The bio-flick: The Notorious Bettie Page was on IFC last night.
A decent movie, but Gretchen Mol does an outstanding job portraying the 50's pin-up queen.
There was a scene in the movie -- that really got me thinking -- about the evils of pornography and the depictions of women being bound, degraded and otherwise subjected to whatever was sought. Aside from that imagery causing me to grin, smile and otherwise daydream -- I considered the perception of how the depiction of porn in movies, in books, in stories basically admonishes porn to be the root of evil for all men.....
Is porn really that evil?
The movie took the stereotypical route of how morally damaging it was for a few souls who "happened to have" porn in their custodial at the time of whatever mis-deeds they were doing. Which just sends me over the edge in a barrel because I simply don't subscribe to the flawed logic of the "association" crime game that constantly plays out in everyday life. The "association" crime basically says: "as long as you are within a certain radius of the said *thing* ... that must've been the reason why you flew off your rocker...." Many of these said characters were also religious in one form or another. So if they were in the same proximity of their Bibles too -- then why don't we blame the word of God as being a catalyst in their behavior?
That's why the "association" card gets a little sticky sometimes...
Does this mean that porn is harmless then?
In the grandest scheme of life - it is harmless. Seriously.... Porn is a graphic expression of sexuality. If the argument that porn is vulgar, then so are our movies, our music, our poetry, our books, our TV programs -- literally anything out there can conceivably be considered vulgar as well. But we measure what is acceptable and what isn't and the problem with that comparison is that it's completely subjective. Not every piece of porn grabs my fancy, but I respect that it very well could be somebody's else's kink -- even if it just doesn't happen to be mine.
But people use pornography as some sort of all-encompassing lynch-pin in the failure of marriages and relationships -- while blatantly ignoring that maybe the marriage or relationship was in peril long before porn entered into the fray. Porn gets a bad rap while the real reasons continually get ignored, overlooked and held in contempt.
Men being accused of "cheating" on their wives using porn -- when very little has probably been done to EXPLAIN the reason why the man may have felt compelled to look at porn in the first place. Do they no longer have a very satisfying love life? No more spark? No more sexual energy between them? Have they talked about it? Have they worked at trying to do more things together or explore alternatives side by side?
The problem is: we change and evolve over time. What turns us on today wasn't the same thing that turned us on 10 years ago (for the most part...) So for a couple that got married and they're now 4, 5 or 12 years in their marriage, one or both of them might be bored with how things have been going. So then why not just come out and say that? Why not call it for what it is and work at resolving it together?
Porn gets blamed for relationship crises when the reality is -- there's probably at least a half dozen other things at play.
If you find such material objectionable, then you
don't ....
have ...
to ....
look ....
at ....
it.
Period.
End of story.
If you find it offensive - then you can absolutely exercise your right not to look at it. And don't try to use the argument: "kids today have more access to porn than...." Kids today are not unlike the kids of yesterday or the week before. If they WANT to find something out, they will find out about it. At best, as a parent - your best alternative is to educate your children and instill the values you think are important and let THAT be the guiding principle that they will use in life. Trying to hide something isn't going to work. Trying to pretend it doesn't exist is simply crazy.
Porn isn't to blame ... for once, it would be nice if folks looked at their own personal responsibilities rather than trying to blame someone else for their own shortcomings ... but then it would be nice to see pigs fly sometimes too....
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Poly Puzzler
(Just a reminder to folks -- I hardly ever blog here anymore -- I'm over on LiveJournal as LordSpooner, so if you want to follow me over there - that'd be great.)
A friend of ours posted something in her LJ that got us both thinking about the puzzle with poly. Namely the issues of polyfidelity, exclusiveness and the "primary problem" that sometimes exists. While there is no one true universal way to approach poly, I'm bestowing the standard caveat that everyone's mileage will vary. I have been simmering some thoughts on the subject and I believe I've come to some realizations about where I wanted to go with this post.
First off, I'm comfortable in the fact that there are certain elements I'm about to go into here that I consider to be pliable, mailable and subject to change. This isn't to say that we shouldn't have a certain amount of goals and parameters for our relationships. But we're not approaching this search that we will eventually have to "settle" on some things. I do believe there's a lot of room for negotiation and chemistry between everyone ultimately helps resolves this issue, but for now, there are a few subjects that I wanted to put out there.
Polyfidelity -- For some reason, the word "fidelity" always meant something totally different whenever I heard it, so when you add poly to it -- my mind just hiccups every time it sees it. However, the concept behind polyfidelity is exactly what we're looking for. To us, polyfidelity signifies one's investment in the dynamic. In my eyes, we're investing in them - so it seems only natural that they in turn want to invest in us. It's not that I hold anything against those that have an open relationship - I don't, but it's not exactly what we're seeking.
