BDSM vs Lovemaking

[BiBunny]

Of course it can, I have no question about that. The puzzle is how a person can have a vanilla relationship and a BDSM relationship going on simultaneously, with 2 separate individuals. How is that not adultery? Does consensuality on the part of everyone involved turn it into some kind of polyandry and therefore not adultery?

Am I confused, or what? Or am I imposing evaluative labels on things that most folks around here would not want to label in that way?

The difference between cheating and polyamorous relationships is the knowledge and consent of everyone involved.

 

[BonnyBlue]

A vanilla and BDSM relationship can work simultaneously. The quirk is whether they know about each other.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Cheating means breaking faith.

If you and your SO made a pact to cleave unto each other, then-- fucking someone else is cheating.

if your relationship does not include that codicil, then fucking someone else is not cheating.

If you and your SO made a pact to guard your family's meager financial resources, then making an impulse purchase is cheating.

If neither of you feel that spending money is that big a deal, then buying the guitar, the Rolex, the spa vacation is not cheating.

Admittedly the first one is much more widely regarded as cheating than the second, but selfish spending is why I walked out of my marriage.

Many people on these boards do commit adultery. They deal with that. it's not our place to censure them. Those are not our lives to lead.

 

[His_pet_slut]

Of course it can, I have no question about that. The puzzle is how a person can have a vanilla relationship and a BDSM relationship going on simultaneously, with 2 separate individuals. How is that not adultery? Does consensuality on the part of everyone involved turn it into some kind of polyandry and therefore not adultery?

Am I confused, or what? Or am I imposing evaluative labels on things that most folks around here would not want to label in that way?

Yes, you are imposing evaluative labels. Adultery is a concept related to religion. If a couple or group of people have made the consensual decision to not apply those religious constructs to their sexual and/or relationship structure, there is no adultery.

 

[FurryFury]

If everyone knows and consents it is a sort of polyandry.

Otherwise it's cheating.

FF

Of course it can, I have no question about that. The puzzle is how a person can have a vanilla relationship and a BDSM relationship going on simultaneously, with 2 separate individuals. How is that not adultery? Does consensuality on the part of everyone involved turn it into some kind of polyandry and therefore not adultery?

Am I confused, or what? Or am I imposing evaluative labels on things that most folks around here would not want to label in that way?

 

[Azalea]

Cheating means breaking faith.

If you and your SO made a pact to cleave unto each other, then-- fucking someone else is cheating.

if your relationship does not include that codicil, then fucking someone else is not cheating.

If you and your SO made a pact to guard your family's meager financial resources, then making an impulse purchase is cheating.

If neither of you feel that spending money is that big a deal, then buying the guitar, the Rolex, the spa vacation is not cheating.

Admittedly the first one is much more widely regarded as cheating than the second, but selfish spending is why I walked out of my marriage.

Many people on these boards do commit adultery. They deal with that. it's not our place to censure them. Those are not our lives to lead.

I agree absolutely. It is no one's place to judge how others work their lives out. And I certainly don't want to give the impression that I do that. My goal is to understand how people work these things out psychologically.

By the way......the thing about the spending being cheating......man, you've convicted me with that something heavy. You have no idea what you've started in my head. I do think money destroys more marriages than any kind of sexual cheating.

 

[CutieMouse]

And there's the total mystery to me.....that you have a wife and a sub at the same time. I don't understand it. But then, I come from a background where sex can only be properly coupled with love. That's the hangup. My psyche is really trying to wrap itself around the other possibility.......that sometimes, as someone above said, sex is just "fucking."

To a significant extent, I still live in a world where sex = love. I absolutely, positively refuse to fuck someone unless we have a rock solid friendship. I mean the kind of friendship where we can be having a beer and he says "Sooo... is this ever going anywhere past 'just friends'?" and I can say "Nope. Not a chance in hell"... and he sticks around anyway. (That conversation actually ended up eventually becoming a year long intimate relationship that is currently in a weird gray zone of weirdness...) Anyway, my point is that I have to have a deep affection for / connection to / love of the men in my life in order for things to become intimate. There has to be a generous amount of familial, friendly, or romantic love for things to properly "click". That means it's never (okay, very very rarely) "just fucking". And the few times it is "just fucking" I always find myself thinking "WTH am I doing here? Good lord this man doesn't understand how I work at all... crap I need to do laundry... the gas bill is late... oh dear... he must think that's his signature move... oh good he's finished..." Very awkward.

