front porch and smile when women walk by. Sometimes they smile back. That is not the only way I meet people but that is how it works in more than a few cases. A smile is very sexy thing. I commend it to everyone.
Yeah, now that female ejaculation has become prominent in porn -- and since one of our female friends has claimed to be a squirter -- my husband feels bummed out that he can't make me squirt. Ugh. I feel great about our sex life until he brings up squirting, then I just feel inadequate.
Essentially, it can be up to 2 cups: the fluid is produced by the female prostate and stored in the bladder (which has a capacity of 2 cups), though it isn't urine.
You can check this by peeing as much as you can, fully emptying your bladder, then ejaculating large quantities of fluid: since you emptied your bladder first, clearly the fluid wasn't stored there, but was generated by the female prostate during the process of stimulation and ejaculation.
@106, 111: Since the general assumption is that you're expected to behave differently to/around people who are not available to date others than to people who are, it's probably a good idea for someone's "availability" status to be a public thing.
In addition, what about monogamish people who are very close with one of the friends they sleep with sometimes? They may want "public acknowledgment and acceptance" even without long-term cohabitation.
Don't you just love it. MB gets periodically incapacitated by stress and wants to be President. No stress there, but then we all know who really would be President after all she is such a dutiful (submissive) little breeder.
@120: Yeah, I dislike monogamy as a "value," but really it's just one of many possible structures that make relationships work for people. I feel torn between thinking it's just how some people are wired, and thinking it's unhealthy and weird.
I do share your wish that there was less of it. I have the same squick to it that I do to an acquaintance's relationship, where they agreed that each of them was not allowed to have friends of the opposite sex. It just seems sick and possessive and controlling.
Why are you against a pair bond, though? Even in a polyamorous relationship, there are still pair bonds, just more of them.
Don't you just love it. MB gets periodically incapacitated by stress and wants to be President. No stress there, but then we all know who really would be President after all she is such a dutiful (submissive) little breeder.
@86 I was expressing two unrelated thoughts. The second had nothing to do with her job. I was thinking about the differences in experience and neediness. A sense of growing frustration on her part.
Am I the only one who reads the title and hears the "Mahna mahna" song from Sesame Street in my head? Monogamish, doo doo de doo doo. Monogamish, doo doo de doo.
Before I met the current bf I was super promiscuious and loved being single and having choices. I liked the novelty of being with someone new all the time. When I'm in a relationship I don't notice other guys. When someone comes on to me it's reflexive for me to stop them. I don't need to think about it. I don't miss being single and I don't feel like I'm missing out.
But again, I'm 100% for people being comfortable with nonmonogamy and it benifits everyone (not least of all, me) for us to live in a world where people freely talk about which way they're wired.
Re the pegging/female ejaculate letter: I propose that The Frothy Mix of Lube, Fecal Matter, and Female Ejaculate that is sometimes the byproduct of pegging be henceforth known as Bachmann. Or Marcus, if you think that's funnier.
When I said "pair bond" I meant a relationship that is supposed to be more important than other social relationships. In other words, my use of "pair bond" has monogamy, or at least monogamish or swinger, connotations. I also happen to really, really like small group interactions, which are different from one of one interactions (which I also like!).
@138: My problem is not with anyone feeling that way, but more with people insisting that their partner should always feel that way. Or making a rule that their partner should never date/kiss/flirt with/have sex with anyone else.
Why?
I'm hetero - do you also have a problem with me "insisting" that my partner have a penis?
I'm not insisting YOU need to be that way, it's just something that I want in a relationship - and experience suggests I'm not the only one. Not all guys get off on their woman being with other men. In fact there's a lot of guys out there who get (*gasp*) jealous!
I don't understand why you have a problem with something that two consenting adults agree to in a relationship.(It's not a 'rule' one person makes for the other, it's something that gets agreed on when one person says 'so... do you want to be exclusive?' and the other one says 'hey sure'. It's not as draconian as you make it sound)
I have no problem with other people being poly but at this point in my relationship I can't deal with it (and we've had polyfuckus points and shared girlfriends points). It's not jealousy or drama, it's the time thing and also it's hard enough dealing with one another's shit and getting it down just being together without adding another fucking layer on top of it with someone else's bullshit to deal with.
I can squirt but I dislike doing it. It doesn't make the O any better or worse but it makes my bed have a nasty wet spot I dislike, and I don't like the feel of towels under my ass. And I too have experienced the "project" feeling of a man where he's decided I need to have this kind of O and he is just the one to bring me there. Ugh... spare me. When did a plain old BJ go out of style? Now it's all anal and squirting. And I've tried anal every which way and unlike everyone else I fucking hate Tristan Taoromino because NO not everyone CAN like anal but fuck me if that's not exactly what most men take from her books when they read them. Men should be fucking banned from reading those books unless they have a partner who is so into having it up her ass she gives him a copy.
In other news, I am glad I married a man who finds anal totally gross, and I found this out entirely on accident before we ever even started flirting. I confess I began flirting with him immediately upon discovering this.
@143: Of course consenting adults can organize their relationship however they want, and I'm glad that they have the freedom to do so and options to choose from. I don't think it's a male/female thing necessarily, just different preferences. (And every single human on the planet gets jealous sometimes, monogamous or not, it's just a question of how you handle the jealousy.)
But, well, it squicks me a little. Like scat play, or cuckold fantasies, or 24/7 TPE, or saying that your partner is not allowed to have friends of the opposite sex, something about it just strikes me as unhealthy and controlling. It bothers me because it's regulating your partner's behavior even when they're not spending time with you. It's specifying not what you want in your relationship, but the kind of relationships that your partner is allowed to have with other people. Compare "don't whistle around me cause it bothers me" with "don't whistle around other people when I'm not there, because I'll feel hurt and betrayed if you do."
And part of it is just that monogamy is seen as a good thing, a cultural ideal, an expectation that that's how mature responsible adults are supposed to live. So people do get stuck in monogamy if they're not careful, just because it's the default. And people do get pressured into it in all sorts of subtle ways.
And of course, when people agree to be exclusive and someone slips up, as people do because no one is perfect, it's seen as a horrible thing to do, a betrayal, making you a "cheating piece of shit," rather than just accepting that people make mistakes. While you don't notice or think about dating or flirting with other people, that's not the case for everyone, and a slip-up gets seen as a horrible breach of trust or as "giving into temptation." Whereas if someone, say, promises to wash the dishes every night, and misses a night once in a while, it's not a big deal.
In other words, it's often seen not just an agreement to be exclusive, but as a moral judgment on the other person for how they act. And the "temptation" to date or flirt or have sex with someone else is always all around you.
And while you talk about it as just a 'hey, sure, let's be exclusive' kind of discussion, sometimes it is what one person really wants while the other isn't sure, or is reluctant, but goes along to try it, or they think it's what they should do, or they want to make their partner happy, or they're afraid to make waves. It's something that can be used to manipulate or guilt-trip a partner, especially when people don't understand or accept non-monogamous relationships as legitimate. ("How could you want other people? You must not love me? Am I not good enough?")
It's difficult to look at the costs and benefits of choosing monogamy, and make a rational decision, when it's such an emotional and moral issue for people. Speaking personally, it's been an ultimatum that I've received many times, not a 'hey, let's be exclusive' thing, and it's hard to know how to respond to that.
I know this is an irrational prejudice of mine in some ways, and I certainly am not trying to tell you or anyone else how you should conduct your relationships. But I wish monogamy weren't as common, and I think in a more free and honest world a monogamous relationship would generally be seen as an odd and somewhat controlling choice that people nevertheless occasionally choose. There is a case to be made that monogamy is not as healthy or realistic of a relationship model as other options.
@145 "Of course consenting adults can organize their relationship however they want"
No they can't, especially not when kids are involved. If nothing else, the law and state gets involved (usually badly, the law is an ass). Cultural expectations affect it, and other people sometimes have legitimate interests in the outcome.
I'm absolutely with you that a more flexibile and understanding take on what should be done in each circumstance would work much better.
Unfortunately, there's now a common view of monogomy with strict insistence on sexual fidelity, but without any commitment to be GGG - the opposite in fact: an ideology of autonomy and no responsiblities, whilst constraining the other person to exclusivity. I do like Dan's clarity on that lunacy.
@145 BlackRose
I'm enjoying your thoughtful commentary. This might seem to nitpick but I think it's an important element here. You wrote:
"if someone, say, promises to wash the dishes every night, and misses a night once in a while, it's not a big deal"
This made me recall Stevie Nicks singing, "well I've been afraid of changing 'cause I built my life around you." No one builds their life around housework. They do set out to build a life around a particular commitment to a relationship. That may be monogamous or not, but whatever rules you set up, and no matter how many people are involved, that commitment is the biggest thing in your life. Having a "slip up" there is the biggest upset that you will experience (excluding death).
I fail to see how you're not just moralizing it as 'bad/unhealthy' instead of 'good/mature'. When I think intellectually you know (and I've been trying to argue) that it's not a moral issue, simply a preference one.
Like I said, some people are wired to monogamy. I have no desire to force/pressure someone into a monogamous relationship, I just want to be with someone who wants the same lifestyle as me. (Don't a lot of us?)
