Girlfriend wants me to dominate another girl

[PhillipeJavert]

I've had a few relationships which involved BDSM in the past and I've come to accept it as something that I enjoy quite a bit and that is an important part of my sex life. Recently, my girlfriend and I have been talking about some of my past experiences dominating past girlfriends and sexual partners. We've both enjoyed being both dominant and submissive with each other. I have some more intense dominant desires (whipping with a belt, pet play, humiliation, etc.) which don't necessarily get indulged in our relationship, and she finds the idea of me dominating another woman and telling her about it later very attractive and doesn't in principle object to my having sexual needs met elsewhere. That is an interesting proposition, to say the least. I'm considering looking for another partner. I'm thinking over both the ethical and practical implications of this and also have to confess that the prospect is more than a bit intriguing. I'd be curious to have the thoughts of the people on this forum. Your input?

 

[VelvetDarkness]

Master and I have been seeking a third to play with on and off for months. The lucky lady would be submissive to Master but could either be a co-submissive with me or dominant over me, we wouldn't mind either way.

The idea started out because I've always had a strong bi streak and also because Master has the usual fantasies about threesomes and having 2 pretty subs to order around and put on a show for him.

More recently however, our talk has moved in other directions. Master has talked about binding me and forcing me to watch while he has sex with another girl. I'm open to the idea. He hasn't expressed a wish to see someone else when I'm not there and I think that for me, something like that would take time and trust. Theoretically, I could not prevent him because I don't have that authority but he wouldn't just go off and do as he pleases with no thought for how it might affect me. He wants it to be a voyage of discovery for both of us.

If you're going to open up your relationship you need a solid foundation of respect and trust. If you're going to see another girl without your gf present, does that then give her the freedom to play with other people? Is she bi/curious to any degree or does she have no interest in a threesome?

If you do this, get your ground rules crystal clear and ensure that necessary precautions are taken regarding STDs and birth control. Make sure communication is completely open and if you do see another woman, take care to ensure that your gf isn't neglected in any way or left feeling superfluous at any time. See if your gf wants to meet the girl. She may not but she should be offered the opportunity.

 

[twysted73]

Slippery slope.

If she's truly secure with herself, with you and with the situation....so long as "Panic-all stop phrases" are in place so noone's feelings get pushed to the wayside......then good luck and I hope the best for you.


Velvet...you sauce bi-minx.

 

[Etoile]

Polyamory is a very big sticky thorny issue. I would suggest you don't look for another *relationship* yet but rather look for a ONE TIME play session and see how your girlfriend feels after that. If that goes well, then start looking for someone to be a long term thing. But very often people like the idea of polyamory but not the reality.

 

[WriterDom]

But very often people like the idea of polyamory but not the reality.

That's true for a lot of things.

 

[PhillipeJavert]

Polyamory is a very big sticky thorny issue. I would suggest you don't look for another *relationship* yet but rather look for a ONE TIME play session and see how your girlfriend feels after that. If that goes well, then start looking for someone to be a long term thing. But very often people like the idea of polyamory but not the reality.

I'm actually not really looking for polyamory. I don't feel comfortable with that myself and it clashes with my values. I'm more looking for a one time play session or perhaps a casual sexual relationship with a friend that doesn't rise to the level of another romance or committed relationship. Of course, the question arises of how to find that, but I'm not looking for a new relationship by any means.

 

[Marquis]

Telling my primary partner about how I dominate other women is a major fetish of mine that I don't really get to indulge in my current relationship.

I say don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[VelvetDarkness]

I'm actually not really looking for polyamory. I don't feel comfortable with that myself and it clashes with my values. I'm more looking for a one time play session or perhaps a casual sexual relationship with a friend that doesn't rise to the level of another romance or committed relationship. Of course, the question arises of how to find that, but I'm not looking for a new relationship by any means.

I'm sorry but I find that cute. Polyamory clashes with your values but casual fucks don't? That's a rather ignorant opinion. Love & commitment should always be valued, especially in this day and age.

 

[Marquis]

I'm sorry but I find that cute. Polyamory clashes with your values but casual fucks don't? That's a rather ignorant opinion.

Why?

They don't have to be your values.

 

[JMohegan]

In a relationship context, I value one-on-one intimacy. Therefore, polyamory clashes with my own personal values.

Outside of a relationship context, I have no problem with casual fucking.

 

[Marquis]

In a relationship context, I value one-on-one intimacy. Therefore, polyamory clashes with my own personal values.

Well, theoretically polyamory shouldn't come at the expense of the one-on-one intimacy between the individual members that practice it.

Again, in theory.

 

[JMohegan]

Well, theoretically polyamory shouldn't come at the expense of the one-on-one intimacy between the individual members that practice it.

Again, in theory.

Like anything else, this is a matter of personal perspective.

 

[Etoile]

Well, theoretically polyamory shouldn't come at the expense of the one-on-one intimacy between the individual members that practice it.

Again, in theory.

I agree completely. I am in that very situation myself, and I would not say this is a healthy example of polyamory. An example, but not a good one. Polyamory should not involve emotional pain on anybody's part. IMNSHO, if somebody's hurt by the arrangement, it's not polyamory anymore, it's some messed up kind of thing. Believe me, I know.