I'm going to risk being offensive, but in my early 20's I was convinced that I could never separate sex and love, my partner then would be my partner forever and sex was really the function of intense romantic love, always end stop.

Some of us stay there, that's fine. Some don't. Some people seriously subsist on meat and potatoes forever and aren't missing anything.

in my 20s, I thought I HAD to be married to have sex. I also thought it was somehow wrong, or sinful, or a sign that something was wrong with me that I liked sex more than my husband because good girls [wives] don't want to do that [sick, perverted, blahblahblah]. The Men™ are a very fluid, evolving thing that I haven't hidden from anyone over the last year-ish, but I haven't shoved it in anyone's face, either. Which means I get questions about which one I actually love [both], what will I do if one asks me to choose between them [WTF? Why would they do that?], or (like tonight) comments about how someone really hopes that someday I'll feel safe enough to accept that I only need/want one of them and settle down - live together, etc [jesus.christ.no. Next door? Yes. Together? Fuck no.].

My views of love/friendship/sex have shifted over the last two decades. I used to think sex HAD to involve all the fireworks and unicorns and marriage type feelings, or it was bad. These days it's more like if you're cool enough to be part of my very very very small inner circle, odds are good that sex is on the table. It isn't this holy, romanticized ideal anymore... it's a continuation of the care, respect, trust, sharing we experience as friends. (Gawd I sound like such a hippie...)

Of course it can, I have no question about that. The puzzle is how a person can have a vanilla relationship and a BDSM relationship going on simultaneously, with 2 separate individuals. How is that not adultery? Does consensuality on the part of everyone involved turn it into some kind of polyandry and therefore not adultery?

Am I confused, or what? Or am I imposing evaluative labels on things that most folks around here would not want to label in that way?

I first dated J about 2½ years ago; we ended things after a few months but stayed friends.

About 18 months ago, I met J. We became friends, and eventually lovers. (He lives out of state and is only in town once or twice a month.)

A little over 12 months ago, the "first" J suggested we give things another try. I told him I had an intimate friendship with the "second" J, but was willing to consider everyone's feelings in the matter. The one who lives here, is thrilled that I have another supportive, loving person in my life who makes me happy. The one who lives out of state is thrilled that I have someone here who is really really good for me. If anything shifts, or changes, or new developments occur with one, I discuss it with the other. The only rule they each have is that the other can stay *as long as he continues to make my life better* [emotionally, physically, mentally, spiritually, etc]. If something ever happens with one that the other disapproves of, I'll [we'll] address it. I'm still hoping to get them in the same room at some point... they have a hell of a lot in common. (Which probably explains why I love both of them as much as I do. LOL)

There is no infidelity, or adultery, or cheating, because everyone's on the same page/we've established loose boundaries that everyone agrees to. They each actually make a point to ask about the other, and kind of check in to make sure the other relationship is functioning properly. It's been a fascinating ride...

 

[Azalea]

Cutie mouse, you totally fascinate me.......and there's nothing wrong with a bit of "hippieness" kicking in. I'm a child of the 60's, sweetie. Hell, I married a hippie, okay?

Anyway.....you have me in awe with your willingness to deal with my questions in such a fearlessly open, honest way. You just have me wanting to sit down with you over coffee or tea and talk.....and talk and talk. Thank you.

 

[His_pet_slut]

In my case, I have been married for over 2 decades. Our marriage always included very select others in our bed, and by that I do mean very select. I may be a slut, but I'm a damn picky slut and if I don't want to share a meal or a snuggle on the sofa while listening to music with you, I sure as heck don't want to have sex with you.