That's why we've characterized our search for a bona-fide triad where our girl will have a relationship with myself as well as with danae. While I have nothing against "V" dynamics - it's just not what we're seeking. We're really hopeful that we will find someone that wants to be apart of both of our lives, not just with myself or just with danae.
But there's a perception in the community as a whole that we're looking for the stereotypical "unicorn" or the infamous HBB (hot bi-babe) phenomenon. We're not. "Unicorns" are treated as very superficially, and typically in it "just for the sex" -- again -- while we have no problem with others pursuing this for themselves, it's not what we're seeking for the long term. Yes, I fully expect times when we're all intimate together in that "wickedly awesome threesome that every guy dreams about" but for us -- it's about going grocery shopping together or with one or the other. It's about spending quality time just enjoying each other's company on a Sunday morning, fixing breakfast, sipping coffee and going through Sunday morning advertisements, laughing and singing to 70's music on satellite radio. It's about snuggling for naps, it's about passionate love, caring, and sense of couple-dom in a triad environment. It's deeper than the sex - tantric almost - and something that touches the core of who we are.
Yes - there's an M/s side to owning two women that I love deep down and I don't make too many apologies for being possessive. It's a sign of security, that comfort zone that you're loved, wanted, cherished and protected. And if our poly girl is being shared in other dynamics -- I almost feel like I can't control and protect if there are multiple relationships in the process. There would be an entirely different wing of dramatics and issues that would strain the dynamic.
Which I realize some dynamics are totally okay with. Maybe it's how I'm investing myself - or maybe it's how my "fixer" personality fault is coming out.
But how fair is that?
To be that exclusive ... when you're not in that "primary spot."
*sighs*
Which brings us to an entirely different conversation of the use of "primary, first, second, third...." Because both danae and I honestly believe that there's no need to have a division like that in the kind of poly dynamic we want. We don't want the strata, we don't want the label of "first and second" nor do we care to think of someone as being outside of our relationship. To us, poly is the joining and merging by including someone else in a dynamic that aspires to be equal to one another.
And I know there are those out there that aspire to be the same.
But the classic example is Thanksgiving - when our families do not know about the dynamic or the bdsm aspect to our lives -- how does that get played out? I've been with danae for over 6 years - coming up on 7 .... and thus my family and hers have accepted the fact that we're together - as a couple (even though they also think we're living in sin - but that's another story.) So when we finally find the one for us -- and she comes with us because she's family too ... then "oh, she must be a friend of Michael and danae's....." "Where is she going to sleep?" "Why does she spend a lot of time with them?"
On some level, there's a degree of acceptance of situations like that - not just for the fact that it's an external issue outside of the dynamic, but an acceptance inside how we feel about that when it happens. We'd want our girl to be a part of us - and that's everything, but sometimes those obstacles keep that from happening. I do know that I would take it very personally if my girl felt like an outcast and that would be something heavily discussed from the onset.
Maybe I'm over thinking all this. But as I hear about other people's horror stories about their failed poly relationships - I do believe giving these issues the proper contemplation and foresight is a good thing.
We want something permanent.
We want something lasting.
We want someone who is going to be happy and content, who wants to stay with us and be apart of our lives as much as we want to be apart of hers.
The Poly Puzzler is a challenging one that requires a LOT of thoughtful consideration, honesty and communication. Merely being poly-minded isn't enough, but it is a start. Admitting what our deep down desires are is not an easy endeavor because we may try to convince ourselves: "Oh, we can do that." or "That's doable" when in fact it might be totally doable for the short term -- but after a year, will you still feel the same?
Lots to think about and lots to discuss during the course of our search.
(Special thanks to wenchalicious for inspiring the thought process that led to this blog. A good deep topic to contemplate.)
A friend of ours posted something in her LJ that got us both thinking about the puzzle with poly. Namely the issues of polyfidelity, exclusiveness and the "primary problem" that sometimes exists. While there is no one true universal way to approach poly, I'm bestowing the standard caveat that everyone's mileage will vary. I have been simmering some thoughts on the subject and I believe I've come to some realizations about where I wanted to go with this post.
First off, I'm comfortable in the fact that there are certain elements I'm about to go into here that I consider to be pliable, mailable and subject to change. This isn't to say that we shouldn't have a certain amount of goals and parameters for our relationships. But we're not approaching this search that we will eventually have to "settle" on some things. I do believe there's a lot of room for negotiation and chemistry between everyone ultimately helps resolves this issue, but for now, there are a few subjects that I wanted to put out there.