 

[JMohegan]

My parents had two children. Without a shadow of a doubt, I know that they've always loved both of us.

But there were times, growing up, when my ball game conflicted with my sister's ballet recital and they couldn't attend both, or when my sister was acting out and catching grief for it and the distraction meant that what I did slipped under the radar, and so on.

In a parent/child context, I think that division of time, attention, and commitment is usually healthy.

But in an adult intimate partnership context, part of what I mean when I say that I value one-on-one intimacy is that I value full time, attention, and commitment from & to a partner. That doesn't mean I think polyamory if wrong, or flawed, or unhealthy. It just means I'm not interested.

The main point here is: valuing poly doesn't make someone ignorant, but valuing monogamy doesn't make someone ignorant, either.

 

[Marquis]

Valuing monogamy definitely does not make someone ignorant.

 

[intothewoods]

I'm sorry but I find that cute. Polyamory clashes with your values but casual fucks don't? That's a rather ignorant opinion. Love & commitment should always be valued, especially in this day and age.

Partnered non-monogamy is the label that Tristan Tarmino has applied to this model. I know a few non-monogamous couples who have the rule that their outside relationships are not to rise to the level of their primary relationship. There are a number of reasons why this might make sense for a couple. I don't think there's any reason why this type of relationship is less valid than polyamory.

In a parent/child context, I think that division of time, attention, and commitment is usually healthy.

But in an adult intimate partnership context, part of what I mean when I say that I value one-on-one intimacy is that I value full time, attention, and commitment from & to a partner.

This is something I used to puzzle over. I assume you mean you value full romantic relationship attention and commitment but have no issue with your partner having a deep friendship or interest outside of the relationship. If that diverted focus and attention is okay and healthy, is a romantic relationship so different? The obvious answer is yes, but it's possible to divert a lot of attention from your partner in all sorts of non-sexual or romantic ways.

I have a number of friends who don't really get the friend - lover distinction. I'm attracted to you, so there's no reason I shouldn't fuck you, etc. At their core, they would happily fuck everyone they are attracted to. I'm not criticizing them. I find it interesting that some people feel like this and some don't. I put people in categories. If you're my friend, you're my friend. Sometimes it seems like an exciting prospect to shatter the boundaries but then when push comes to shove that reality is confusing and a little frightening to me because I don't know what the rules are.

 

[Etoile]

Partnered non-monogamy is the label that Tristan Tarmino has applied to this model. I know a few non-monogamous couples who have the rule that their outside relationships are not to rise to the level of their primary relationship. There are a number of reasons why this might make sense for a couple. I don't think there's any reason why this type of relationship is less valid than polamory.

*ding ding ding*

I agree.

 

[intothewoods]

*ding ding ding*

I agree.

minus the typo. Polamory. Many polar bear loves.

 

[Etoile]

minus the typo. Polamory. Many polar bear loves.

Actually, according to this:

Polar bears aren't monogamous animals -- a strong male might impregnate several females in one season.

 

[JMohegan]

This is something I used to puzzle over. I assume you mean you value full romantic relationship attention and commitment but have no issue with your partner having a deep friendship or interest outside of the relationship. If that diverted focus and attention is okay and healthy, is a romantic relationship so different? The obvious answer is yes, but it's possible to divert a lot of attention from your partner in all sorts of non-sexual or romantic ways.

I have a number of friends who don't really get the friend - lover distinction. I'm attracted to you, so there's no reason I shouldn't fuck you, etc. At their core, they would happily fuck everyone they are attracted to. I'm not criticizing them. I find it interesting that some people feel like this and some don't. I put people in categories. If you're my friend, you're my friend. Sometimes it seems like an exciting prospect to shatter the boundaries but then when push comes to shove that reality is confusing and a little frightening to me because I don't know what the rules are.

When I talk about an "intimate relationship," for me, I mean a monogamous, committed relationship similar to mainstream romantic pairings, with the added factor of overtly expressed D/s.

Yes, I understand that it's possible to divert attention away from your partner in all sorts of non-intimate relationship ways. Jobs, friends, family, community service, athletics, and so on - that all adds up to a lot. But the focus, depth, and scope of an intimate relationship is, for me, best served in a one-on-one construct. I have zero desire to hang out with 2 subs at once, and zero desire to cut intimate relationship time & attention with an individual partner in half.

Casual fucking is something I've done many, many times with no emotional impact at all. I've never fucked a friend before, and am fairly certain I never would.

 

[Marquis]

So honestly JMo, you've never had threesome fantasies, or anything along those lines?

 

[JMohegan]

So honestly JMo, you've never had threesome fantasies, or anything along those lines?

In a relationship context, no. It's just not my thing.

Casual fucking? Back in my wild and crazy college days, I had plenty of multiple encounters. I found them entertaining, yes.

 

[intothewoods]

In a relationship context, no. It's just not my thing.

Casual fucking? Back in my wild and crazy college days, I had plenty of multiple encounters. I found them entertaining, yes.

Any m-m-f?

 

[midwestyankee]

Any m-m-f?

You're incorrigible - and I love it!

 

[intothewoods]

You're incorrigible - and I love it!

What? I didn't add - tell us all the details, speaking slowly and sparing no detail.