BDSM was not an overt part of things other than some spanking and occasional real rough sex. I discovered BDSM and began exploring it in detail about 7 years ago and it was like a light coming on. My spouse tried to fulfill the role of Dom and it was a fiasco. We separated briefly. Got back together and then he became significantly ill. When that happened, all outside sexual activity other than a strictly online relationship stopped. As my husband's illness progressed, the physical side of our relationship pretty well completely ended. He knows me and he knows I am a sexual, sensual creature. One night several years ago he told me to find someone to fulfill those needs, but to be safe about it all. He also asked that I not give him details or rub his nose in it, so to speak...so, I now have my relationship with M~ and he fully knows my situation. Is it ideal? No, but it is working and I am as happy as one can be when their partner and best friend has become someone you really don't know any longer and is slowly dying.

 

[Azalea]

I am fortunate that my husband is still cancer free after having his pancreas removed in 2003.......but all of the stuff surrounding that has greatly affected our sexual relationship. We are trying to find our way back to one another, and it's a very slow process.
My heart feels broken for you both. How he must love you.

 

[njlauren]

Azalea-
I think the answer is to realize that everyone sees things through their own view. I more then understand your question about how someone can be,let's say married to the person they love, and yet also had a bd/sm relationship outside the marriage,because of the obvious thing of having a relationship outside the primary one.

I can't speak on that one myself, I don't think I could ever do that, but I have known more then a few people who do, and the basic answer is they see what they are doing as part of their primary relationship and they have worked out the boundary issues and such. For the mates who are vanilla that I have talked to (why would I ask? Because quite honestly I had the same question you did) they said they recognized it was a facet of their partner they couldn't do, and they realized it help fulfill them. One person gave me a kind of weird analogy, it is kind of like having a mate who is an avid golfer and giving them the time and space to do it, when you yourself can't stand it...obviously imperfect, but it is about meeting a need/desire.

Then the question comes, if such a thing involves sex (I am talking penetrative sex, like let's say a female sub with a male dom where her funny is vanilla), how can they stand it? Won't the hubby worry? And the answer is yes it is sex, albeit in a different form, and that comes down to truth quite honestly. If the husband believes the bd/sm relationship doesn't threaten the primary one, that the love the sub has for the domme is very different then the love for him (roughly analogous to the love a wife might have for a male friend I guess), that their relationship is the bd/sm one and is different and doesn't threaten the marriage, it can work. The ones I have seen, whether it is a dom or sub outside the primary relationship, generally have guidelines, boundaries, rules similar to what a D/s does. For example, the primary relationship takes precedence over the BD/SM one (none of this you see in stories where Master calls I go kind of thing) unless the husband has said that is okay; or things like when the sub goes and visits the dom or the dom visits the sub, no sleeping over allowed, or it is limited to some times of the year, etc...

It is like an open relationship or a swinging one, it comes down to trust and communication and willingness. Quite honestly, it also takes the person outside the primary relationship, dominant or submissive, to realize that they are with someone who does have a primary relationship and respects it and if they thought the person they were in the BD/SM-D/s with was jeopardizing it they would back off or otherwise call a time out (and yes, I have known some people who have done this, not wanting to break up the primary one...).

Is it cheating? No, not if it is honest, open and agreed to. Is it adultery? If you take the definition of Judeo/Christian/Islamic circles, then yes, because there is sex outside the marriage...do I consider it so? No, not if the parties agree to that (and I don't really give a crap about what the wedding vows said or didn't say, to be honest, those vows were written a long time ago if standard ones, and came from the church and such. Among other things, when you get married most people tend to be young and still not fully formed as people, you change, and the vows you took 10 years before may not match the people you are today; in a sense what defines the marriage is what is in the people's hearts and minds that they share with each other; if the mate is okay with their spouse having a bdsm relationship outside the marriage, then it isn't adultery per se.

I guess the way I would sum it up, based on what I have seen, is that the two relationships, the primary marital one let's say (or cohabiting, whatever) and the bd/sm ones are totally different, in emotional scope, feelings and so forth, enough so that for the people involved there is no threat. Again, not saying I could ever do something like that, my bd.sm has been within my primary relationship, other then playing at a play party that was casual and no sex involved other then sensation play/bondage, but I sort of understand why it happens like that. I do wonder how the BD/SM one for the married person involved doesn't affect the primary one (looking from my view, not intellectually), how for example the sub doesn't end up getting strong feelings for the dominant, since bd/sm can be in some ways more intimate then vanilla sex and also more emotionally fired up, but apparently people who do this are able to do so.