Polyfidelity -- For some reason, the word "fidelity" always meant something totally different whenever I heard it, so when you add poly to it -- my mind just hiccups every time it sees it. However, the concept behind polyfidelity is exactly what we're looking for. To us, polyfidelity signifies one's investment in the dynamic. In my eyes, we're investing in them - so it seems only natural that they in turn want to invest in us. It's not that I hold anything against those that have an open relationship - I don't, but it's not exactly what we're seeking.
That's why we've characterized our search for a bona-fide triad where our girl will have a relationship with myself as well as with danae. While I have nothing against "V" dynamics - it's just not what we're seeking. We're really hopeful that we will find someone that wants to be apart of both of our lives, not just with myself or just with danae.
But there's a perception in the community as a whole that we're looking for the stereotypical "unicorn" or the infamous HBB (hot bi-babe) phenomenon. We're not. "Unicorns" are treated as very superficially, and typically in it "just for the sex" -- again -- while we have no problem with others pursuing this for themselves, it's not what we're seeking for the long term. Yes, I fully expect times when we're all intimate together in that "wickedly awesome threesome that every guy dreams about" but for us -- it's about going grocery shopping together or with one or the other. It's about spending quality time just enjoying each other's company on a Sunday morning, fixing breakfast, sipping coffee and going through Sunday morning advertisements, laughing and singing to 70's music on satellite radio. It's about snuggling for naps, it's about passionate love, caring, and sense of couple-dom in a triad environment. It's deeper than the sex - tantric almost - and something that touches the core of who we are.
Yes - there's an M/s side to owning two women that I love deep down and I don't make too many apologies for being possessive. It's a sign of security, that comfort zone that you're loved, wanted, cherished and protected. And if our poly girl is being shared in other dynamics -- I almost feel like I can't control and protect if there are multiple relationships in the process. There would be an entirely different wing of dramatics and issues that would strain the dynamic.
Which I realize some dynamics are totally okay with. Maybe it's how I'm investing myself - or maybe it's how my "fixer" personality fault is coming out.
But how fair is that?
To be that exclusive ... when you're not in that "primary spot."
*sighs*
Which brings us to an entirely different conversation of the use of "primary, first, second, third...." Because both danae and I honestly believe that there's no need to have a division like that in the kind of poly dynamic we want. We don't want the strata, we don't want the label of "first and second" nor do we care to think of someone as being outside of our relationship. To us, poly is the joining and merging by including someone else in a dynamic that aspires to be equal to one another.
And I know there are those out there that aspire to be the same.
But the classic example is Thanksgiving - when our families do not know about the dynamic or the bdsm aspect to our lives -- how does that get played out? I've been with danae for over 6 years - coming up on 7 .... and thus my family and hers have accepted the fact that we're together - as a couple (even though they also think we're living in sin - but that's another story.) So when we finally find the one for us -- and she comes with us because she's family too ... then "oh, she must be a friend of Michael and danae's....." "Where is she going to sleep?" "Why does she spend a lot of time with them?"
On some level, there's a degree of acceptance of situations like that - not just for the fact that it's an external issue outside of the dynamic, but an acceptance inside how we feel about that when it happens. We'd want our girl to be a part of us - and that's everything, but sometimes those obstacles keep that from happening. I do know that I would take it very personally if my girl felt like an outcast and that would be something heavily discussed from the onset.
Maybe I'm over thinking all this. But as I hear about other people's horror stories about their failed poly relationships - I do believe giving these issues the proper contemplation and foresight is a good thing.
We want something permanent.
We want something lasting.
We want someone who is going to be happy and content, who wants to stay with us and be apart of our lives as much as we want to be apart of hers.
The Poly Puzzler is a challenging one that requires a LOT of thoughtful consideration, honesty and communication. Merely being poly-minded isn't enough, but it is a start. Admitting what our deep down desires are is not an easy endeavor because we may try to convince ourselves: "Oh, we can do that." or "That's doable" when in fact it might be totally doable for the short term -- but after a year, will you still feel the same?
Lots to think about and lots to discuss during the course of our search.
(Special thanks to wenchalicious for inspiring the thought process that led to this blog. A good deep topic to contemplate.)
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Change is good....
...so goes the saying...
I started blogging on blogger back in 2002 and I'll be the first to admit that in the midst of my meandering Journey here ... there ... and yon ... I've been pretty resistant to the whole LJ experience. Not that I have anything against LJ, but when I just want to write down my thoughts -- blogger suited me just fine. LJ is much more for a community-feel to it and I completely understand its appeal.
