I'm tripping on cough syrup, ask me anything.

[LMNO]

Maybe.

Eventually.

It says not to smoke while wearing it, which means that's the first thing I have to do.

In that case, please amend my first answer to "no".

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Right on my balls. It felt wonderful going on, but not sure about the taking it off part. Can't worry about events in the future I guess.

Yeah, functioning scrotums are overrated.

[Iron Sulfide]

My concern was more for the fact that you're married to someone and find you need emotional stimulation elsewhere. And if it's an "open" relationship, my assumption would be that this has been the situation for some time, now. Now if "open" meant you were swingers, that would slant my perception of things a bit differently. Regardless of my assumptions, therapy is usually not a bad thing.

Ewwww swingers are gross! Sorry, that's just me being judgmental.

I think that before you pass judgment on people getting "emotional stimulation" outside of their marriages, you should A: consider the fact that it'snot very healthy for anyone to rely on ONLY ONE person for all their emotional needs (see: "friends and family") and B: learn a little more about what polyamory means and why people choose it. Monogamy is not the One True and Only Way as Ordained By The Universe.

where, Nigel, did I pass judgement in that? I do tend, myself, towards a monogamous model, but that's not at all why I suggested therapy. Do you, Nigel, think that therapy is a bad thing, or somehow not beneficial? All I was trying to do was float the possibility of therapy out there without being all, "DUDE, GET UR ASS TO A SHRINK" because that's neither cool, nor helpful. I also didn't want to spiral into a huge block of text, so I kept it simple.

A: Show me where I said anybody should rely on one person. The emotional stimulation I was referring to was, in context, obviously romantic in nature.  (and if you think getting your romantic emotional needs satisfied by your Friends and Family is cool, that's some odd shit there...)

B:poly = many; amor = love. I'm quite aware of what being a slut is. And if that's what a person is, far be it for me to condemn them anymore than for being black, gay, schizophrenic or paraplegic. It is what is.

Now you gonna keep needling me, or what?

[Freeky]

Right on my balls. It felt wonderful going on, but not sure about the taking it off part. Can't worry about events in the future I guess.

Dok isn't here today, so I'ma have to call this one for him.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

My concern was more for the fact that you're married to someone and find you need emotional stimulation elsewhere. And if it's an "open" relationship, my assumption would be that this has been the situation for some time, now. Now if "open" meant you were swingers, that would slant my perception of things a bit differently. Regardless of my assumptions, therapy is usually not a bad thing.

Ewwww swingers are gross! Sorry, that's just me being judgmental.

I think that before you pass judgment on people getting "emotional stimulation" outside of their marriages, you should A: consider the fact that it'snot very healthy for anyone to rely on ONLY ONE person for all their emotional needs (see: "friends and family") and B: learn a little more about what polyamory means and why people choose it. Monogamy is not the One True and Only Way as Ordained By The Universe.

where, Nigel, did I pass judgement in that? I do tend, myself, towards a monogamous model, but that's not at all why I suggested therapy. Do you, Nigel, think that therapy is a bad thing, or somehow not beneficial? All I was trying to do was float the possibility of therapy out there without being all, "DUDE, GET UR ASS TO A SHRINK" because that's neither cool, nor helpful. I also didn't want to spiral into a huge block of text, so I kept it simple.

A: Show me where I said anybody should rely on one person. The emotional stimulation I was referring to was, in context, obviously romantic in nature.  (and if you think getting your romantic emotional needs satisfied by your Friends and Family is cool, that's some odd shit there...)

B:poly = many; amor = love. I'm quite aware of what being a slut is. And if that's what a person is, far be it for me to condemn them anymore than for being black, gay, schizophrenic or paraplegic. It is what is.

Now you gonna keep needling me, or what?

I wasn't needling you... I don't even know who you are, why would I needle you? I was replying to the post you made.

My concern was more for the fact that you're married to someone and find you need emotional stimulation elsewhere. And if it's an "open" relationship, my assumption would be that this has been the situation for some time, now. Now if "open" meant you were swingers, that would slant my perception of things a bit differently. Regardless of my assumptions, therapy is usually not a bad thing.