I'm sorry you've had such negative experiences but for me personally the conversation WAS like that. Me and the boyfriend started out as, I guess 'sex buddies' and early (within the first two or three weeks, I think) after we started seeing eachother I had some sexual things happen with other people. It never came up until we had the exclusivity talk and it turned out that through the whole time we had been involved he hadn't been with anyone else. He's not wired that way either. And he wasn't stoked on the fact that I had (although obviously it was kosher since we were nowhere near official at that point) but he didn't hold it against me. But he was happy to know that it wouldn't be happening in the future.
You're still looking at it from the frame of one person wanting to fuck around and the other person forbidding them to do it. While that DOES happen and while it may be your experience, that's not the definition of monogamy and it's certainly not what a person aspires to in a monogamous relationship any more than petty infighting and jealousy is what poly relationships aspire to.
All in all I think you're largely ignoring the mutual nature of monogamous relationships (the ones done right). When I'm in a relationship I actually really like turning guys down because I know how important it is to my S/O. It's nice to have something that we have together that no one else gets to have.
I don't feel "controlled" - I'm doing something that makes a person I love happy. I don't understand why that has to squick you out, but oh well.
Thanks for taking a crack at that comment, I wasn't sure how to approach it since our feelings are so different.
I finally came up with an analogy though. It's not like doing the dishes. So here goes: I'm a meat eater. I love bacon. But let's - for the sake of argument - say I'm a vegetarian. I want my boyfriend to be a vegetarian too, since it matters to me. I meet a guy, it comes up, and it turns out he is too! A long term relationship ensues and then one day I walk by a restaurant and see him eating a huge burger with a friend.
That's kind of more along the lines of what cheating is like? If that helps?
I've been quite clear on your thinking for some time now. Don't feel that you need to clarify for my sake. I have no problem with what you said @148,150. You recognize that there is a distinction between wanting something for your own life and making rules for society.
@150 - but what do you do then? (rhetorical you) Is vegetarianism important enough to ditch a long relationship? Or do you decide that you value this particular person (who occasionally eats meat) more than the principle of both of you never eating meat? Life is hard, and people do change.
The more salient point (for me) is the lie. If the person was always a meat-eater then they should've told me from the beginning, to not do so is a lack of respect - I think respect is extremely important in a relationship. (Yes, more important than fidelity)
So the meat-eating (or cheating) coupled with the lie is absolutely enough to ditch a relationship. (For me.) I need to be able to trust my partner and if they lied to me about something that important then I don't know if I'd be able to trust them ever again. (This is MY issue/bias.)
If they brought up "hey I want to eat meat now" that would be different or if they told me from the beginning they're not a vegetarian. Dan Savage seems to agree on this point.
@Mr. J it was more for BlackRose's sake but thanks. I appreciate that someone understands my message. :)
@126--that is baloney. Yes, the process of reaching ejaculation does involve a similar feeling to milk letdown in the breasts, in the bladder--fluid is produced. But I have a very hard time believing that all that fluid is coming solely from the Skene's glands. It's piss. It's piss perhaps more diluted than usual and mixed with Skene's glands ejaculatory fluid so chemically different from regular urine, but come on. And any piss that may already be in the bladder doesn't magically disappear either.
I think it's cute how men jump through hoops trying to convince women that it's some sort of magical elixir to make them feel less inhibited and more able to do it, and I certainly agree that it's more than just a woman peeing forcefully, but whether you call it amrita or squirty juice, it's still mostly piss.
You sound like one of those women who hates porn because of your own insecurities: probably surrounding body image (I'm sorry, but that's generally the type of woman who feels threatened by images of women in porn) or perhaps some sort of sexual abuse? I know, I know, I'm making grand accusations and I don't know you from Eve. I could be wrong. But the fact is, my boyfriend consumed HUGE amounts of porn in high school (I watched it too, being the sexually liberated girl I am, though not nearly as much as he did), and he was a WONDERFUL, gentle, giving lover. I don't think watching porn makes you...disrespect or not understand a woman's sexuality any more than playing video games makes you violent in "real life."
It sounds like you have a stick up your ass...when really maybe what you need is a "stick" up your ass, know what I'm saying? ;)
@153 - yep, the 4-month lie was the worst of it. But, you know, we'd been together half our lives. He hadn't been lying that whole time; this was a newly felt need. For the record, Dan advised me to forgive this particular lie, if I could, as long as there weren't more and more of them. I'm a flawed human, and I decided to accept that my husband is a flawed human (with a cute butt :-)
BlackRose: your comment at #145 seems to ignore that poly people often have rules, too. It's not a dichotomy of "monitoring your partner's every move" vs. "TOTAL FREE-FOR-ALL!" - it's a continuum. Within monogamy you get some couples where glancing at an attractive stranger would be grounds for a fight, and other couples where one person could go out and get lap dances from strippers all night and the other wouldn't care as long as there was no sex. On the poly end, when I was dating a guy in an open marriage, he wasn't allowed to see me more than three times a week or to ever spend the night at my apartment. And then again I knew a guy who didn't believe in placing his partners in a hierarchy of "primary" or "secondary" and preferred to let his relationships happen more organically...but when he wanted to fuck one of his partner's best friends, she flipped out at the idea (the two girls had fought over guys all through high school with the friend usually "winning" and it was still a sore spot for her) so he didn't. It all comes down to what any given person is prepared to handle - and how much they're willing to do for someone they love.
I do think it's absurd that monogamy is the default state of relationships - in high school I (and everyone else I knew) thought going out with someone a handful of times meant you were a couple now, and it didn't even occur to us to question this, which landed a lot of people in wildly misguided relationships. But oh well...the important thing is that I learned from my mistakes and now I negotiate my relationships on a case-by-case basis.
My current relationship started out monogamous because I was only interested in my boyfriend and he was only interested in me. There was no "controlling" of anyone; just, "Here's how I feel" "Hey, me too!" "Cool. If it ever changes for you, please let me know. I'll do the same." ...And things did change, and we're adapting accordingly.
Hmm, it's surprising to hear fee-jak is chemically similar to male ejaculate, and I'm not sure I believe it, since they are widely dissimilar in feel, taste, looks and smell!
Fee-jak is like WATER, with no smell or taste whatsoever, and when it dries, it's as though it was never there.
I state this not from scientific experiment, but from many years of my own experience. Maybe SOME women shoot sticky stinky goo, but I doubt it.
This is sort of completely off-topic, but it's burdening me and I need to get it out. I've posted on here extensively about relationship struggles - said some things about my girlfriend (now ex) which were absolutely brutal...to the point that I was admonished (rather politely) that it "didn't sound like I really liked her very much". I was focused on me, and my gripes and venting freely...thinking anonymity made it all ok somehow.
Well, she connected those comments to me, and the hurt that has caused her is beyond belief. I can't see how to ever expiate that - she has not spoken to me once since - but I need to say how horrible I feel for the pain inflicted. This is truly the worst thing I've ever done to someone.
we're all flawed and we have flaws we can and cannot accept. cheating is a flaw I can't accept. There are many flaws I can accept that other women might not.
You are entitled to your feelings. Is she really upset by what you wrote or by the fact that you wrote it? Both? The way she split doesn't speak well for her commitment.
All I can say is that I vented about our relationship on here - and I said things that make me want to jump in front of a train when I picture myself saying them to her face.
It really doesn't matter how/why or whether the hurt was intentional - it is real and I am responsible.
I'm not wanting to start a conversation here about it all - I really just wanted to express this publicly, as I did the comments that led to it.
All I can say is that I vented about our relationship on here - and I said things that make me want to jump in front of a train when I picture myself saying them to her face.
It really doesn't matter how/why or whether the hurt was intentional - it is real and I am responsible.
I'm not wanting to start a conversation here about it all - I really just wanted to express this publicly, as I did the comments that led to it.
Latebloomer @165: I just reported how my GF would describe my pre-her technique - imagine an exasperated roll of the eyes while saying it. Your results may vary.
@148: Thanks for describing how it worked for you: it seems silly, but I really hadn't thought of monogamy that way before.
I think there's a huge distinction between monogamy by happenstance, in the sense that you are both only interested in each other at the time, and monogamy by fiat, where it's imposed as a rule requiring you to actively fight temptation at all costs.
Put another way, I think monogamy should be practiced consciously, chosen mutually, regularly discussed and re-evaluated, and not used as a condition for continuing the relationship. (And I'd say the same for any other relationship model.)
What I find disturbing is when monogamous couples build their whole relationship around the promise of monogamy being perfectly kept 100% of the time.
@159: Yes, and at a certain point on that continuum it starts to look less like reasonable rules and more like people being controlling. We'd all agree, I'm sure, that there are some sorts of rules a couple could consensually institute that would be extremely unhealthy and controlling. One example might be not masturbating or watching porn. Or regulating what each other eats, or the friends each other has.
"Extreme" monogamy (no dating or flirting with anyone else, no discussing other options, any slip-up is a betrayal) strikes me as a little too controlling.
My feelings on this are conflicted -- it's a complicated issue -- and thanks for giving me some new perspectives.