That said.
I started dabbling a bit more over there and I'm starting to like it more. What's attracting me the most is the filtering mechanism because sometimes I just want to air out my thoughts to danae or to aislin or to both of them without publishing things to the entire world.
It's not that I'm trying to hold anything back -- it's just that some things do require at least a bit more focus. While I'm writing here - I am usually very careful with my verbiage to make sure that I'm within a certain frame of mind. On LJ - with the filters in place - I can run a bit more freely.
So while it might seem like I've abandoned my blogspot account - I do promise to try and do some cross-postings on here still as The Journey remains a significant part of where I've come in life. For those that are in the LJ realm -- please go ahead and check me out at http://lordspooner.livejournal.com
I'll see ya' over there, over here -- somewhere :)
I started blogging on blogger back in 2002 and I'll be the first to admit that in the midst of my meandering Journey here ... there ... and yon ... I've been pretty resistant to the whole LJ experience. Not that I have anything against LJ, but when I just want to write down my thoughts -- blogger suited me just fine. LJ is much more for a community-feel to it and I completely understand its appeal.
That said.
I started dabbling a bit more over there and I'm starting to like it more. What's attracting me the most is the filtering mechanism because sometimes I just want to air out my thoughts to danae or to aislin or to both of them without publishing things to the entire world.
It's not that I'm trying to hold anything back -- it's just that some things do require at least a bit more focus. While I'm writing here - I am usually very careful with my verbiage to make sure that I'm within a certain frame of mind. On LJ - with the filters in place - I can run a bit more freely.
So while it might seem like I've abandoned my blogspot account - I do promise to try and do some cross-postings on here still as The Journey remains a significant part of where I've come in life. For those that are in the LJ realm -- please go ahead and check me out at http://lordspooner.livejournal.com
I'll see ya' over there, over here -- somewhere :)
Thursday, February 26, 2009
The Evil of Fetishism
First -- a definition by Merriam:
danae has never came across a fetishist before she met me and to hear her say that made me incredibly uncomfortable because it just sounds completely freakish. All of a sudden I'm feeling very self-conscious again as I face the reality of: "I can't NOT engage sexually without the fetish, the image, the thought, the visual, the act..."
But I find that it's not a matter of preference.
For as long as I can remember, I've always had to have the visual in my head: the picture, the sensation, the "thing." And by admitting that - it seems so incredibly wrong. That's because whenever one uses the word "fetish" or "fetishist" there always seems to have the negative stereotypes like: "I can't orgasm until I smell stinky feet," or "I have to rub myself in Vicks vapo-rub just to get off..." Not that I'm trying to demean or disrespect those that have those particular fetishes -- for me, there's nothing "self-erotica" about it.
For instance: I love hoods. I love latex. I love tight shiny spandex. But I do not have a fetish of wearing hoods, of wearing latex or wearing tight shiny spandex. Nor do I wrap my cock with pantyhose and masturbate to that. All of my fetishes are engineered with a partner in mind. The visual, the scenario, the outline of my kinky thoughts are voraciously wrapped around another participant (and yes, multiples therein) so it's never solo act. Otherwise it would be simple to merely have the interaction with that particular fetish gear item and be happy as a clam. But, that's not what it's like for me.
Everyone is a little bit different though. Some fetishists merely need the "thing" with them without any other human contact. I can surmise that it probably has a lot to do with a lot of solo masturbation throughout the years -- creating the story in my mind so that I can relieve the tension in my body through an orgasm. Those images play an important part if terms of getting my body ready to cross over the point of no return.
But those mental images necessarily have to be complex in origin. It can be as simple and benign as just having a collar and leash, clothed, or not -- with the fixated item is the collar and leash. Other times it can be much more involved with having danae in a hood, tied spread eagle, nipple clamps, rope harness, naked except for a pair of satin gloves while she's being tormented with a hitachi wand and having her pussy spanked. It just depends.
Sometimes my fetish visions extend beyond the set of the scene itself. Things like the idea of extended play, permanency situations, objectification and modifications that can send me into orgasmic orbit!
There's no real rhyme to it - but it's always there.
Being a fetishist is not nearly as difficult as it is to be living with one. I acknowledge this. There's the perception that the *thing* is somehow more attractive than the person.
I know how that reads.
Ultimately I don't blame anyone who might have bad things to say about that.
