Hookup, Find Sex or Meet Someone Hot Now
Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
Hookup, Find Sex or Meet Someone Hot Now
| Blogs > rm_velvttouch > Me, Myself and I... |
cheater vs swinger vs polyamory
|
cheater vs swinger vs polyamory "When you learn to separate love and sex and take them for what they really are, emotional feeling and physical pleasure, you eliminate the reason why most relationships don't work out." Polyamory (from Greek πολυ (poly, literally “multiple”) and Latin amor (literally “love”)) is the desire, practice, or acceptance of having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved. Polyamory is distinct from polygamy, being closer to a personal outlook than a predefined bonding system. It is grounded in such concepts as choice, trust, equality of free will, and the more novel idea of compersion, rather than in cultural or religious tradition. Swinging is generally "non-monogamous sexual activity, treated much like any other social activity, that can be experienced as a couple." Cheating is -- as an act of lying, deception, fraud, trickery, imposture, or imposition. Cheating characteristically is employed to create an unfair advantage, usually in one's own interest, and often at the expense of others.[1] Cheating implies the breaking of rules. I love wikipedia. It is a great reference source and you can find the whole article just by putting those terms into the wikipedia search. Poly, swingers and traditional can cheat by breaking the rules that form the boundaries of their relationships. I love compersion that is the taking of pleasure from your partners pleasure. Now what is wrong with that...lol but we get so caught up in our own insecurities that we begrudge the people we love their needs. Because we can't or won't fullfill them. How silly is that? That is like saying honey you love golf and I don't so you can't have it. You can love someone and get your physical needs fullfilled somwehere else and it doesn't change your love. We do it all the time with our other needs (like friendship and common interests) so why is it different with our sexual needs? and why should all the other relationships in our lives change when we find one person we want to have a more intimate relationship with? Isn't that like saying to the people in our lives thanks for being a place holder? Love is not a check book. We don't make deposits and take out withdrawals. Love is infinite. We can love lots of people in lots of different ways. and preferably all at the same time..lol I am so poly... ADDENDUM: blog posted with this question: Do you think it is right for someone to assume they will be everything you need and that they are worth you giving up valued friendships? I think it is unrealistic for someone to think that. It takes a village and not just for but people in general. |
|||
1/19/2008 10:58 am |
I personally would find it hard to be with multiple partners - when I love, it's with all my heart. To break that love would, for me, be betrayal. Mistress Innuendo Taking what you say and turning it into something naughty !!
| ||
1/19/2008 11:11 am |
Velvttouch...well written. I am like you...so poly...have always been....
| ||
1/19/2008 11:20 am |
I wish we could start a more honest, open debate about this subject. Today's youth will move towards more of a polymory society as they are sexually active in that why already. That is if the guilt we were embedded with doesn't tell us the world will end far before polymory takes over. My emotions would allow for a polymorous relationship with my wife. My wife's would not. She hasn't a clue I think this way.
| ||
1/19/2008 11:24 am |
I think a lot of people would be poly if they opened up their perceptions and emotional boundaries...i feel that I am too, but it's difficult to explain to some...
| ||
1/19/2008 3:34 pm |
I don't swing, nor am I Poly, but these words you wrote "Love is not a check book. We don't make deposits and take out withdrawals. Love is infinite. We can love lots of people in lots of different ways. and preferably all at the same time" ~ really hit home. That was a great post!  Reputation is for time ~ Character is for eternity.
| ||
|
I don't swing, nor am I Poly, but these words you wrote "Love is not a check book. We don't make deposits and take out withdrawals. Love is infinite. We can love lots of people in lots of different ways. and preferably all at the same time" ~ really hit home. That was a great post!
| ||
|
Well, said and SOOOOO ever true. That "love is like a check book" line of reasoning is how I tend to explain things to people I know. The sad thing is most of them end up retreating to the "but it's just wrong" lather-rinse-repeat line of discussion/argument.
| ||
|
Very well said Darlin'. It's all about open communication and trust. There are a few women that I love, each in their own way and to their own degree. I no longer believe in the all encompassing 'ONE' for me. I married twice, thinking I had found it, only to be sorely disappointed. Finding people who understand this is difficult, though.
| ||
|
Very well said Darlin'. It's all about open communication and trust. There are a few women that I love, each in their own way and to their own degree. I no longer believe in the all encompassing 'ONE' for me. I married twice, thinking I had found it, only to be sorely disappointed. Finding people who understand this is difficult, though.
| ||
8/5/2008 9:41 pm |
It is Sooo refreshing to see someone who thinks the same way as I do on this subject. The real enemy's in any relationship are deceit and jealousy. And then out loud I said..... You can find me at flibertygibet ddaught commm.