What #14 said.
I come, and I've known one other female friend who comes. The commonalities of our experiences, and what I've read in non-porn discussions, is something VERY different from the "Girls Who Cum" porn I've seen.
Hate to break it to those avid consumers, but if the lady is "squirting like a hydrant", she's probably not coming, she actually is just peeing on you. Compare that hosing down with a normal guy ejaculating and you'll understand what I mean. I saw one porn film of what was supposed to be a female ejaculator, in which she "came" into a wine glass, filling it more than half way up, and then drank it, proclaiming it was "ooOOoo... girl cum!".
Yyyeah, uhm... no.
My ex (who would have been VERY squicked at being pissed on by anyone) was all cool with it once he determined for himself that, whatever it was that I was emitting when I peaked, it wasn't pee.
And FWIW, neither I or the other girl I knew who occasionally ejaculated ever made a wet spot bigger than a couple inches across on the sheets, and for both of us, direct G-Spot stimulation was required and thoroughly enjoyed. Ex described the odor as strangely sweet, and kind of clingy.
And we didn't have to go to Vienna to figure it out, either.
@171: 'to come' means 'to have an orgasm,' whether or not you ejaculate.
And no, large quantities of female ejaculate are not urine. I know because I've seen women completely empty their bladder before ejaculating large quantities of fluid.
Civelletop,
I'm sorry that your girlfriend was hurt, and that you feel so bad. I guess we all assume the internet is a lot more anonymous than it might actually be!
But as far as beating yourself up about it--try to just consider it a lesson learned.
Regarding female ejaculate and urine... ladies, there's a simple test you can do at home if you can ejaculate: Take Azo Standard (available OTC), wait a day or so, and get yourself off. Check the color of your come by dabbing a bit on a kleenex; Azo dyes urine vivid orange. My result? Champagne colored, not Sunkist.
Or at least my wife is. Once she got past the "I've got to pee" stage, ie that no matter what is coming out, her lover is more than happy to receive it, it just meant a towel was needed. Sometimes it's sweet (definitely not urine for non-diabetes), sometimes it's bitter like coffee. I can't be alone in noticing that what a woman eats can flavor her pussy. I've even tasted garlic from a girlfriend's nipples. Why should it be a shock that some of what scents urine ends up in other fluids? In any case, it's like queefs, all part of the fun.
I wonder if my coming just from having a orgasming pussy heaving into my face is odd. I even had a girlfriend call me a liar til I showed her the splouge on the side of the bed. My point: we aren't all exactly alike, and it's all to the good.
I like the term Monogamish. I support that type of relationship. It makes sense. I am therapist and I see plenty of couples that are exploring this type of relationship. The problem that I keep seeing come up in session is that when a partner wants to be monogamish more often than not it's because of a fear of intimacy and closeness that they are defending themselves against. When they are desiring a monogamish relationship out of fear of real closeness it never actually works out for the couple. I wish there was a way to tell if a partner wants to practice a more open relationship because of a healthy desire or an unhealthy desire.
This is CCG. The guy I'm with is the sweetest, kindest and most gentle and honest man I've ever known. I didn't want him judged badly. I had some horrible relationships until I broke away, got my shit together and got a degree (however you judge what it's in). There are two issues - the first is that he needs to let me be a little more free or I will suffocate. I need to not have to be with him all the time, or have the pressure that he would lose it if we weren't together anymore. The second is the stripping. I know not everyone would be happy with this job, but he loves me, not an office worker. he is willing to compromise, obviously i am not the forceful rough bitch people seem to think or I wouldn't be writing into dan to ask for help. I really love and cherish this guy. He is experiencing love for the first time and I have been trying to make it as amazing as possible but we've hit a bump. I can't change who I am for him, and it feels like thats what he's asking.
You are fine the way you are. Don't change for a guy. Not everyone here thinks you are a rough bitch. I would be perfectly happy to be with a stripper. My attitude is to say "go be happy and then I'll be happy." That's called "being supportive."
If you continue to suffocate then get out. He will need to learn to get over failed relationships as every adult does. Don't let yourself be held hostage to that. Don't be cruel either, but I really don't think you need to be told that. You seem compassionate to me.
CCG A good part of the problem is that you have decided to make, what for a lot of people would be a major change. While you stripped in the past, you weren't when you became involved. You don't say how much of your past you told him or when. Even if he knew, was he aware of the possibility of your returning to stripping? It is easier to accept something that predates your relationship than, what he may perceive to be, a major change that affects your future.
As I understand it, GGG requires a person to be reasonably accepting. The problem being that what seems to be reasonable to one person may not be to some one else.
I think it's so weird that in this day and age we don't really know what the hell female ejaculate actually is. The best science determines that it's "not pee"? Geez, man.
Not so much "weird" as "shameful" when taken in the wider context of how long it took us to even start looking at things like heart disease in women. (What? Y'all aren't just men without dicks? Huh.)
When I feel a pussy pounding into my face, along with her taste and smell (and delicious weird noises), I have a "white flash" sort of orgasm (as opposed to a "screaming bucker"). Given that a woman's pussy is right in front of my eyes, my nose and mouth are saturated with the scent and flavor, and the lips and tongue may have more tactile nerves than the genitals, is it that surprising? Maybe that's my peculiar advantage, because for me it isn't just a project or a point of control, the better her O, the better my O. And on top of that getting my face and chest soaked with her juices when she ejaculates...
It isn't better than being touched on my penis, but it's definitely real.
CCG: "The job was great for me and allowed me such sexual (and financial!) liberation. I didn't orgasm for the first time until after I took control of my own sexuality via stripping."
"Sexual liberation?" What 188 said. So it isn't just a job; there is a sexual component to the stripping for you. Explain why he shouldn't find this aspect at least as threatening as say, you having a group of friends that you go out and do sexual things with on a regular basis.
When you wrote that it was sexually liberating to strip, was it because you literally no longer had anything to hide? I have been a card carrying naturist. I never felt any compulsion to expose myself, but very much felt liberated when I did on my first visit to a nude beach.
I sometimes wonder if it isn't akin to coming out of the closet. I went to a gathering, made new friends, and yet after wandering around nude for a couple of days suddenly had a rush of panic that I was naked in front of lots of people. That fear, that lack of acceptance of oneself, is what we normally carry around ourselves because of what others might think of us. And boy, getting rid of that constant state of fear feels GREAT.
It's your decision, but honesty in who you are should be your goal.
I'm looking at Married in MA's comments and I'm thinking how little respect is given to a man's emotional needs when it comes to arousal. Maybe when you're a young buck, sure, but (at least in my case )the older men get the more they are like women. I had a wife once who like to compare men to light bulbs and women to ovens. What she couldn't understand was that I too had an emotional connection to sex and that I couldn't just turn on and off (i.e., no amount of black nylons and cute little ass in my face was gonna make up for ragging on me half the time). Now, although I love to be fondled and have my cock sucked, what gets me hard to begin with is a positive respones to my teeth on her nipples, or an assertive tongue on her clit, or that very pleased but self conscious "Oooooh" when I rim her, or the wetness that fills my mouth that I know is not just me. For me at least, a satisfied woman is the biggest turn on in the world.
To the Republican closet-case forum
came the Christians of prissy decorum.
Marcus Bachmann, that rube,
forgot to bring lube,
and they had to re-use the santorum.
@190: That is hot! I'm kinda jealous. And yes, I find it incredibly surprising. It's not a question of quantity of nerves as much as it is their quality.
I don't know the neurology behind it but it is definitely a different feeling for me when sexual nerves are touched, as opposed to nonsexual ones. The difference (for me at least) is entirely about where on my body the touch is, as opposed to context or sight or scent or hearing.
"The job was great for me and allowed me such sexual (and financial!) liberation. I didn't orgasm for the first time until after I took control of my own sexuality via stripping."
When i said liberation I only meant in relation to the control I took of my own body. Previously I was unaware of how (too) easily I would give my sexuality and body to partners, and in working as a stripper I really learned to value myself in a way I hadn't before. I learned how to say no and value my limits. I also learned a kind of peace towards my body in that I make good money and people want it, so maybe I shouldn't get too hung up on a few spots or scars. I'm not saying it's a method that would work with everyone, and I should clarify this value is not monetary. It's just learning how to take control and learn acceptance.I don't get kicks from the dancing for the customers. That's just another aspect of the job.
I'm glad I was able to give a bit of a new perspective. It's always interesting to have my ideas challeneged because I get to look at them from a different angle too.
One thing I found interesting is that you listed 'no dating' under the 'extreme monogamy catagory'. That's surprising to me! Because dating to me is one of the most extreme things. And I think a lot of poly relationships are built on the same idea.
For my guy, the thought of him flirting (for example at work, because we both have service industry jobs where flirting is basically the baseline of interaction) doesn't really bother me, porn watching and etc doesn't bother me. But the thought of him dating another woman? That bothers me. I mean, it's pretty standard cliche for women to be more bothered by 'emotional cheating' than sexual. I think dating is sort of in that catagory.
Or did I misunderstand you?