[LMNO]

Incidentally, I think there is at least one swinger who posts here... you may have just offended them.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think it's weird that people are basically saying "OMG I can't believe you're doing something that works for you and the person you're in a relationship with!"

Yeah, me too. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Incidentally, I think there is at least one swinger who posts here... you may have just offended them.

I don't, actually, care. I am prejudiced against swinging; I think it's gross. I don't usually bring it up unless someone is all "ZOMG SWINGING IS AWZUMMM BUT ROMANTIC LOVE FOR MORE THAN ONE PERSON IS UNHEALTHY!"

As long as swingers keep their emotionally disconnected dongles away from me, I won't hit them with a shovel.

[LMNO]

Well, I guess we now know where you stand on the subject.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A: Show me where I said anybody should rely on one person. The emotional stimulation I was referring to was, in context, obviously romantic in nature.  (and if you think getting your romantic emotional needs satisfied by your Friends and Family is cool, that's some odd shit there...)

Polyamory is about getting romantic needs fulfilled by more than one person.

B:poly = many; amor = love. I'm quite aware of what being a slut is. And if that's what a person is, far be it for me to condemn them anymore than for being black, gay, schizophrenic or paraplegic. It is what is.

Wait, so you don't want to bother finding out what polyamory is? You just want to jump to predetermined conclusions? "Poly" doesn't mean "many"; it means "multiple". "Multiple loves". There is nothing wrong with being promiscuous, but polyamory" =/= "slutty".

Now you gonna keep needling me, or what?

Upon re-reading, it appears that you are needling me.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

We did swinging for awhile... Or rather we joined a swinger club because we were curious. Thought it would be fun to expose ourselves to a different reality tunnel and honestly the idea of a subculture that had rebelled against some of ther strongest taboos in our society was something I wanted to see.



Don't get me wrong... we're not monogamous. But we sure as hell aren't in that 'lifestyle'. Absurd doesn't even begin to cover the experience.

I don't think we're really poly-amorous either, that indicates long term relationship sort of things... I guess maybe I'm just a somewhat picky slut.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yeah.

I realize that people live their relationships, open or otherwise, in many different ways. I get extremely attached to my lovers, but I realize that other people in open relationships may cultivate their relationships differently. However, my experiences with the "swinger" world have been creepy bordering on horrific. Swingers and "polys" are vastly different in their approach to sexual intimacy, IME.

[Triple Zero]

Incidentally, I think there is at least one swinger who posts here... you may have just offended them.

Did he/she invent the breakbeat?

[Salty]

The biggest freaks sexually, IMO, are those totally straight married couples that never touch each other, or anybody else in some skewed sense of fidelity.

And even then it always comes down to individuals, personality, vibe. Sexuality is too fluid for labels to fit and stick. Every poly person I've met has a different set of gudelines and needs.

Swingers seem a bit more rigid about their interactions, but that's from my limited observations.  It always always always comes back to personality.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Yeah.

I realize that people live their relationships, open or otherwise, in many different ways. I get extremely attached to my lovers, but I realize that other people in open relationships may cultivate their relationships differently. However, my experiences with the "swinger" world have been creepy bordering on horrific. Swingers and "polys" are vastly different in their approach to sexual intimacy, IME.

I agree. We presumed (falsly) that you met people, got to know them and then maybe had an orgy or something. Apparently, you meet people fuck them and then occasionally catch their name or contact them in the future. Also, apparently there is a presumption that if you're there YOU WILL FUCKING ANYTHING... literally.

We were used to occasionally ending up in some crazy intimate situation with friends that we loved and were close to. I kid you not, we walked in the door and within 15 minutes three guys had hit her up for oral sex... like "Oh hey, can I get you a drink? Wanna suck my cock?"

We joined one of the online services and figured maybe meeting individuals not at a club would work better... so we met a couple, went to have dinner at their place (seemed nice) and in between excusing themselves to stick powder up their nose, they made it clear that they 'expected' sex that night.... cause 'Why else would we be having dinner with strangers?'

Me, I'm just sticking with surprising adventures with close friends from now on.



I think Central Ohio may be part of the problem with my experience with swingers....