It's hard to describe why my body doesn't react the same way other "normal" people. The only thing I can offer is that my brain simply won't let it. That's not to say the vanilla-side of making out doesn't turn me on. Without a doubt, I get very aroused with the touching and the kissing, but those things alone won't even take me near anything to the point of orgasm. Maybe it's an embedded requirement to have some sort of mental foreplay arranged in my head so that I can come quickly so that I don't wear down danae's arm or mouth.
My mind takes over at that point and sends me over the edge. This has been my life for as long back as I can remember.
Fetishists need to be aware of how our process affects those around us. As consuming our fetishes can be, there has to be a degree of awareness of how it affects the relationship. Understanding the basis of our fetish is the first step, learning to incorporate those fetishes with those who we want to be sexual with - is also important. But lastly -- as impossible as it might sound, fetishists have to come at least part way to appreciate the connection of one-on-one physical contact with our mates. Unless you're so absorbed into your fetish that you don't need the contact from the outside world -- then let's not forget the rewards for having excellent companionship.
Having someone who understands our fetishes is so incredibly wonderful! Don't waste that chance you have for companionship by living your life alone in the closet. It's simply not worth it in the end.
"an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression"In a discussion about fetishes, a question arose. At what point does a fetish cross the line from simply having an interest in something? For a fetishist, you're almost always crossing that line.
danae has never came across a fetishist before she met me and to hear her say that made me incredibly uncomfortable because it just sounds completely freakish. All of a sudden I'm feeling very self-conscious again as I face the reality of: "I can't NOT engage sexually without the fetish, the image, the thought, the visual, the act..."
But I find that it's not a matter of preference.
For as long as I can remember, I've always had to have the visual in my head: the picture, the sensation, the "thing." And by admitting that - it seems so incredibly wrong. That's because whenever one uses the word "fetish" or "fetishist" there always seems to have the negative stereotypes like: "I can't orgasm until I smell stinky feet," or "I have to rub myself in Vicks vapo-rub just to get off..." Not that I'm trying to demean or disrespect those that have those particular fetishes -- for me, there's nothing "self-erotica" about it.
For instance: I love hoods. I love latex. I love tight shiny spandex. But I do not have a fetish of wearing hoods, of wearing latex or wearing tight shiny spandex. Nor do I wrap my cock with pantyhose and masturbate to that. All of my fetishes are engineered with a partner in mind. The visual, the scenario, the outline of my kinky thoughts are voraciously wrapped around another participant (and yes, multiples therein) so it's never solo act. Otherwise it would be simple to merely have the interaction with that particular fetish gear item and be happy as a clam. But, that's not what it's like for me.
Everyone is a little bit different though. Some fetishists merely need the "thing" with them without any other human contact. I can surmise that it probably has a lot to do with a lot of solo masturbation throughout the years -- creating the story in my mind so that I can relieve the tension in my body through an orgasm. Those images play an important part if terms of getting my body ready to cross over the point of no return.
But those mental images necessarily have to be complex in origin. It can be as simple and benign as just having a collar and leash, clothed, or not -- with the fixated item is the collar and leash. Other times it can be much more involved with having danae in a hood, tied spread eagle, nipple clamps, rope harness, naked except for a pair of satin gloves while she's being tormented with a hitachi wand and having her pussy spanked. It just depends.
Sometimes my fetish visions extend beyond the set of the scene itself. Things like the idea of extended play, permanency situations, objectification and modifications that can send me into orgasmic orbit!
There's no real rhyme to it - but it's always there.
Being a fetishist is not nearly as difficult as it is to be living with one. I acknowledge this. There's the perception that the *thing* is somehow more attractive than the person.
I know how that reads.
Ultimately I don't blame anyone who might have bad things to say about that.
It's hard to describe why my body doesn't react the same way other "normal" people. The only thing I can offer is that my brain simply won't let it. That's not to say the vanilla-side of making out doesn't turn me on. Without a doubt, I get very aroused with the touching and the kissing, but those things alone won't even take me near anything to the point of orgasm. Maybe it's an embedded requirement to have some sort of mental foreplay arranged in my head so that I can come quickly so that I don't wear down danae's arm or mouth.
My mind takes over at that point and sends me over the edge. This has been my life for as long back as I can remember.
Fetishists need to be aware of how our process affects those around us. As consuming our fetishes can be, there has to be a degree of awareness of how it affects the relationship. Understanding the basis of our fetish is the first step, learning to incorporate those fetishes with those who we want to be sexual with - is also important. But lastly -- as impossible as it might sound, fetishists have to come at least part way to appreciate the connection of one-on-one physical contact with our mates. Unless you're so absorbed into your fetish that you don't need the contact from the outside world -- then let's not forget the rewards for having excellent companionship.