Also: this is something that I think is so great about sexuality - how diverse it is. Re: the man who ejaculates while giving oral. You think that's hot? That is basically the least appealing sexual encounter I can possibly imagine. But hey, everyone being different is what makes the world go 'round. I love it.
Ahh, you just don't like the idea of the stain on the side of the bed, right?
About being a squirter vs "dry": if you can let yourself feel safe and comfortable enough to orgasm so hard you can barely walk, then what more do you need? I especially love those times when my wife is half conscious, quivering, and I gently trace the ripples across her abdomen and thighs (and breasts, and knees...). Yeah, it's all good.
CCG- I totally get it. Dancing makes me feel good too on so many different levels. Good luck making the BF understand. I wrote a poem about a similar situation:
MY OWN LITTLE WORLD
As I sit here bored shitless each day at my desk
I struggle through it like it’s some kind of test
I like that they think that I’m smart and efficient
But this mundane existence seems somewhat deficient
I have quit the dance, given up my art
Traded up for a better life, when does that start?
I really do hate this 8-5 scene
I wish I’d wake up and it would be a bad dream
I’d awaken on stage surrounded by fans
With dollars in each of their outstretched hands
The desire of many, possession of none
I’d symbolize sex and exemplify fun
I know the grass always looks greener on the other side
But, I miss my alter ego in which I could hide
I liked living in my own little world of illusion
My rock&roll fantasy sex-goddess delusion
Female ejaculate comes from a woman's Skene's gland which is the analogous part to the male prostate which has a large part in male ejaculate. This has been known for quite some decades by now. And just a reminder to you all...porn may have it's place, but just like Hollywood movies and Facebook, it doesn't reflect reality.
No, it's not a stain thing at all! I'm just not really into receiving oral and I'm (luckily) generally turned off by men who are into giving it. To me, a man orgasming while going down on a lady is the biggest bummer. That just means having to wait a refractory period length before getting to the PIV. Which is the part I look forward to.
But that's me.
Also I think the whole "squirters have better orgasms" thing is pretty spurious.
@ CCG: Sounds like you have a pretty clear example of the autonomy vs attachment conflict that commonly happens in relationships. You might try checking out the book Passionate Marriage by David Schnarch. I have some issues with some of what he says (and how he says it), but there's some good material in there about the importance of differentiation in relationships (that being the ability to be true to your own values without withdrawing from your partner); poly books make similar arguments but (obviously) not from a monogamous perspective.
@ 170: You have a very strange notion of what monogamy is.
Put another way, I think monogamy should be practiced consciously, chosen mutually, regularly discussed and re-evaluated, and not used as a condition for continuing the relationship.
Um, no. If one partner wants a monogamous relationship and the other doesn't, that's perfectly legitimate grounds for ending the relationship. Compulsory nonmonogamy is just as wrong as compulsory monogamy. A monogamy mismatch is a sexual incompatibility just like a heterosexual person and a homosexual person dating each other. I don't know where you get the idea that the nonmonogamous person is entitled to continue the relationship even if their partner identifies as monogamous - it takes two people to make a relationship, and only one to end it.
And FTR, "no dating other people" is not "extreme monogamy". You're really not helping the nonmonogamous cause here.
@ CCG: Sounds like you have a pretty clear example of the autonomy vs attachment conflict that commonly happens in relationships. You might try checking out the book Passionate Marriage by David Schnarch. I have some issues with some of what he says (and how he says it), but there's some good material in there about the importance of differentiation in relationships (that being the ability to be true to your own values without withdrawing from your partner); poly books make similar arguments but (obviously) not from a monogamous perspective. Might help with the whole "I'm going to strip and I need some time and space of my own away from you, but that doesn't mean I don't love you or want to leave you." But don't forget that just because this is his first relationship and you don't want to break his heart, that doesn't mean you have to compromise who you are or what you want. Differentiation also means being willing to leave a relationship that's not a good fit for you.
@ 170: You have a very strange notion of what monogamy is.
Put another way, I think monogamy should be practiced consciously, chosen mutually, regularly discussed and re-evaluated, and not used as a condition for continuing the relationship.
Um, no. If one partner wants a monogamous relationship and the other doesn't, that's perfectly legitimate grounds for ending the relationship. Compulsory nonmonogamy is just as wrong as compulsory monogamy. A monogamy mismatch is a sexual incompatibility just like a heterosexual person and a homosexual person dating each other. I don't know where you get the idea that the nonmonogamous person is entitled to continue the relationship even if their partner identifies as monogamous - it takes two people to make a relationship, and only one to end it. Monogamy is a joint agreement, not a preference for how often you wash the dishes.
And FTR, "no dating other people" is not "extreme monogamy". You're really not helping the nonmonogamous cause here.
@93: Your 10 minutes per week obviously doesn't have to factor in hauling all your stuff to the car (or bus), transit time to the laundromat, sitting there until all your loads are done, folding/hanging everything, and the return trip home. Even if you have only one load, there's your two hours right there.
@207 & @93 Laundry takes longer than 10 minutes even if you have a washer/dryer. Mine takes 20 min to wash 30 min to dry, and varying times to hang up, fold,(possibly even iron) and put away. I totally get it. I'm monogamous for the same reasons as mydriasis.
@laundry-doers... Is your laundry really keeping you from hot sex? You want hot sex with other people, but the laundry keeps you from having time? LOL.
Time it takes for a straight woman to have sex with a new guy:
30 minutes to create a post on AdultFriendFinder or CL.
30 minutes to sort through the responses, draft your reply, and arrange the meet-up.
60 minutes to drive to the guy's place and have sex.
If you aren't sneaking around then you can skip the public meeting -- the guy will know that someone else has all of his identifying information. And all of this can be done at your own convenience, if you're not very picky. Don't have sex outside your relationship if you don't want to, but please don't blame the laundry!
@209 - I've been trying to stay out of the whole brouhaha over your multiple posts, but at this point, I just have to say EWWW... If it takes all of a half-hour for you to vet your various conquests, no wonder you're having such shitty sex outside your marriage.
@203: Well, there's no way to compare one person's pleasure to another person's pleasure, but women who have both squirting and non-squirting orgasms usually say the squirting ones are better. You don't believe them?
@198: Also, I'm not sure, you may have misunderstood me. When I said "dating," I didn't mean it in the sense of having a girlfriend or a serious relationship with someone else. I meant it in the sense of getting to know new people and spending time with them (in a romantic context).
I'm not even thinking of dating here as necessarily including sex, depending on the terms of the non-monogamy. It could just be getting dinner or coffee, or flirting, or kissing. So yes, I definitely think banning dating is more 'extreme' than banning sex!
And in my experience the cliche about women being more bothered by an emotional connection with a third person than sex with a third person is completely false. But it's likely my experience isn't representative. Have you found that to be true? I'm not sure what you mean, though, cause friendship is an emotional connection. I don't even think banning emotional connections workable in practice, because it's difficult to draw a line between emotional connection in friendship vs. dating.
And I'm not talking about "cheating", to be clear, which brings up whole different issues because it's a breach of trust. I'm talking about the perceived pain, or jealousy, from your partner having a sexual vs. emotional connection with someone else.
Oh, and about the squirting being hot thing, I just meant the idea of him coming just from that was hot. In practice, for myself, I think I would prefer to come in a pussy as well.
@203, *ahem*. (The part about the stain was supposed to be a joke)
The latter part of 199 was supposed to be in support for your last statement, but alas wasn't clear enough.
As it turns out, when I have those oral orgasms, I can have more than one, and still keep an erection (though not as well as I used to). What usually happens after I prime my wife's G-spot is moving the towel to the middle of the bed for a nice, sloppy, noisy cowgirl ride (French vanilla, but still vanilla).
(Geeze, I feel like Otter from Animal House, when Babs tells him it wasn't that great.)
@210 - Just trying to say that it's not the laundry, it's their pickiness that keeps them from the occasional tryst :-)
I'm picky, myself, so it does take me more time to vet people. Also, thanks for your concern -- my outside sex has been hella fun, recently, thanks to tips from Slogsters about figuring out what I want and going for it.
"I meant it in the sense of getting to know new people and spending time with them (in a romantic context)."
Yeah that's basically a monogamous person's nightmare. Or at least this monogamous person's. Why would you get to know someone in a romantic context if you didn't want a relationship with them (mono, or otherwise)? That's the emotional equivilant of getting naked in bed with someone but not having sex. I mean, really?
Re: squirters. I absolutely don't think they're lying but a bunch of people have cited that squirting vs. non is based on anatomy. I don't think having a little gland that emits fluid is magically going to MAKE orgasms better, it's more just physical evidence for some women that it WAS good. Or at least that seems more likely. I've certainly never heard any evidence that they have magic orgasm powers. :p
Erica!
You got me. I'm exceedingly picky. My friends make fun of the fact that I basically won't give a guy the time of day unless he looks like a model. And that's for fucking. For relationships he needs to have like a million other qualities too.
But I prefer "patient" to picky. Good things come to those who wait.
Still though, you're way wrong about monogamy and laundry.