 

[laceNlthrgrrl]

Where do the two intersect?
I am still struggling with the idea of sex that is not lovemaking.
I am also still trying to figure out how one can have a lovemaking partner at the same time as a different Dom/Domme or sub.

Does BDSM sex ever evolve into lovemaking? Or is the sex a vehicle for the playing out of specific psychological needs, divorced from love?

So many queries.

Sex can be 'just sex' in the sense of touching/arousal/penetration without all of the emotional trappings that are usually considered to be 'lovemaking.' It's the same as fuckbuddies or friends with benefits. You get to get off with someone for whom you have some sort of regard, without all the hearts 'n flowers stuff. OR with someone for whom you have a deep enough trust to submit to them.

Sometimes the BDSM part is separate simply because the romantic partner can't deal with all of the aspects of their SO's needs. ("I love you, I can't hurt you!") Hopefully one gets one's other needs met with the knowledge/consent of the affectionate partner, but not necessarily. (Murkier and murkier, eh?)

I've experienced really hot BDSM that devolved into lovemaking, but because of the context it left me seriously wanting. I've experienced the opposite and other variations, as well.

For myself, I think of BDSM and lovemaking as separate things. Sex may or may not intersect with the BDSM. Sometimes I just really want to be whipped about. (Endorphines are delicious, after all.) Sometimes, after a shitty day, I just want some tea and a snuggle. (I might get either, none, or both.)

 

[desertslave]

Of course it can, I have no question about that. The puzzle is how a person can have a vanilla relationship and a BDSM relationship going on simultaneously, with 2 separate individuals. How is that not adultery? Does consensuality on the part of everyone involved turn it into some kind of polyandry and therefore not adultery?

Am I confused, or what? Or am I imposing evaluative labels on things that most folks around here would not want to label in that way?

Okay, first, adultery only happens if the married person is satisfying their different grooves with different people. If marriage isn't on the list, obviously adultery doesn't apply. That part is really just labels.

Now that that's out of the way I think it's definitely possible to have different needs satisfied by different people. Note that I didn't say it's not complicated, only possible.

I've been in a semi-three-way like that, with a 'nilla BF and a Dom-type. In the long run, I don't think any of us was completely satisfied, but it worked for a while.

NOW I'm married to my Sir. We've had our ups and downs, our flourishes and dry spells. Our core is love and trust. Sometimes it gets expressed by floggings, sometimes by snuggles. I like this better. It's not always a perfect balance, but we're definitely on a sliding scale.

 

[His_pet_slut]

I am fortunate that my husband is still cancer free after having his pancreas removed in 2003.......but all of the stuff surrounding that has greatly affected our sexual relationship. We are trying to find our way back to one another, and it's a very slow process.
My heart feels broken for you both. How he must love you.

Yes, he does love me very much and I do him. Nothing will ever change that. As far as what M~ and I do? I would not categorize our relationship as being based on love, but there is certainly a deep affection on both sides.

 

[josephsmit1987]

Fair enough, and that is an awesome post

Joseph Smith

 

[the captians wench]

To a significant extent, I still live in a world where sex = love. I absolutely, positively refuse to fuck someone unless we have a rock solid friendship. I mean the kind of friendship where we can be having a beer and he says "Sooo... is this ever going anywhere past 'just friends'?" and I can say "Nope. Not a chance in hell"... and he sticks around anyway. (That conversation actually ended up eventually becoming a year long intimate relationship that is currently in a weird gray zone of weirdness...) Anyway, my point is that I have to have a deep affection for / connection to / love of the men in my life in order for things to become intimate. There has to be a generous amount of familial, friendly, or romantic love for things to properly "click". That means it's never (okay, very very rarely) "just fucking". And the few times it is "just fucking" I always find myself thinking "WTH am I doing here? Good lord this man doesn't understand how I work at all... crap I need to do laundry... the gas bill is late... oh dear... he must think that's his signature move... oh good he's finished..." Very awkward.



in my 20s, I thought I HAD to be married to have sex. I also thought it was somehow wrong, or sinful, or a sign that something was wrong with me that I liked sex more than my husband because good girls [wives] don't want to do that [sick, perverted, blahblahblah]. The Men™ are a very fluid, evolving thing that I haven't hidden from anyone over the last year-ish, but I haven't shoved it in anyone's face, either. Which means I get questions about which one I actually love [both], what will I do if one asks me to choose between them [WTF? Why would they do that?], or (like tonight) comments about how someone really hopes that someday I'll feel safe enough to accept that I only need/want one of them and settle down - live together, etc [jesus.christ.no. Next door? Yes. Together? Fuck no.].