| ||
|
Love is not a pie, a concrete limited thing, and you can certainly (and we all do, I'd wager) love more than one person at a time, in different ways. The problem, as I see it, comes from the fact that the rest of life is divided into concrete things - if you spend more time (or energy or money or whatever) with X, you have less time available for Y. I love the idea of polyamory. I love the idea of communism. Both can be (and have been) warped beyond recognition at times, and turned absolutely against themselves - and still named 'communism' or 'polyamory' by the ones who warped them. I still love the ideas, but I am most cautious around them.... as, indeed, I am around many things. *L* Can one person fill all your needs? Not bloody likely! Should you give up valuable friendships for the central relationship - well, tricky, but perhaps. This is the slippery slope question, indeed - but I can see there being times when it would make absolute sense. And times when it would be veering on abuse, if not actually abusive. Too many variables. And I'm sticking to my story! 
| ||
|
the other bit of that is let's say all is well and good with your primary relationship... A has B and B has A and both A and B have C and D as secondary relationships and everyone in the primary relationship is fine fine fine... but what about C & D? How long are they likely to be happy being 'secondary' relationships? I've seen it work, and I've seen it falter and fall, more than not, alas and alack. ah, the humanity!
| ||
|
lol what is funny is we all prioritize the people in our lives and just never admit it. x is more important than y. z is more important than a. "How would you feel if your lover then met someone else who was so interesting that he/she wanted to spend all their time with that person, and lost interest in you?" although that would hurt my feelings who am i to tell them they can't if that is what they want. trying to keep someone that has a better fit with someone else smacks of possession not relationship. i want to want the people in my life and for them to want to be in mine. i don't want to have to have the people in my life or for the to have to have me. I don't think it should work that way..
| ||
9/5/2008 12:09 am |
I like your intelligent candor... we have much in common, and for this subject, please read my blog on "Monogamy, how unrealistic can it get?" To REALLY love someone, you have to remain their BEST FRIEND, not be their owner. Stephen
| ||
|
I like your intelligent candor... we have much in common, and for this subject, please read my blog on "Monogamy, how unrealistic can it get?" To REALLY love someone, you have to remain their BEST FRIEND, not be their owner. Stephen
| ||
|
Reading your post here, made me think that perhaps there would not be a better than 50% divorce rate if MORE people dropped their false pretenses and came to the realization that ONE person is going to e able to be EVERYTHING for you. Who only has one car, or lives in only one house throughout their entire life? Hugs and well placed kisses - Chris
| ||
|
Well, you've articulated a principle I've long held very clearly. Reinforces my sense that we think quite a bit alike. As an added metaphor about the infinite capacity for love...how many of your children can you love at one time? Clearly the human capacity for love extends beyond one person, and while the love a parent has for his/her children is different than eros and agape, in many ways I think it can be more profound. If that capacity for deep and abiding love exists for our children, it makes sense to me that the various forms of adult affection can be equally broad. I do get that there is a finite amount of time and energy a person can give of themselves and in one sense, spending time with one person means you are not spending time with another...but I'd far rather have 5% of some amazing time with someone than 20% of "pass the butter please" (and I don't mean in the Last Tango in Paris fashion).
| ||
|
you know my first thought was to hit delete...lol but my second thought was why bother. anyone who takes what i said seriously will have the same first thought and anyone that doesn't will agree with you...
| ||
3/31/2009 3:48 pm |
Interesting point of view, you have given me something to think about!!
| ||
|
Very interesting      Is life getting you down? Then Come to My Blog!  [blog 05realman21] You will leave with a smile! Check out my profile to find out what a REALman is like! Click here! Join my alien group and get a free anal probe from Splurgee! Click here! Realman & Splurgee Agony Aunts
| ||
|
lol you can point them here. and thank you for the compliment. i think my english teacher would object to my form most of the time...lol
| ||
|
ego... lol that is what happened...
| ||
1/23/2010 11:53 am |
In the end it comes down to frame of mind, communication and the parties involved.
| ||
|
1."Polyamory is a difficult concept for me to grasp since i have yet to remove my mind from my body. I mean, you've accomplished something that philosophers, such as Rene Descartes, have tried to understand for over a century now. You've taken the mind and separated it from the body somehow" actually polyamory is not about separating. it is about having loving relationships with more then one person. 2." but if your loved one is going elsewhere to satisfy his physical needs doesn't that give you a feeling of inadequacy of some form?" no, why should i feel inadequate 3."Why does he need to go elsewhere?" maybe he doesn't need to go elsewhere. maybe he wants to. the one thing we can't give our others is being new to them or being someone else. and someone else isn't necessarily better just different and there is nothing wrong with that. 4. "I think that is the main argument of the majority of the people alive today. Why go elsewhere if your needs are being met at home?" that is not realistic. one person can not fulfill every need of someone else 5. "Are you so confident that it doesn't matter what he does, or are you so unnattached from any kind of emotion that you can't seem to feel anger?" it isn't about confidence so much as understanding that a. it is unrealistic to think that one person can fulfill every need of someone else. b. you can take pleasure from your other finding pleasure with someone else i think it is selfish to hold the people around us back because of our own insecurities
| ||
7/20/2011 6:24 pm |
I do not know how much more I can say than you did!!!
|
Become a member to create a blog