Having someone who understands our fetishes is so incredibly wonderful! Don't waste that chance you have for companionship by living your life alone in the closet. It's simply not worth it in the end.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
The Tapioca Poly Problem
I realize that there's a perception out there that everyone in the bdsm lifestyle "must therefore be poly...." *sighs*
Generalizations kill me.
Whoever slapped that label on all of us -- deserves a pretty hefty beating. Unfortunately, if it's a perception issue then I'm afraid there's nothing any of us can do about that. People will think however they want to think -- and that's that. But the over-generalized label is heavily flawed because:
for (1) one, it's inaccurate
for (2) two, it's a matter of choice between consenting adults.
Lastly (3), poly isn't for everyone - just as much as the lifestyle in general isn't for everyone.
It's really that simple.
Not everyone likes tapioca pudding -- so why does it have to be on everyone's tray in the buffet line?
Answer: It doesn't.
But then why are these folks that don't like tapioca pudding sneering those who partake in the tapioca pudding?
Ah, herein lies the rub. It's this kind of useless "us vs. them" bullshit that is entirely unnecessary. What is so incredibly difficult for some folks who simply can't respect the lifestyle choice of another? It's unfortunately not just a matter of respect as it nearly mimics the like of an all-out flame war where: the folks on "that" side try to dissuade, ridicule or even condemn poly folks from participating in THEIR lifestyle of choice. Conversely monogamous type people shouldn't be pressured or coerced that they HAVE TO BE poly minded. It's ridiculous to make someone they don't want to be -- so WHY?
C'mon folks, we're playing in the same sandbox. Play nice!
*sighs*
There's the fundamental basis of want, need and desire - that should at least be respected by both sides of the issue. We have to respect each other's path and realize that no one way is better than the other. It just happens to be right for *us* (you, me, the person sitting next to you, them) in that moment.
Period.
Whether your poly or monogamous -- what matters most is that you're on the path you choose to be on. Let the powers happen as they will just like is does with everything else in the lifestyle ... that's how it works.
Unfortunately the criticisms don't stop there as there are those that think that if you're engaging in a polyamorous dynamic - then you're somehow damaged for wanting to do so. Why is that? I can't help but think of all of the different ideological sources that lead folks to their conclusions about "the dangers of polyamorous relationships" in the first place. I do believe that there are always the horror stories that circulate like the one where:
"the Dominant sought to restore stability in the primary relationship by introducing a third person into the dynamic."
It's perfectly legitimate to ask the $64,000.00 question of "WHY?", what is the rationale and explanation for changing the dynamic to include another person? It's a straight forward issue - and hopefully absent of the warning bells in our scenario up above. Unfortunately it's instances like this - that don't help the perception of poly.
If a dynamic hasn't seriously considered all of the ramifications, hard work and possible avenues for the added dynamic -- then that situation may have more than a handful of stumbling blocks. Because when you consider the intricate nature of relationships between JUST two people -- those complexities multiply in triplicate in a multi-dimensional relationship. Every single one of the basic canons of our relationship principles are instantly amplified: honesty, communication, and trust. Even your typical play-partner arrangement has some degree of negotiation, contemplation and an exchange of thoughts, concerns, feelings and ideas. The main point is to ensure that the balance remains and doesn't suddenly teeter or shift.
Poly families that have successfully extended their dynamic to include others have worked extremely hard to make that happen. It takes a very solid foundation with continual maintenance on the basic tenets of relationships in order to make it work. It's unfortunate that there's the stereotype that all bdsm relationships are polyamorous -- because I do respect the monogamous-minded folks out there and I completely agree that they should be able to practice their monogamy as they wish.
They don't have to have tapioca if they don't want to -- but please maintain some civility to those of use who do want it.
Generalizations kill me.
Whoever slapped that label on all of us -- deserves a pretty hefty beating. Unfortunately, if it's a perception issue then I'm afraid there's nothing any of us can do about that. People will think however they want to think -- and that's that. But the over-generalized label is heavily flawed because:
for (1) one, it's inaccurate
for (2) two, it's a matter of choice between consenting adults.
Lastly (3), poly isn't for everyone - just as much as the lifestyle in general isn't for everyone.
It's really that simple.
Not everyone likes tapioca pudding -- so why does it have to be on everyone's tray in the buffet line?
Answer: It doesn't.
But then why are these folks that don't like tapioca pudding sneering those who partake in the tapioca pudding?