My views of love/friendship/sex have shifted over the last two decades. I used to think sex HAD to involve all the fireworks and unicorns and marriage type feelings, or it was bad. These days it's more like if you're cool enough to be part of my very very very small inner circle, odds are good that sex is on the table. It isn't this holy, romanticized ideal anymore... it's a continuation of the care, respect, trust, sharing we experience as friends. (Gawd I sound like such a hippie...)



I first dated J about 2½ years ago; we ended things after a few months but stayed friends.

About 18 months ago, I met J. We became friends, and eventually lovers. (He lives out of state and is only in town once or twice a month.)

A little over 12 months ago, the "first" J suggested we give things another try. I told him I had an intimate friendship with the "second" J, but was willing to consider everyone's feelings in the matter. The one who lives here, is thrilled that I have another supportive, loving person in my life who makes me happy. The one who lives out of state is thrilled that I have someone here who is really really good for me. If anything shifts, or changes, or new developments occur with one, I discuss it with the other. The only rule they each have is that the other can stay *as long as he continues to make my life better* [emotionally, physically, mentally, spiritually, etc]. If something ever happens with one that the other disapproves of, I'll [we'll] address it. I'm still hoping to get them in the same room at some point... they have a hell of a lot in common. (Which probably explains why I love both of them as much as I do. LOL)

There is no infidelity, or adultery, or cheating, because everyone's on the same page/we've established loose boundaries that everyone agrees to. They each actually make a point to ask about the other, and kind of check in to make sure the other relationship is functioning properly. It's been a fascinating ride...

This is one of the many reasons I think of CM as my big sister I never had.

I've had very simular situations.

Question for you CM, if you don't mind:

Of course I've had people ask the same questions you have, Jounar even poised a comment to me that has me really thinking and evaluating my life. (Namely "have I been putting my life on hold?" Yeah, in some areas and "why?" which was not the answer I expected it to be or he was thinking it would be.)

But that's not really my question. My question is, at what point do you think you should mention these other relationships to a new potential relationship?

Of course I have Jounar, whom I love dearly, and a couple that I can't imagine not being in my life in some way. So when I decided to date again, I would bring up the fact that these people are very important to me right off, and I've had it said to me that that doesn't give this poor new guy a fighting chance. I think I'm just being fair, some say I'm being too honest.

I guess part of it is I have to decide what it is I want out of well any of it....

 

[JMohegan]

My question is, at what point do you think you should mention these other relationships to a new potential relationship?

Friendships with former lovers? No problem. Current lovers, existing D/s relationships, and/or existing intimate play partners? Those are deal killers for me personally.

So I'd vote for mentioning any ongoing lover, D/s relationship, or play partner, as soon as the issue comes up. Give an honest response to the typical "Are you seeing anyone?" or "Got a boyfriend?" type of question. Your tone can be casual, rather than dramatic or ominous, but if you're not honest then you're just wasting everyone's time. This is a basic compatibility thing.

 

[lothwen]

personally, I think that it's "Making love" when you're with somebody that you love, whether the sex is gentle and sensual, or fast and passionate, or has some elements of BDSM.

So I'd vote for mentioning any ongoing lover, D/s relationship, or play partner, as soon as the issue comes up. Give an honest response to the typical "Are you seeing anyone?" or "Got a boyfriend?" type of question. Your tone can be casual, rather than dramatic or ominous, but if you're not honest then you're just wasting everyone's time. This is a basic compatibility thing.

I completely agree with this. I had a fling with this guy and we both said that it wouldn't be serious, but I asked him to please let me know if he was having sex with anybody else (I wasn't) not because I would have hard feelings about it, but because I would approach our situation differently-like insisting he wear a condom, for example.

