RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner?

RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

RCdc -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 6:41:18 AM)
No it didn't, it was pretty much about being open in relationships and I didn't read it as being cool about infidelity... in fact that wasn't even mentioned which kinda threw me when I saw posters mentioning it - I was thinking - am I reading the wrong link![;)] I didn't like the premise that if your into monogamy, then you must be in some sort of sexual denial though. I'm all for celebrating all types of relationships, but not at the risk of trashing ones that don't meld with the whole 'alternative' vibe. the.dark.

juliaoceania -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 6:52:30 AM)
Well, that was why my second post on the thread, I was like, "huh, wait a minute... wasn't it about open relationships?" I remembered the gal who wrote it said something about being "polyamorous", their relationship wasn't that either, not under the definitions I have ever read for that lifestyle. Having sex outside your relationship doesn't make you poly

RCdc -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 6:57:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Having sex outside your relationship doesn't make you poly I wouldn't say that. There are so many types of poly relationships, that really wouldn't ring true. Poly simply means 'more than one'. It's what you add to it that makes it more definable.(polyfidelity - polyamory - polyamourous etc) the.dark.

juliaoceania -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 7:03:55 AM)
So you would consider her "polyamorous", which is what she wrote in the article? I am far from an expert on that term, and would welcome the opportunity to learn more I dismissed the entire article, perhaps mistakenly, based on that

RCdc -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 7:08:51 AM)
If she calls herself that then sure. I would feel uncomfortable, personally, at polyamourous, but poly, sure. the.dark.

Tantriqu -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 7:30:45 AM)
That kind of attitude is genocidal, and killing an entire generation in Africa. And condoms only cover the cock: besides, they're only 70% effective when on, and 0% when off, which is why a lot of men and women nowadays get herpes in their asscracks from spooning after sex. And hellO! Pregnancy, anyone? Even on this continent where AIDS isn't rampant yet, sex with a casual partner is like sex with an unwashed vibrator bought from a pawnshop, with batteries that may or may not work: no emotional connection, perhaps a life-long STD and you may not even get an orgasm. [:'(] Sexual russian roulette for a temporary high. A poly relationship is different, when all partners have been tested, are monogamous and are happy within the relationship. Otherwise, having sex with another person is lying to and stealing from your spouse, and possibly infecting them: ooh, that's noble and attractive. I have no use for people, and especially partners, like that.

juliaoceania -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 7:37:13 AM)
I am not mitigating the risks of sexual activity, and I am careful about my partners....but you speak of having sex as though the risks are something new. In some cultures they stone people for having sex, and they do it anyways, why? It is a biological imperative. Seeing that people will have sex even with the risks of losing everything, even their lives, how do we seek to contain risks? To me trying to control sexuality is like trying to herd cats... I do not intend the above as an excuse for cheating, or to approve of unsafe sex practices, I am just acknowledging the realities of life

DesFIP -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 7:54:41 AM)
But the article assumes that everyone who is monogamous is being denied, which isn't true. Many of us are monogamous. I don't register other people as being sexually attractive when I am happy in a relationship. I can see that they are attractive in an objective sense but I don't have pangs about not being able to bang them. I am not being denied anything. The problem is not that you take the risk of contracting a chronic illness, but that you pass it on to your spouse who did not choose to take that risk. After all, if they chose to take that risk, they would have been sexually active with others themselves. And of course there's always the risk of passing it on to an unborn child. More importantly, the article speaks to one unmarried couple who are young and assume that is transferable to everyone else. I would wager a bet that if they get married, this will no longer be okay in their relationship. Because that is my experience. But above everything else, it's bad science. Or pseudo-science rather. Generic you, obviously.

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:21:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: We're not talking about having sex with EVERYONE besides your partner Oh damn, we aren't? I'm not, anyway. That is not what my own definition of "poly" or even an "open relationship" means. But, of course, no two people see things the same way as evidenced here once again..........luci

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:23:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc It's a dreadful article that does nothing to promote poly in the positive, making it seem selfish and makes monogamy sound limp and frigid. the.dark. Thanks for your opinion. Obviously, mine is not the same. Again, I'm puzzled as to how it makes poly seem "selfish." Could you show me where she indicates monogamy as a whole is "limp and frigid" exactly or was that just the impression you seemed to get overall? luci

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:27:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied Actually a test result is no guarantee. Some diseases have windows of time where you can read negative and a few months later be positive. True and this is a reason why I am not one to preach the gospel of testing. There are those who act as if testing is necessary before any type of encounter should occur and seem to stake their very lives on the result they see. For the very reasons you stated, I am not one of them. It's still "iffy" at best, of course. I just don't buy the line that being with anyone outside of your partner is automatically some huge risk, thus I mentioned testing. I guess it is the closest thing to a guarantee one can get though I feel there are NO guarantees. Want to have no risk? Then have no sex with anyone at anytime I suppose. How boring...........luci

