purplerein said:

But some folks can have a drink or a trip to vegas now and again without being an addict.

Wrong.
Unstable.
Everything that is wrong with people and relationships.
Just plain fucked up.

Anx said:

I agree with you 100 % on that

CarrieMpls said:

yes, there are people who can handle liquor or gambling or sex, without being addicted..
but sex without intimacy is just about the climax, and i bet if people were really honest, they'd say that when he/she walks out the door, they wonder if it was worth it, or perhaps they feel empty inside. please understand, i'm not trying to be preachy, but explain how I feel.
[Edited 11/30/06 6:43am]

purplerein said:

I understand that that is your experience, but sex for me is never only about the climax, and I've had one night stands before. I'd say that maybe that's the difference between a man and a woman, but I don't think that's it either.
As for an orgasm being worth betraying your partner? Of course not. But if you're talking to your partner to begin with and are honest about things, there's no betrayal.
Again, maybe I'm being too idealistic.

CarrieMpls said:

im not sure i get where betrayal comes into the picture..

purplerein said:

because you said it wasn't 'worth it'. I guess I don't know what else you'd be referring to. Why wouldn't it be 'worth it'? If there's no betrayal, and you had a good time and both adults are consenting and play safe, what are you losing that would make it not 'worth it'?

Anx said:

wow my ideal man

purplerein said:

see, you're speaking from your perceptions of sexuality based on YOUR experiences and worldview. and that's great. for YOU.

and that's not to say that you weren't offering anything more than your opinion within the context of stating your own comfort levels.

but reading your comment i feel is like if i were to post, "well, i don't like pickles. people who DO like pickles just must enjoy having something sour and bitter in their lives. they must be sour, bitter people, those pickle lovers."

why do i give a shit why people like pickles? they don't work for me. end of story.

sex means a lot of things to different people - sometimes it even means "i love you". unless someone is getting hurt by it, i think there's no wrong interpretation.

CarrieMpls said:

Yeah. I think some people take sex WAY too seriously, and that's ok. That's them. As if every experience has to have some deep, meaningful significance. It CAN be that way, with the person you love, and it can also be just a fun time. I personally don't believe for a minute that humans are monogamists by nature. It's completely normal to want to have sexual experiences with more than one person.

If you can talk to your partner about these things, and if they also have the same feelings, then I think it's fine. I would never judge another person's relationship. I am not that closed-minded. Everyone's different, and different things work for different couples. It doesn't mean in any way that they don't really love each other. How could anyone know and judge if they are not IN that relationship?

question mark edit
[Edited 11/30/06 7:28am]

As Borat said:


"If she cheat on me, I will CRUSH her."

minneapolisgenius said:

what you said. as far as i'm concerned, that's exactly it.

jerseykrs said:

Yeah, but, Borat's not a real person. You are.

jerseykrs said:

As Jerri Blank said:

"I'm damp as a cellar down there. Enter if you dare."

couldn't stand my gf boning another guy
[Edited 11/30/06 7:30am]

Anx said:

This issue hits very close 2 home 4 me as it just ended the greatest relationship I've ever had after nearly 5 years.

The 1 and only place where my partner and I disagreed was he did not believe in monogamy. When we 1st got 2gether he asked if we were going 2 b xclusive. I said "I'd like 2 b. Is that going 2 b a problem?" He said "No". and that was the end of the discussion.

cut 2 5 years later and he tells me "Remember when I said 'No'? I actually meant 'Yes'." He never cheated on me and has repeatedly told me that I am the love of his life and no1 will ever match what he feels 4 me, but he couldn't take all of the missed opportunities 2 have random sex with multiple strangers.

I look at it this way; if yer gonna b in a relationship, b in it. If U don't want 2 b tied down 2 just 1 person, than stick 2 dating. No commitment, no xpectations, no1 gets hurt.

4 my money, U can't have it both ways. This has nothing 2 do with me being insecure, or under-evolved or closed-minded or old-fashioned. I just don't think U can really make a serious commitment 2 some1 and still f**k everything that moves. I had no desire 2 suddenly change from 'Husband' to 'my personal favorite of all the guys I'm currently screwing'.

But that's me. Your results may vary.

npgmaverick said:

right, but it ain't that simple though. dating doesn't always equate slutting it up, just as open relationships don't equate the inability to commit.

I don't want a open relationship. I want a relationship where i am with a woman but not handcuffed to them. I don't want to be answering to them or having to tell them where i am all the time or taking care of them or them taking care of me. I just want a cool relationship with a woman. An easy going , do what you want relationship. I don't mean having sacktime with other people. But not a traditional boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.

npgmaverick said:

Who said anything about fucking everything that moves though?

Spats said:

That's cool.

minneapolisgenius said:

Okay, scratch that.

Change 2 "I just don't think U can really make a serious commitment 2 some1 and still keep the option 2 f**k everything that moves.

Of course, nothing is completely black and white and I am comparing 2 xtremes but when it comes down 2 it, b it a fling here and there or outright slut-dom, it's still asking the same thing of your partner. At least, it is if that partner is me.

Again, your results may vary.
[Edited 11/30/06 9:21am]

Anx said:

i apologize if i came off as preachy...i was offering my feelings, but not hoping to preach at the same time. my feelings are based on what works for me, as i thought was being asked in the original question.

it leads me to ask you Anx...just how big and bumpy is your pickle?

npgmaverick said:

"open relationship" does not have to automatically equal "complete state of nature". it's not like keeping yourself open for doing the nasty 24/7 to anyone anywhere. and if someone wants an open relationship thinking that is what it means, they're sorely (literally and figuratively, ha) mistaken.

i don't know where this need to polarize comes from - just because a thing doesn't fall on your side of the fence, doesn't mean it falls on the other side of the planet.

purplerein said:

sex offender!

for me the STD issue is serious enough to prevent me from wanting multiple partners in an open relationship. and if my partner were involved with other women sexually i'd run like hell, because i don't want to risk being infected due to their lack of good sexual hygiene.

as we know, condoms do NOT prevent the spread of certain STDs.

that's just me.

Anx said:

I agree, but I wasn't polarizing, this is xactly what my S.O. told me. He precisely wanted 2 continue his relationship with me while being available 2 have promiscuous random sex with any1 at any such time he felt the desire 2.

That seemed pretty effed up 2 me, especially after 5 years.

npgmaverick said:

yeah, i hear what you're saying, and for what it's worth, i've been in a similar relationship. but i don't use that experience as a model for the concept as an ideal. the ideal may be fucked up. but it's not one that i dismiss. i've never been in a fully-disclosed, fully-dissenting, fully-this-is-what-it-IS open relationship. it could suck. i've also been in a relationship that was in practice open but in discussion not. that was weird and gross. i guess my deal is, i'm open to whatever direction my next relationship takes me, as long as it's mutual and the communication is there.

I like sex.

What I meant was that I'm not against this. Casual's fine, as long as it's casual. If I've found "the one", well, there's a reason why they call it "the one".