 

[subwannabe]

Azalea: Maybe I missed it but I'm not sure if you are asking about your relationship with one person or two or maybe thinking of two but haven't gotten there yet. Sorry about your husband. Anyway, to answer your question. In my opinion, lovemaking and BDSM are two different things. Again, in my opinion, lovemaking seems to indicate a tender loving sexual relationship, one where one doesn't smack the other with a riding crop, etc. Now I'm not saying you can't have both with the same person. I'm just saying that at times you can "make love" to your spouse or SO and at other times you can have a very fulfilling sexual BDSM relationship. I don't think you can do both at the same exact time but you can take turns doing both with the same person. This is just my opinion regarding one on one relationships. Right now I'm not addressing relationships where more than two people are involved but, to some extent, I believe my same thoughts would still apply to other situations, assuming that there is agreement all of the way around.

 

[Himself128]

The difference between cheating and polyamorous relationships is the knowledge and consent of everyone involved.

Well said.

 

[Netzach]

This is one of the many reasons I think of CM as my big sister I never had.

I've had very simular situations.

Question for you CM, if you don't mind:

Of course I've had people ask the same questions you have, Jounar even poised a comment to me that has me really thinking and evaluating my life. (Namely "have I been putting my life on hold?" Yeah, in some areas and "why?" which was not the answer I expected it to be or he was thinking it would be.)

But that's not really my question. My question is, at what point do you think you should mention these other relationships to a new potential relationship?

Of course I have Jounar, whom I love dearly, and a couple that I can't imagine not being in my life in some way. So when I decided to date again, I would bring up the fact that these people are very important to me right off, and I've had it said to me that that doesn't give this poor new guy a fighting chance. I think I'm just being fair, some say I'm being too honest.

I guess part of it is I have to decide what it is I want out of well any of it....

I did it on planning the first date with M. Literally. "Here's what it is, I have a tryst every week, I'm not planning on stopping, it's never going to be a ride into the sunset ending, but I'm not stopping either. You want to hang, great, you don't, I'm into friends."

Spares a LOT of headache. And some people are surprisingly into complicated math, much to my delight.

FWIW, I was SURE no one would ever really be able to handle it, and comfortable being told "no way." It's not the case at all, there are a lot of weird people with weird needs out there.

 

[CutieMouse]

This is one of the many reasons I think of CM as my big sister I never had.

Question for you CM, if you don't mind:

Of course I've had people ask the same questions you have, Jounar even poised a comment to me that has me really thinking and evaluating my life. (Namely "have I been putting my life on hold?" Yeah, in some areas and "why?" which was not the answer I expected it to be or he was thinking it would be.)

But that's not really my question. My question is, at what point do you think you should mention these other relationships to a new potential relationship?

Of course I have Jounar, whom I love dearly, and a couple that I can't imagine not being in my life in some way. So when I decided to date again, I would bring up the fact that these people are very important to me right off, and I've had it said to me that that doesn't give this poor new guy a fighting chance. I think I'm just being fair, some say I'm being too honest.

I guess part of it is I have to decide what it is I want out of well any of it....

So I'd vote for mentioning any ongoing lover, D/s relationship, or play partner, as soon as the issue comes up. Give an honest response to the typical "Are you seeing anyone?" or "Got a boyfriend?" type of question. Your tone can be casual, rather than dramatic or ominous, but if you're not honest then you're just wasting everyone's time. This is a basic compatibility thing.

I did it on planning the first date with M. Literally. "Here's what it is, I have a tryst every week, I'm not planning on stopping, it's never going to be a ride into the sunset ending, but I'm not stopping either. You want to hang, great, you don't, I'm into friends."

Spares a LOT of headache. And some people are surprisingly into complicated math, much to my delight.

FWIW, I was SURE no one would ever really be able to handle it, and comfortable being told "no way." It's not the case at all, there are a lot of weird people with weird needs out there.

I've had similar situations to you, Wenchie.

I deal with it pretty much how JM & Netz suggest. If someone shows interest in me, I casually mention that I've actually fallen into a poly arrangement of sorts that is meeting my needs. It has taken me 40 years to find myself, and those men; I will not give either of them up. Period. Full stop. We may not always be lovers, but I will not give them up. Accept it; or if you can't, accept that we will not be a good fit.