If I have two free hours I could spend half the time looking for a guy online (p.s. I've almost never found a decent guy online, and I used to do casual hookups like it was my job) and half the time finding out if fucking him is any good. Or I could go have sex with someone who I know is STD free, I know is good in bed, who I don't need to put up any precautions with and who is better looking than any picture I've ever seen online.
@205: For some people, it may be an orientation, as you describe. For some people, how often and whether to have sex with other people may come down to a "how often do you wash the dishes" type compromise. And there's everything in between.
You are correct that anyone has the power to end a relationship at any time, and relationships aren't an obligation. But I don't think that it's legitimate to throw down an ultimatum, depending on the circumstances. There is a big difference between "I'm sorry, I can't do this anymore" and "YOU need to change or I will dump you/ not pay you back/ damage your property/ act in hurtful ways."
It's ok for people to have reasonable boundaries and conditions, but that doesn't mean it's ok for people to have unreasonable ones or to make ultimatums. And people should have some degree of flexibility and willingness to try things.
And there are certainly degrees of putting rules on your partner that are overly controlling: for instance, not allowing your partner to have friends or outside interests is generally recognized as being overly controlling. At some point, talk about orientations and compatibility misses the mark because someone is just not being fair or reasonable or legitimate.
I do recognize that mistreatment can be a problem, in different ways, in any type of relationship. But I'm not sure exactly where the line is: that is, how strong exclusivity conditions can be before they become unhealthy. Can we agree at least that there is a point where they do? (And you could say the same thing about non-monogamy.)
Also, I'm not sure why you think banning dating (even casual non-physical dating) is not extreme, unless you misunderstood what I meant by dating: I meant it as in "going on a date," not necessarily sexual or a relationship.
@217 - laundry doesn't get dirty overnight (unless the sex was fantastic!), but most guys are ready again in the morning. If these newlyweds existed, they'd have problems beyond their reliance on euphemism. :-P
To answer your first question at face value: because an emotional/romantic/sexual connection with someone can still be valuable and enriching even if it's not in an official boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.
I don't know or not if it's theoretically possible for every woman to squirt. But there are a lot of women who thought they couldn't for a long time, and then finally were able to.
As far as I know, every woman has Skene's glands, though they may not all have ones that gush. Some may just dribble a little and some may seem to not produce any fluid. My point wasn't that the ability to squirt magically makes orgasms better, but that in someone who has that ability, squirting actually does often make the orgasm more intense. At least, that's what they say. And it's not surprising physically, because the fluid builds up additional pressure that gets released.
Just curious... help me understand. You're ok with flirting all day? That's at least a slight degree of non-monogamy that a lot of people couldn't just compartmentalize and say it doesn't matter, even if it was at work (CCG's boyfriend, for instance). And if flirting is ok, how do you determine when a friendship crosses the line to being emotionally threatening, or too close, or starts getting romantic-like? There's no clear boundary, and people should have close friends of both sexes outside the relationship.
See, I think you have it backwards, though. Squirting doesn't cause intensity - intensity causes squirting. For some people the same degree of intensity can exist without the squirting. That's my logic, anyway.
Or to make a comparison: I'm a bit of a "screamer". I'm super vocal. Sex that gets me waking up our neighbors is obviously usually better than sex with less of a decibel count, but that doesn't mean that I think women who are quiet during sex don't come as hard as I do. Not neccesarily anyway.
I... really don't know how to explain the dating things because I have a feeling it's just semantic confusion.
Flirting is superficial. I'm really desensitized to it because it's super common in the industry. Plus also I'm one of those people who comes off flirty without trying to be. Sometimes that's annoying. If I'm nice to someone of the opposite sex that's construed as flirting. If I'm bitchy/sarcastic/dry that's just 'teasing' aka another form of flirting.
To me, flirting is nothing. It's just how people get along and pass the time. And for someone who's comfortable being monogamous, it's non-threatening. (We don't do it in front of eachother, though. And why would I? Why would I flirt with the second cutest guy in the room?)
Dating (again, for me, and for any partner I've had) is a means of vetting a potential S/O. Most people I know see it that way. So dating is uber-off limits for me.
Um... in terms of opposite-sex friendships? Yeah that can be interesting territory for straight monogamous couples. Speaking from my own experience? My partner isn't attracted to any of his female friends. Most of the friends he has are male, anyway. He's had the odd female friend who's into him, but I'm not "threatened" because I trust him, and I know he doesn't see them in that way.
Same goes for me. I've actually kind of given up on trying to be close friends with straight guys because I find a lot of the time they tend to want other things at some point. Almost all my closest friends are female or gay guys (to be SUPER clear, this isn't to please any guy. It's always how things have been for me). I had a pretty close guy friend briefly and he was a little uneasy about it until he met him and saw what he looked like.
Oh yeah, and if you date within your community you may be losing out on some good opportunities with people who assume that you are monogamous and who might not want to be stepping on your SO's action or exposing themselves to inconvienent drama. Our worlds are often a lot smaller than we think they are.
Thanks for your concern(?) but no, if anything he's less troubled by it than I am. He's 1. just as busy as I am and 2. very low maintenance.
Let me be clear though; it's not just pramatic time concerns that turn me off of polygamy. It doesn't appeal to me in any faculty.
I don't get it: the anti-monogamists say that "it's not natural" to be monogamous, implying that people should live up to their natures. Well, if this guy's nature is that he is more emotionally needful than most, why all the hate?
I agree with what you said, but I'm not conflating monogamish with polyamory. I also dislike monogamy, sexist polygyny, and the cultural value that sex should be about love. Intellectually, I get that monogamy and sex only in the presence of love works for other people, but I wish it didn't and I wish there was less of it. I'm just recording the same reaction to monogamish. It's not a productive, useful, or kind reaction I'm having, so maybe I shouldn't have posted about it, but I did.
There is a spectrum between monogamish and polyamory, and spectrums of relationships inside those two categories. Some poly people don't have primary partners, and in some poly relationships people don't ever meet their lover's other lovers. To me, the big difference between monogamish and polyamory is the importance of the pair bond, and I dislike the pair bond, so that means I dislike monogamish.
My spouse was talking to a friend about our relationship, and the friend told em that, from what they'd heard from friends, swinging was better than polyamory, because couples stayed together longer with swinging than with polyamory. This value system assumes that the pair bond is the most important thing, and relationships that lead to the longest chronological pair bonds are better. I disagree, and see this as a monogamy centric viewpoint. To me, the ideals of monogamish seem too much like the ideals of monogamy.
I'm pretty sure #4 was trolling: that is, saying something just to stir up angry opposition.
Here's some more info on the source and quantity of female ejaculate: http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/femal…
Essentially, it can be up to 2 cups: the fluid is produced by the female prostate and stored in the bladder (which has a capacity of 2 cups), though it isn't urine.
You can check this by peeing as much as you can, fully emptying your bladder, then ejaculating large quantities of fluid: since you emptied your bladder first, clearly the fluid wasn't stored there, but was generated by the female prostate during the process of stimulation and ejaculation.
In addition, what about monogamish people who are very close with one of the friends they sleep with sometimes? They may want "public acknowledgment and acceptance" even without long-term cohabitation.
I do share your wish that there was less of it. I have the same squick to it that I do to an acquaintance's relationship, where they agreed that each of them was not allowed to have friends of the opposite sex. It just seems sick and possessive and controlling.
Why are you against a pair bond, though? Even in a polyamorous relationship, there are still pair bonds, just more of them.
@132
It is how some people are wired, trust.
Before I met the current bf I was super promiscuious and loved being single and having choices. I liked the novelty of being with someone new all the time. When I'm in a relationship I don't notice other guys. When someone comes on to me it's reflexive for me to stop them. I don't need to think about it. I don't miss being single and I don't feel like I'm missing out.
But again, I'm 100% for people being comfortable with nonmonogamy and it benifits everyone (not least of all, me) for us to live in a world where people freely talk about which way they're wired.
When I said "pair bond" I meant a relationship that is supposed to be more important than other social relationships. In other words, my use of "pair bond" has monogamy, or at least monogamish or swinger, connotations. I also happen to really, really like small group interactions, which are different from one of one interactions (which I also like!).
Why?
I'm hetero - do you also have a problem with me "insisting" that my partner have a penis?
I'm not insisting YOU need to be that way, it's just something that I want in a relationship - and experience suggests I'm not the only one. Not all guys get off on their woman being with other men. In fact there's a lot of guys out there who get (*gasp*) jealous!
I don't understand why you have a problem with something that two consenting adults agree to in a relationship.(It's not a 'rule' one person makes for the other, it's something that gets agreed on when one person says 'so... do you want to be exclusive?' and the other one says 'hey sure'. It's not as draconian as you make it sound)
I can squirt but I dislike doing it. It doesn't make the O any better or worse but it makes my bed have a nasty wet spot I dislike, and I don't like the feel of towels under my ass. And I too have experienced the "project" feeling of a man where he's decided I need to have this kind of O and he is just the one to bring me there. Ugh... spare me. When did a plain old BJ go out of style? Now it's all anal and squirting. And I've tried anal every which way and unlike everyone else I fucking hate Tristan Taoromino because NO not everyone CAN like anal but fuck me if that's not exactly what most men take from her books when they read them. Men should be fucking banned from reading those books unless they have a partner who is so into having it up her ass she gives him a copy.