Ah, herein lies the rub. It's this kind of useless "us vs. them" bullshit that is entirely unnecessary. What is so incredibly difficult for some folks who simply can't respect the lifestyle choice of another? It's unfortunately not just a matter of respect as it nearly mimics the like of an all-out flame war where: the folks on "that" side try to dissuade, ridicule or even condemn poly folks from participating in THEIR lifestyle of choice. Conversely monogamous type people shouldn't be pressured or coerced that they HAVE TO BE poly minded. It's ridiculous to make someone they don't want to be -- so WHY?
C'mon folks, we're playing in the same sandbox. Play nice!
*sighs*
There's the fundamental basis of want, need and desire - that should at least be respected by both sides of the issue. We have to respect each other's path and realize that no one way is better than the other. It just happens to be right for *us* (you, me, the person sitting next to you, them) in that moment.
Period.
Whether your poly or monogamous -- what matters most is that you're on the path you choose to be on. Let the powers happen as they will just like is does with everything else in the lifestyle ... that's how it works.
Unfortunately the criticisms don't stop there as there are those that think that if you're engaging in a polyamorous dynamic - then you're somehow damaged for wanting to do so. Why is that? I can't help but think of all of the different ideological sources that lead folks to their conclusions about "the dangers of polyamorous relationships" in the first place. I do believe that there are always the horror stories that circulate like the one where:
It's perfectly legitimate to ask the $64,000.00 question of "WHY?", what is the rationale and explanation for changing the dynamic to include another person? It's a straight forward issue - and hopefully absent of the warning bells in our scenario up above. Unfortunately it's instances like this - that don't help the perception of poly.
If a dynamic hasn't seriously considered all of the ramifications, hard work and possible avenues for the added dynamic -- then that situation may have more than a handful of stumbling blocks. Because when you consider the intricate nature of relationships between JUST two people -- those complexities multiply in triplicate in a multi-dimensional relationship. Every single one of the basic canons of our relationship principles are instantly amplified: honesty, communication, and trust. Even your typical play-partner arrangement has some degree of negotiation, contemplation and an exchange of thoughts, concerns, feelings and ideas. The main point is to ensure that the balance remains and doesn't suddenly teeter or shift.
Poly families that have successfully extended their dynamic to include others have worked extremely hard to make that happen. It takes a very solid foundation with continual maintenance on the basic tenets of relationships in order to make it work. It's unfortunate that there's the stereotype that all bdsm relationships are polyamorous -- because I do respect the monogamous-minded folks out there and I completely agree that they should be able to practice their monogamy as they wish.
They don't have to have tapioca if they don't want to -- but please maintain some civility to those of use who do want it.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Adding a New Keyword Tag/Label Here....
Normally a subject line like this won't get a lot of attention, but I can assure you that the content below this sentence is probably going to catch your attention of some of you just a little bit.
The new keyword tag/label being introduced here is POLY because after resuming and ultimately concluding continuing discussions on the topic - our relationship has reached a solid point where we are ready to expand our dynamic. Yes, I am in the process of re-writing my profiles and starting the process of deciding what I want. So while this extension is new chapter for us - but it's one that has really been a long time in the making.
danae has repeatedly blogged about poly throughout most of her Journey and what it meant to her. In our various discussions spanning the last 6 years I've welcomed the prospect of perhaps someday making an addition to our dynamic, but most these discussions were mostly philosophical and practicality -- as couples generally do in their variable "what if" type talks that cover everything from "what's your favorite ice cream" to "what do you think about breath play.."
So the genesis of the concept around poly really started from the beginning of our relationship. We approached the situation with the necessary seriousness and contemplation that one would hope a major path decision like this would take. It wasn't until we started discussing it recently that we both came to the consensus that we're ready to move forward with it.
Okaaaaaaaaaay.... what does that mean? It means that starting right now, I am beginning the process of seeking other relationships outside of the one I currently have with danae. Other relationships can be defined as casual as an occasional play partner all the way to a deeper D/s possible M/s relationship. How that intertwines with my M/s relationship with danae depends on the dynamic that evolves over time. Obviously the casual play partners don't take the relationship exit off-ramp, but those interested in traveling down that road must remember the basic fundamental process in how relationships evolve in general.
A lot of discussions, a lot of getting to know one another, a lot of assessment of how the chemistry is and how the general feeling is between two people. danae will be a part of this process because I choose her to be apart of this process. she does have a say in all of this because she has a vested interest in what happens as well.
If you're wondering though "How does danae feel about all of this?" then look no further. she spells it out very plainly and if you have questions -- feel free to contact either of us: My email and her email
So you're reading post #1 with the new tag/label of POLY. It's not the first time I've blogged about poly" -- but I think you'll see the very gradual transition of thought to where we are today.