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:31:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx Slave Luci: "I think the premise of the article would be better stated as wishing to be "poly" is seen as selfish, but monogamy is celebrated. Despite the opening line, I don't see the article as celebrating "infidelity." Well actually my answer was just a FR based on the first sentence of your OP: "Interesting, positive article that says "infidelity is treated as selfish, while monogamy is celebrated." Yeah, I could see where that would throw you, esp. without reading any of the article. I should've left my own statement, as well as the tagline off and maybe the responses would've focused more on the text of the article and not the very word "infidelity." Meh - didn't seem to matter anyway as apparently I'm the only one who read it and got anything good or positive out of it - except a QSM, thank you :). Foolish me, I actually thought it was positive to read someone implying that (a) those who want more than one partner aren't necessarily selfish and (b) if that desire causes relationship problems, they should be able to go to a counselor who actually has some background on the the concept of poly and doesn't automatically tell them they are sick or wrong for engaging in it. That's what I got out of it and that's what I liked about it. Writing style aside, I liked the author's premise............luci

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:37:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AQuietSimpleMan I can say it sticks to the Idea that Monogamy is not Mandatory Thank you, exactly. That is what I found positive about the whole thing, not necessarily the personal story of the couple told within. quote: and I think some people did not actually read the article and have comments on nothing but the Title cause no where in the article did it ever talk about doing anything behind your partners back, it was all about having a sexual relationship with someone other than your Primary partner. But of course. There's always that, unfortunately. Thanks for actually reading it and for getting the point I was trying to make. As I said before, I don't think the writing style or the personal story was really the overall point. It was more that just because you don't want monogamy, that doesn't make you wrong and there should be some counselors out there who get it as well. luci

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 10:39:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomImus quote: ORIGINAL: AQuietSimpleMan The Title is kinda less than Positive.... ...and pretty much set the tone for the entire article. Like I said in my earlier post - it was poorly written. It reminded of election advertisement copy where the candidate tries to win your vote by belaboring the faults of his opponent. Well, I heartily disagree, of course. Not only did it not "set the tone" for the entire article (or even part of it) it pretty much didn't have anything to do with the rest of the article. Now THAT should get points taken off the writing style, I suppose. Otherwise, I'm not sure why that is so important. She wasn't attempting to write the great american novel or anything, just get the point across that monogamy is not always the right choice for everyone. THAT is the point.................luci

RCdc -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 11:01:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci Thanks for your opinion. Obviously, mine is not the same. Again, I'm puzzled as to how it makes poly seem "selfish." Could you show me where she indicates monogamy as a whole is "limp and frigid" exactly or was that just the impression you seemed to get overall? luci The title is pretty limiting. I didn't find it set up the premise of the article personally. quote: Infidelity is treated as selfish This is where the article contradicts itself. Open relationships or poly relationships aren't about infidelity. I can see how this initial statement sets up the article for a fall, even as someone who thinks poly rocks. quote: while monogamy is celebrated. But what's so great about living a life of self-denial? She's made a blanket statement. If she had qualified it as being a personal realisation that being monogamous was not for her, it would have made for a much more responsible article. She didn't - she sees monogamy as being in self denial of ones sexual wants. She stated she cried when her boyfriend cheated on her. Then goes on to celebrate poly relationships as if they are one in the same thing. I find the whole article poorly written, inarticulate and misleading. the.dark.

slaveluci -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 11:06:17 AM)
OK, I understand that. Thank you, RCdc for explaining..........luci

juliaoceania -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 8:52:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: We're not talking about having sex with EVERYONE besides your partner Oh damn, we aren't? I'm not, anyway. That is not what my own definition of "poly" or even an "open relationship" means. But, of course, no two people see things the same way as evidenced here once again..........luci I was being a smart ass, I am celibate currently because I have no long term partner... but that is my choice as a responsible person that wants to remain healthy. If I chose differently and was honest with my partners I think that would be a personal choice

DarlingSavage -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/5/2010 9:14:38 PM)
where the person you love most is also the person you most need to limit? I don't understand what the author means by this question. I've read the first 2 pages. Poly isn't for me. If it works for someone else that isn't trying to be with me, then good for them! I'm way too jealous. As for the article, I didn't see her saying anything redeeming about polyamory. I didn't see her give any reasons why it might be good for anyone. I just think it's one of those things that it works for some people and it doesn't work for others. I would feel, and have felt, the same way the author did, not pretty enough, not satisfying enough, not enough.

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Freedom from Sexual Self-Denial: Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? (7/6/2010 5:12:26 AM)
Well I did read the whole article and I think she is mixing up polyfidelity and polyamory. What she is advocating is multiple sexual partners not a relationship involving love between three or more partners. The article comes across as being a way for her to work through her partner having had sex outside their relationship and is biased towards that. Further, she does at one point state that there are those for whom monogamy works and is a healthy relationship just that having an open relationship is seen by our society as abnormal when clearly that is not always the case.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.076172E-02