In other news, I am glad I married a man who finds anal totally gross, and I found this out entirely on accident before we ever even started flirting. I confess I began flirting with him immediately upon discovering this.
But, well, it squicks me a little. Like scat play, or cuckold fantasies, or 24/7 TPE, or saying that your partner is not allowed to have friends of the opposite sex, something about it just strikes me as unhealthy and controlling. It bothers me because it's regulating your partner's behavior even when they're not spending time with you. It's specifying not what you want in your relationship, but the kind of relationships that your partner is allowed to have with other people. Compare "don't whistle around me cause it bothers me" with "don't whistle around other people when I'm not there, because I'll feel hurt and betrayed if you do."
And part of it is just that monogamy is seen as a good thing, a cultural ideal, an expectation that that's how mature responsible adults are supposed to live. So people do get stuck in monogamy if they're not careful, just because it's the default. And people do get pressured into it in all sorts of subtle ways.
And of course, when people agree to be exclusive and someone slips up, as people do because no one is perfect, it's seen as a horrible thing to do, a betrayal, making you a "cheating piece of shit," rather than just accepting that people make mistakes. While you don't notice or think about dating or flirting with other people, that's not the case for everyone, and a slip-up gets seen as a horrible breach of trust or as "giving into temptation." Whereas if someone, say, promises to wash the dishes every night, and misses a night once in a while, it's not a big deal.
In other words, it's often seen not just an agreement to be exclusive, but as a moral judgment on the other person for how they act. And the "temptation" to date or flirt or have sex with someone else is always all around you.
And while you talk about it as just a 'hey, sure, let's be exclusive' kind of discussion, sometimes it is what one person really wants while the other isn't sure, or is reluctant, but goes along to try it, or they think it's what they should do, or they want to make their partner happy, or they're afraid to make waves. It's something that can be used to manipulate or guilt-trip a partner, especially when people don't understand or accept non-monogamous relationships as legitimate. ("How could you want other people? You must not love me? Am I not good enough?")
It's difficult to look at the costs and benefits of choosing monogamy, and make a rational decision, when it's such an emotional and moral issue for people. Speaking personally, it's been an ultimatum that I've received many times, not a 'hey, let's be exclusive' thing, and it's hard to know how to respond to that.
I know this is an irrational prejudice of mine in some ways, and I certainly am not trying to tell you or anyone else how you should conduct your relationships. But I wish monogamy weren't as common, and I think in a more free and honest world a monogamous relationship would generally be seen as an odd and somewhat controlling choice that people nevertheless occasionally choose. There is a case to be made that monogamy is not as healthy or realistic of a relationship model as other options.
No they can't, especially not when kids are involved. If nothing else, the law and state gets involved (usually badly, the law is an ass). Cultural expectations affect it, and other people sometimes have legitimate interests in the outcome.
I'm absolutely with you that a more flexibile and understanding take on what should be done in each circumstance would work much better.
Unfortunately, there's now a common view of monogomy with strict insistence on sexual fidelity, but without any commitment to be GGG - the opposite in fact: an ideology of autonomy and no responsiblities, whilst constraining the other person to exclusivity. I do like Dan's clarity on that lunacy.
I'm enjoying your thoughtful commentary. This might seem to nitpick but I think it's an important element here. You wrote:
"if someone, say, promises to wash the dishes every night, and misses a night once in a while, it's not a big deal"
This made me recall Stevie Nicks singing, "well I've been afraid of changing 'cause I built my life around you." No one builds their life around housework. They do set out to build a life around a particular commitment to a relationship. That may be monogamous or not, but whatever rules you set up, and no matter how many people are involved, that commitment is the biggest thing in your life. Having a "slip up" there is the biggest upset that you will experience (excluding death).
Like I said, some people are wired to monogamy. I have no desire to force/pressure someone into a monogamous relationship, I just want to be with someone who wants the same lifestyle as me. (Don't a lot of us?)
I'm sorry you've had such negative experiences but for me personally the conversation WAS like that. Me and the boyfriend started out as, I guess 'sex buddies' and early (within the first two or three weeks, I think) after we started seeing eachother I had some sexual things happen with other people. It never came up until we had the exclusivity talk and it turned out that through the whole time we had been involved he hadn't been with anyone else. He's not wired that way either. And he wasn't stoked on the fact that I had (although obviously it was kosher since we were nowhere near official at that point) but he didn't hold it against me. But he was happy to know that it wouldn't be happening in the future.
You're still looking at it from the frame of one person wanting to fuck around and the other person forbidding them to do it. While that DOES happen and while it may be your experience, that's not the definition of monogamy and it's certainly not what a person aspires to in a monogamous relationship any more than petty infighting and jealousy is what poly relationships aspire to.
All in all I think you're largely ignoring the mutual nature of monogamous relationships (the ones done right). When I'm in a relationship I actually really like turning guys down because I know how important it is to my S/O. It's nice to have something that we have together that no one else gets to have.
I don't feel "controlled" - I'm doing something that makes a person I love happy. I don't understand why that has to squick you out, but oh well.
Thanks for taking a crack at that comment, I wasn't sure how to approach it since our feelings are so different.
I finally came up with an analogy though. It's not like doing the dishes. So here goes: I'm a meat eater. I love bacon. But let's - for the sake of argument - say I'm a vegetarian. I want my boyfriend to be a vegetarian too, since it matters to me. I meet a guy, it comes up, and it turns out he is too! A long term relationship ensues and then one day I walk by a restaurant and see him eating a huge burger with a friend.
That's kind of more along the lines of what cheating is like? If that helps?
I've been quite clear on your thinking for some time now. Don't feel that you need to clarify for my sake. I have no problem with what you said @148,150. You recognize that there is a distinction between wanting something for your own life and making rules for society.
The more salient point (for me) is the lie. If the person was always a meat-eater then they should've told me from the beginning, to not do so is a lack of respect - I think respect is extremely important in a relationship. (Yes, more important than fidelity)
So the meat-eating (or cheating) coupled with the lie is absolutely enough to ditch a relationship. (For me.) I need to be able to trust my partner and if they lied to me about something that important then I don't know if I'd be able to trust them ever again. (This is MY issue/bias.)
If they brought up "hey I want to eat meat now" that would be different or if they told me from the beginning they're not a vegetarian. Dan Savage seems to agree on this point.
@Mr. J it was more for BlackRose's sake but thanks. I appreciate that someone understands my message. :)
I think it's cute how men jump through hoops trying to convince women that it's some sort of magical elixir to make them feel less inhibited and more able to do it, and I certainly agree that it's more than just a woman peeing forcefully, but whether you call it amrita or squirty juice, it's still mostly piss.
You sound like one of those women who hates porn because of your own insecurities: probably surrounding body image (I'm sorry, but that's generally the type of woman who feels threatened by images of women in porn) or perhaps some sort of sexual abuse? I know, I know, I'm making grand accusations and I don't know you from Eve. I could be wrong. But the fact is, my boyfriend consumed HUGE amounts of porn in high school (I watched it too, being the sexually liberated girl I am, though not nearly as much as he did), and he was a WONDERFUL, gentle, giving lover. I don't think watching porn makes you...disrespect or not understand a woman's sexuality any more than playing video games makes you violent in "real life."
It sounds like you have a stick up your ass...when really maybe what you need is a "stick" up your ass, know what I'm saying? ;)
I do think it's absurd that monogamy is the default state of relationships - in high school I (and everyone else I knew) thought going out with someone a handful of times meant you were a couple now, and it didn't even occur to us to question this, which landed a lot of people in wildly misguided relationships. But oh well...the important thing is that I learned from my mistakes and now I negotiate my relationships on a case-by-case basis.
My current relationship started out monogamous because I was only interested in my boyfriend and he was only interested in me. There was no "controlling" of anyone; just, "Here's how I feel" "Hey, me too!" "Cool. If it ever changes for you, please let me know. I'll do the same." ...And things did change, and we're adapting accordingly.
Fee-jak is like WATER, with no smell or taste whatsoever, and when it dries, it's as though it was never there.
I state this not from scientific experiment, but from many years of my own experience. Maybe SOME women shoot sticky stinky goo, but I doubt it.
Well, she connected those comments to me, and the hurt that has caused her is beyond belief. I can't see how to ever expiate that - she has not spoken to me once since - but I need to say how horrible I feel for the pain inflicted. This is truly the worst thing I've ever done to someone.
nail. on. head. thank you!
@Erica
we're all flawed and we have flaws we can and cannot accept. cheating is a flaw I can't accept. There are many flaws I can accept that other women might not.
You are entitled to your feelings. Is she really upset by what you wrote or by the fact that you wrote it? Both? The way she split doesn't speak well for her commitment.
It really doesn't matter how/why or whether the hurt was intentional - it is real and I am responsible.
I'm not wanting to start a conversation here about it all - I really just wanted to express this publicly, as I did the comments that led to it.
It really doesn't matter how/why or whether the hurt was intentional - it is real and I am responsible.