The thing with Arizona J and Dallas J is long and complicated (even though it really isn't), but I'm insanely lucky that they are who they are. Arizona J actually ambiguously-ish ended things (very poorly) last December, and it was quite a hiccup in the friendship... I ended up curled up in bed with Dallas J one night crying about it, actually. LOL

For a month or two I was more open to the idea of dating, if I had to, and ended up having dinner with people off Fet once or twice. My Fet profile just says I'm straight, without any D/s or relationship status, because it's no one's business... but within the first or third [unsolicited] email, I would make a point to mention The Men™, and that quite frankly attending to the needs and desires of two is quiet enough - but I'm always happy to entertain new platonic friendships.

Sometimes that would be the end of things right there, sometimes it would take another week or two, sometimes they would completely ignore the concept of The Men™ even existing. One guy was really nice and interesting, and swore he was looking for a platonic friend, not even interested in playing... until he found a submissive two weeks later, and was suddenly unable to grab dinner like we'd talked about. LOL I did see one guy off Fet for a bit; it wasn't working for me. He never really got the fact that I had The Men™, was happy with them, and wasn't looking to add anyone. One night [after 4-5 dates] he actually got huffy and asked me if I could at least PRETEND to be in a relationship with him, just for ego's sake? No. (I stopped even pretending to try to date after that mess.)

Two weeks ago Arizona J owned up on the poor way he handled ending things last December, and we rediscussed it with a little more emotional honesty. I told him I'd think about it, and talked it over with Dallas J earlier this week. Dallas J's gut opinion was the same as mine - My friendship with Arizona J is good for me, and that relationship is free to develop organically *as long as everyone involved agrees to own their own shit*.

I've already gotten lectures from people at work for staying friends with someone after a break up, and questions about when I'm going to settle down, or comments about how I let them take advantage of me by being so accommodating, etc... I usually just say "Okay. Well, i know it's unconventional but they make me blissfully happy, and for me that supersedes everything else, but thank you for your concern."

 

[the captians wench]

And so far I've aproached things in just that way. Then after a few meetings decided this dating crap is for the birds and returned to being happy with one very long distance thing and one very weird friendship triad thing. And for me, in this moment, that's enough.

But the comment was made to me that I "wasn't giving anyone a chance" because I mention these relationships right off the pitch, and the fact that while I might not always carry the same relationship with any of these people, they will be some part of my life. My thinking is, if they feel threatened by that, then they probably aren't good for me anyway.

I'm good with how things are in this moment. Lord knows I have a very stressful road ahead of me what with going back to school, pushing my costumes, and still working the McJob. Adding to that is not on the agenda.

 

[Azalea]

"In my opinion, lovemaking and BDSM are two different things. Again, in my opinion, lovemaking seems to indicate a tender loving sexual relationship, one where one doesn't smack the other with a riding crop, etc. Now I'm not saying you can't have both with the same person. I'm just saying that at times you can "make love" to your spouse or SO and at other times you can have a very fulfilling sexual BDSM relationship." (subwannabe)

This reflects how I see it.....I've sensed a sort of impatience on the part of quite a few folks with the concept of "making love." Lovemaking seems to be an activity many folks don't want to take part in. It's too soft. I feel like there's something else entirely going on in BDSM activity......a single-minded pursuit of sensation at all costs, whether it hurts or feels good.
Understand, I am a total "virgin" in regards to BDSM activity. I have no experience to base my thoughts on......only reactions to what I hear and read.
For me to tell folks in the lifestyle about their own experience is ludicrous, and perhaps even insulting.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Lovemaking seems to be an activity many folks don't want to take part in. It's too soft. I feel like there's something else entirely going on in BDSM activity......a single-minded pursuit of sensation at all costs, whether it hurts or feels good.

This is exactly correct at times, and for some people. Many BDSM folk are uncomfortable with certain types of intimacy, or have trust issues, or have their egos all wrapped up in a tough exterior.

This is actually something of a theme in many BDSM romance novels. someone learning to "make Love" instead of "relying" on the whips and chains. It's considered a happy ending.


But you know... "making Love" mostly just doesn't give me orgasms. It really doesn't. My nervous system gets bored, and takes a vacation waiting for something to happen. Love is lovely, but even with lovers I am spurring them on-- " a little harder please, I won't break."