The new keyword tag/label being introduced here is POLY because after resuming and ultimately concluding continuing discussions on the topic - our relationship has reached a solid point where we are ready to expand our dynamic. Yes, I am in the process of re-writing my profiles and starting the process of deciding what I want. So while this extension is new chapter for us - but it's one that has really been a long time in the making.
danae has repeatedly blogged about poly throughout most of her Journey and what it meant to her. In our various discussions spanning the last 6 years I've welcomed the prospect of perhaps someday making an addition to our dynamic, but most these discussions were mostly philosophical and practicality -- as couples generally do in their variable "what if" type talks that cover everything from "what's your favorite ice cream" to "what do you think about breath play.."
So the genesis of the concept around poly really started from the beginning of our relationship. We approached the situation with the necessary seriousness and contemplation that one would hope a major path decision like this would take. It wasn't until we started discussing it recently that we both came to the consensus that we're ready to move forward with it.
Okaaaaaaaaaay.... what does that mean? It means that starting right now, I am beginning the process of seeking other relationships outside of the one I currently have with danae. Other relationships can be defined as casual as an occasional play partner all the way to a deeper D/s possible M/s relationship. How that intertwines with my M/s relationship with danae depends on the dynamic that evolves over time. Obviously the casual play partners don't take the relationship exit off-ramp, but those interested in traveling down that road must remember the basic fundamental process in how relationships evolve in general.
A lot of discussions, a lot of getting to know one another, a lot of assessment of how the chemistry is and how the general feeling is between two people. danae will be a part of this process because I choose her to be apart of this process. she does have a say in all of this because she has a vested interest in what happens as well.
If you're wondering though "How does danae feel about all of this?" then look no further. she spells it out very plainly and if you have questions -- feel free to contact either of us: My email and her email
So you're reading post #1 with the new tag/label of POLY. It's not the first time I've blogged about poly" -- but I think you'll see the very gradual transition of thought to where we are today.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
What Time Does to Us.....
I've been debating about whether to blog about this or not..
The whole Facebook phenomenon is just ... weird ...
I've reconnected with folks and overall it's been a nice experience.. Most folks seem genuine, they are helpful, funny and not like the rag-tag hormone driven kids I remember.. In a big way -- it's been nice to see all of us grown up.. Several people having kids, enjoying their respective hobbies, being successful, etc.. etc.. And I will admit -- it's kinda cool..
But yes - I did already blog about this this time last year.. Yet this is a little different..
Thanks to Facebook - I didn't have to expose myself to the unwanted type things that I anticipated would transpire ... and I'm very glad in a way that I didn't go.. For one - there would've been the very uncomfortable confrontation with an ex-girlfriend that would've been very unsavory.. But then there's the smattering of other things I'm finding out about my teenage cohorts:
- Some are Republicans ....
- Some are devout Christians ... which isn't that surprising in general, but a small selection of folks that found their religion -- when they were a bit of hell-raisers in school *is* a tad askew...
- Some of their interests are .... "wow"
And yet as I type this -- I'm not sure what I would've expected.. I guess it's comforting to know that some people grew up while others still seem like they're struggling a little bit.. I see a culmination of "how-we-got-here" moments and the totality of it is overwhelming I guess...
Okay - now I'm just rambling....
The whole Facebook phenomenon is just ... weird ...
I've reconnected with folks and overall it's been a nice experience.. Most folks seem genuine, they are helpful, funny and not like the rag-tag hormone driven kids I remember.. In a big way -- it's been nice to see all of us grown up.. Several people having kids, enjoying their respective hobbies, being successful, etc.. etc.. And I will admit -- it's kinda cool..
But yes - I did already blog about this this time last year.. Yet this is a little different..
Thanks to Facebook - I didn't have to expose myself to the unwanted type things that I anticipated would transpire ... and I'm very glad in a way that I didn't go.. For one - there would've been the very uncomfortable confrontation with an ex-girlfriend that would've been very unsavory.. But then there's the smattering of other things I'm finding out about my teenage cohorts:
- Some are Republicans ....
- Some are devout Christians ... which isn't that surprising in general, but a small selection of folks that found their religion -- when they were a bit of hell-raisers in school *is* a tad askew...
- Some of their interests are .... "wow"
And yet as I type this -- I'm not sure what I would've expected.. I guess it's comforting to know that some people grew up while others still seem like they're struggling a little bit.. I see a culmination of "how-we-got-here" moments and the totality of it is overwhelming I guess...
Okay - now I'm just rambling....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