I'm not wanting to start a conversation here about it all - I really just wanted to express this publicly, as I did the comments that led to it.
I think there's a huge distinction between monogamy by happenstance, in the sense that you are both only interested in each other at the time, and monogamy by fiat, where it's imposed as a rule requiring you to actively fight temptation at all costs.
Put another way, I think monogamy should be practiced consciously, chosen mutually, regularly discussed and re-evaluated, and not used as a condition for continuing the relationship. (And I'd say the same for any other relationship model.)
What I find disturbing is when monogamous couples build their whole relationship around the promise of monogamy being perfectly kept 100% of the time.
@159: Yes, and at a certain point on that continuum it starts to look less like reasonable rules and more like people being controlling. We'd all agree, I'm sure, that there are some sorts of rules a couple could consensually institute that would be extremely unhealthy and controlling. One example might be not masturbating or watching porn. Or regulating what each other eats, or the friends each other has.
"Extreme" monogamy (no dating or flirting with anyone else, no discussing other options, any slip-up is a betrayal) strikes me as a little too controlling.
My feelings on this are conflicted -- it's a complicated issue -- and thanks for giving me some new perspectives.
I come, and I've known one other female friend who comes. The commonalities of our experiences, and what I've read in non-porn discussions, is something VERY different from the "Girls Who Cum" porn I've seen.
Hate to break it to those avid consumers, but if the lady is "squirting like a hydrant", she's probably not coming, she actually is just peeing on you. Compare that hosing down with a normal guy ejaculating and you'll understand what I mean. I saw one porn film of what was supposed to be a female ejaculator, in which she "came" into a wine glass, filling it more than half way up, and then drank it, proclaiming it was "ooOOoo... girl cum!".
Yyyeah, uhm... no.
My ex (who would have been VERY squicked at being pissed on by anyone) was all cool with it once he determined for himself that, whatever it was that I was emitting when I peaked, it wasn't pee.
And FWIW, neither I or the other girl I knew who occasionally ejaculated ever made a wet spot bigger than a couple inches across on the sheets, and for both of us, direct G-Spot stimulation was required and thoroughly enjoyed. Ex described the odor as strangely sweet, and kind of clingy.
And we didn't have to go to Vienna to figure it out, either.
And no, large quantities of female ejaculate are not urine. I know because I've seen women completely empty their bladder before ejaculating large quantities of fluid.
I'm sorry that your girlfriend was hurt, and that you feel so bad. I guess we all assume the internet is a lot more anonymous than it might actually be!
But as far as beating yourself up about it--try to just consider it a lesson learned.
Not piss, but possibly some cross-contamination.
Or at least my wife is. Once she got past the "I've got to pee" stage, ie that no matter what is coming out, her lover is more than happy to receive it, it just meant a towel was needed. Sometimes it's sweet (definitely not urine for non-diabetes), sometimes it's bitter like coffee. I can't be alone in noticing that what a woman eats can flavor her pussy. I've even tasted garlic from a girlfriend's nipples. Why should it be a shock that some of what scents urine ends up in other fluids? In any case, it's like queefs, all part of the fun.
I wonder if my coming just from having a orgasming pussy heaving into my face is odd. I even had a girlfriend call me a liar til I showed her the splouge on the side of the bed. My point: we aren't all exactly alike, and it's all to the good.
Peace.
You are fine the way you are. Don't change for a guy. Not everyone here thinks you are a rough bitch. I would be perfectly happy to be with a stripper. My attitude is to say "go be happy and then I'll be happy." That's called "being supportive."
If you continue to suffocate then get out. He will need to learn to get over failed relationships as every adult does. Don't let yourself be held hostage to that. Don't be cruel either, but I really don't think you need to be told that. You seem compassionate to me.
As I understand it, GGG requires a person to be reasonably accepting. The problem being that what seems to be reasonable to one person may not be to some one else.
jill
http://inbedwithmarriedwomen.blogspot.co…
Not so much "weird" as "shameful" when taken in the wider context of how long it took us to even start looking at things like heart disease in women. (What? Y'all aren't just men without dicks? Huh.)
Yup, a son, father, and a husband.
When I feel a pussy pounding into my face, along with her taste and smell (and delicious weird noises), I have a "white flash" sort of orgasm (as opposed to a "screaming bucker"). Given that a woman's pussy is right in front of my eyes, my nose and mouth are saturated with the scent and flavor, and the lips and tongue may have more tactile nerves than the genitals, is it that surprising? Maybe that's my peculiar advantage, because for me it isn't just a project or a point of control, the better her O, the better my O. And on top of that getting my face and chest soaked with her juices when she ejaculates...
It isn't better than being touched on my penis, but it's definitely real.
"Sexual liberation?" What 188 said. So it isn't just a job; there is a sexual component to the stripping for you. Explain why he shouldn't find this aspect at least as threatening as say, you having a group of friends that you go out and do sexual things with on a regular basis.
When you wrote that it was sexually liberating to strip, was it because you literally no longer had anything to hide? I have been a card carrying naturist. I never felt any compulsion to expose myself, but very much felt liberated when I did on my first visit to a nude beach.
I sometimes wonder if it isn't akin to coming out of the closet. I went to a gathering, made new friends, and yet after wandering around nude for a couple of days suddenly had a rush of panic that I was naked in front of lots of people. That fear, that lack of acceptance of oneself, is what we normally carry around ourselves because of what others might think of us. And boy, getting rid of that constant state of fear feels GREAT.
It's your decision, but honesty in who you are should be your goal.
Peace.
To the Republican closet-case forum
came the Christians of prissy decorum.
Marcus Bachmann, that rube,
forgot to bring lube,
and they had to re-use the santorum.
BullseyeRooster.com
I don't know the neurology behind it but it is definitely a different feeling for me when sexual nerves are touched, as opposed to nonsexual ones. The difference (for me at least) is entirely about where on my body the touch is, as opposed to context or sight or scent or hearing.
"The job was great for me and allowed me such sexual (and financial!) liberation. I didn't orgasm for the first time until after I took control of my own sexuality via stripping."
When i said liberation I only meant in relation to the control I took of my own body. Previously I was unaware of how (too) easily I would give my sexuality and body to partners, and in working as a stripper I really learned to value myself in a way I hadn't before. I learned how to say no and value my limits. I also learned a kind of peace towards my body in that I make good money and people want it, so maybe I shouldn't get too hung up on a few spots or scars. I'm not saying it's a method that would work with everyone, and I should clarify this value is not monetary. It's just learning how to take control and learn acceptance.I don't get kicks from the dancing for the customers. That's just another aspect of the job.
I'm glad I was able to give a bit of a new perspective. It's always interesting to have my ideas challeneged because I get to look at them from a different angle too.
One thing I found interesting is that you listed 'no dating' under the 'extreme monogamy catagory'. That's surprising to me! Because dating to me is one of the most extreme things. And I think a lot of poly relationships are built on the same idea.
For my guy, the thought of him flirting (for example at work, because we both have service industry jobs where flirting is basically the baseline of interaction) doesn't really bother me, porn watching and etc doesn't bother me. But the thought of him dating another woman? That bothers me. I mean, it's pretty standard cliche for women to be more bothered by 'emotional cheating' than sexual. I think dating is sort of in that catagory.
Or did I misunderstand you?
Also: this is something that I think is so great about sexuality - how diverse it is. Re: the man who ejaculates while giving oral. You think that's hot? That is basically the least appealing sexual encounter I can possibly imagine. But hey, everyone being different is what makes the world go 'round. I love it.
Ahh, you just don't like the idea of the stain on the side of the bed, right?
About being a squirter vs "dry": if you can let yourself feel safe and comfortable enough to orgasm so hard you can barely walk, then what more do you need? I especially love those times when my wife is half conscious, quivering, and I gently trace the ripples across her abdomen and thighs (and breasts, and knees...). Yeah, it's all good.
Peace.
MY OWN LITTLE WORLD
As I sit here bored shitless each day at my desk
I struggle through it like it’s some kind of test
I like that they think that I’m smart and efficient
But this mundane existence seems somewhat deficient
I have quit the dance, given up my art
Traded up for a better life, when does that start?
I really do hate this 8-5 scene
I wish I’d wake up and it would be a bad dream
I’d awaken on stage surrounded by fans
With dollars in each of their outstretched hands
The desire of many, possession of none
I’d symbolize sex and exemplify fun
I know the grass always looks greener on the other side
But, I miss my alter ego in which I could hide
I liked living in my own little world of illusion
My rock&roll fantasy sex-goddess delusion
re: better names than "squirting"
Back in the early 90's we called it "gushing." I think "gusher" sounds better than "squirter".
No, it's not a stain thing at all! I'm just not really into receiving oral and I'm (luckily) generally turned off by men who are into giving it. To me, a man orgasming while going down on a lady is the biggest bummer. That just means having to wait a refractory period length before getting to the PIV. Which is the part I look forward to.
But that's me.
Also I think the whole "squirters have better orgasms" thing is pretty spurious.
@ 170: You have a very strange notion of what monogamy is.
Um, no. If one partner wants a monogamous relationship and the other doesn't, that's perfectly legitimate grounds for ending the relationship. Compulsory nonmonogamy is just as wrong as compulsory monogamy. A monogamy mismatch is a sexual incompatibility just like a heterosexual person and a homosexual person dating each other. I don't know where you get the idea that the nonmonogamous person is entitled to continue the relationship even if their partner identifies as monogamous - it takes two people to make a relationship, and only one to end it.
And FTR, "no dating other people" is not "extreme monogamy". You're really not helping the nonmonogamous cause here.
@ 170: You have a very strange notion of what monogamy is.
Um, no. If one partner wants a monogamous relationship and the other doesn't, that's perfectly legitimate grounds for ending the relationship. Compulsory nonmonogamy is just as wrong as compulsory monogamy. A monogamy mismatch is a sexual incompatibility just like a heterosexual person and a homosexual person dating each other. I don't know where you get the idea that the nonmonogamous person is entitled to continue the relationship even if their partner identifies as monogamous - it takes two people to make a relationship, and only one to end it. Monogamy is a joint agreement, not a preference for how often you wash the dishes.
And FTR, "no dating other people" is not "extreme monogamy". You're really not helping the nonmonogamous cause here.
Time it takes for a straight woman to have sex with a new guy:
30 minutes to create a post on AdultFriendFinder or CL.
30 minutes to sort through the responses, draft your reply, and arrange the meet-up.
60 minutes to drive to the guy's place and have sex.
If you aren't sneaking around then you can skip the public meeting -- the guy will know that someone else has all of his identifying information. And all of this can be done at your own convenience, if you're not very picky. Don't have sex outside your relationship if you don't want to, but please don't blame the laundry!
@203: Well, there's no way to compare one person's pleasure to another person's pleasure, but women who have both squirting and non-squirting orgasms usually say the squirting ones are better. You don't believe them?
@198: Also, I'm not sure, you may have misunderstood me. When I said "dating," I didn't mean it in the sense of having a girlfriend or a serious relationship with someone else. I meant it in the sense of getting to know new people and spending time with them (in a romantic context).
I'm not even thinking of dating here as necessarily including sex, depending on the terms of the non-monogamy. It could just be getting dinner or coffee, or flirting, or kissing. So yes, I definitely think banning dating is more 'extreme' than banning sex!
And in my experience the cliche about women being more bothered by an emotional connection with a third person than sex with a third person is completely false. But it's likely my experience isn't representative. Have you found that to be true? I'm not sure what you mean, though, cause friendship is an emotional connection. I don't even think banning emotional connections workable in practice, because it's difficult to draw a line between emotional connection in friendship vs. dating.
And I'm not talking about "cheating", to be clear, which brings up whole different issues because it's a breach of trust. I'm talking about the perceived pain, or jealousy, from your partner having a sexual vs. emotional connection with someone else.
Oh, and about the squirting being hot thing, I just meant the idea of him coming just from that was hot. In practice, for myself, I think I would prefer to come in a pussy as well.
The latter part of 199 was supposed to be in support for your last statement, but alas wasn't clear enough.
As it turns out, when I have those oral orgasms, I can have more than one, and still keep an erection (though not as well as I used to). What usually happens after I prime my wife's G-spot is moving the towel to the middle of the bed for a nice, sloppy, noisy cowgirl ride (French vanilla, but still vanilla).
(Geeze, I feel like Otter from Animal House, when Babs tells him it wasn't that great.)
Peace.
I'm picky, myself, so it does take me more time to vet people. Also, thanks for your concern -- my outside sex has been hella fun, recently, thanks to tips from Slogsters about figuring out what I want and going for it.
"I meant it in the sense of getting to know new people and spending time with them (in a romantic context)."
Yeah that's basically a monogamous person's nightmare. Or at least this monogamous person's. Why would you get to know someone in a romantic context if you didn't want a relationship with them (mono, or otherwise)? That's the emotional equivilant of getting naked in bed with someone but not having sex. I mean, really?
Re: squirters. I absolutely don't think they're lying but a bunch of people have cited that squirting vs. non is based on anatomy. I don't think having a little gland that emits fluid is magically going to MAKE orgasms better, it's more just physical evidence for some women that it WAS good. Or at least that seems more likely. I've certainly never heard any evidence that they have magic orgasm powers. :p
Erica!
You got me. I'm exceedingly picky. My friends make fun of the fact that I basically won't give a guy the time of day unless he looks like a model. And that's for fucking. For relationships he needs to have like a million other qualities too.
But I prefer "patient" to picky. Good things come to those who wait.
Still though, you're way wrong about monogamy and laundry.
If I have two free hours I could spend half the time looking for a guy online (p.s. I've almost never found a decent guy online, and I used to do casual hookups like it was my job) and half the time finding out if fucking him is any good. Or I could go have sex with someone who I know is STD free, I know is good in bed, who I don't need to put up any precautions with and who is better looking than any picture I've ever seen online.
Hmmm...
You are correct that anyone has the power to end a relationship at any time, and relationships aren't an obligation. But I don't think that it's legitimate to throw down an ultimatum, depending on the circumstances. There is a big difference between "I'm sorry, I can't do this anymore" and "YOU need to change or I will dump you/ not pay you back/ damage your property/ act in hurtful ways."
It's ok for people to have reasonable boundaries and conditions, but that doesn't mean it's ok for people to have unreasonable ones or to make ultimatums. And people should have some degree of flexibility and willingness to try things.
And there are certainly degrees of putting rules on your partner that are overly controlling: for instance, not allowing your partner to have friends or outside interests is generally recognized as being overly controlling. At some point, talk about orientations and compatibility misses the mark because someone is just not being fair or reasonable or legitimate.
I do recognize that mistreatment can be a problem, in different ways, in any type of relationship. But I'm not sure exactly where the line is: that is, how strong exclusivity conditions can be before they become unhealthy. Can we agree at least that there is a point where they do? (And you could say the same thing about non-monogamy.)
Also, I'm not sure why you think banning dating (even casual non-physical dating) is not extreme, unless you misunderstood what I meant by dating: I meant it as in "going on a date," not necessarily sexual or a relationship.
Being a little shy, they use the term "doing the wash" in place of "having sex".
One night the husband, feeling horny, starts pestering his bride to "do the wash", but she being tired says no.
Early the next morning the wife, feeling guilty, wakes her husband early to ask if he still wants to "do the wash".
He replies, "no thanks, I already did it by hand".
To answer your first question at face value: because an emotional/romantic/sexual connection with someone can still be valuable and enriching even if it's not in an official boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.
I don't know or not if it's theoretically possible for every woman to squirt. But there are a lot of women who thought they couldn't for a long time, and then finally were able to.
As far as I know, every woman has Skene's glands, though they may not all have ones that gush. Some may just dribble a little and some may seem to not produce any fluid. My point wasn't that the ability to squirt magically makes orgasms better, but that in someone who has that ability, squirting actually does often make the orgasm more intense. At least, that's what they say. And it's not surprising physically, because the fluid builds up additional pressure that gets released.
Just curious... help me understand. You're ok with flirting all day? That's at least a slight degree of non-monogamy that a lot of people couldn't just compartmentalize and say it doesn't matter, even if it was at work (CCG's boyfriend, for instance). And if flirting is ok, how do you determine when a friendship crosses the line to being emotionally threatening, or too close, or starts getting romantic-like? There's no clear boundary, and people should have close friends of both sexes outside the relationship.
Or to make a comparison: I'm a bit of a "screamer". I'm super vocal. Sex that gets me waking up our neighbors is obviously usually better than sex with less of a decibel count, but that doesn't mean that I think women who are quiet during sex don't come as hard as I do. Not neccesarily anyway.
I... really don't know how to explain the dating things because I have a feeling it's just semantic confusion.
Flirting is superficial. I'm really desensitized to it because it's super common in the industry. Plus also I'm one of those people who comes off flirty without trying to be. Sometimes that's annoying. If I'm nice to someone of the opposite sex that's construed as flirting. If I'm bitchy/sarcastic/dry that's just 'teasing' aka another form of flirting.
To me, flirting is nothing. It's just how people get along and pass the time. And for someone who's comfortable being monogamous, it's non-threatening. (We don't do it in front of eachother, though. And why would I? Why would I flirt with the second cutest guy in the room?)
Dating (again, for me, and for any partner I've had) is a means of vetting a potential S/O. Most people I know see it that way. So dating is uber-off limits for me.
Um... in terms of opposite-sex friendships? Yeah that can be interesting territory for straight monogamous couples. Speaking from my own experience? My partner isn't attracted to any of his female friends. Most of the friends he has are male, anyway. He's had the odd female friend who's into him, but I'm not "threatened" because I trust him, and I know he doesn't see them in that way.
Same goes for me. I've actually kind of given up on trying to be close friends with straight guys because I find a lot of the time they tend to want other things at some point. Almost all my closest friends are female or gay guys (to be SUPER clear, this isn't to please any guy. It's always how things have been for me). I had a pretty close guy friend briefly and he was a little uneasy about it until he met him and saw what he looked like.
IT'S
A
JOKE!!!
I know it sucked, but it was the only laundry joke I know.