― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:12 (eighteen years ago)
― Outlogged, Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:34 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:17 (eighteen years ago)
― Gukbe, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:17 (eighteen years ago)
― C J, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:19 (eighteen years ago)
― Masonic Boom, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:23 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:29 (eighteen years ago)
― Mark G, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:34 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr.C, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:35 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:35 (eighteen years ago)
― Masonic Boom, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:36 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:36 (eighteen years ago)
― lex pretend, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:39 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:41 (eighteen years ago)
― Masonic Boom, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:43 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:43 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:43 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:45 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:46 (eighteen years ago)
― danbunny, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:46 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:47 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:48 (eighteen years ago)
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:49 (eighteen years ago)
― lex pretend, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:49 (eighteen years ago)
― accentmonkey, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:49 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:49 (eighteen years ago)
― danbunny, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:50 (eighteen years ago)
― danbunny, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:51 (eighteen years ago)
― Masonic Boom, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:55 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:57 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:57 (eighteen years ago)
― Masonic Boom, Thursday, 10 May 2007 13:58 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:00 (eighteen years ago)
― gem, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:01 (eighteen years ago)
― r|t|c, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:07 (eighteen years ago)
― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:14 (eighteen years ago)
― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:26 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:30 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:32 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:38 (eighteen years ago)
― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:39 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:40 (eighteen years ago)
― Mark G, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:42 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:43 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:43 (eighteen years ago)
― nathalie, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:44 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:46 (eighteen years ago)
― nathalie, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:48 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:50 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:51 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:53 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:54 (eighteen years ago)
― onimo, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:56 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:57 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:57 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 10 May 2007 14:59 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:00 (eighteen years ago)
― Mark G, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:01 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:01 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:02 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:02 (eighteen years ago)
― nathalie, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:03 (eighteen years ago)
― the table is the table, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:03 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:08 (eighteen years ago)
― Mark C, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:08 (eighteen years ago)
― tipsy mothra, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:09 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:10 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:12 (eighteen years ago)
― Michael White, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:14 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:14 (eighteen years ago)
― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:14 (eighteen years ago)
― nathalie, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:15 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:16 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:17 (eighteen years ago)
― ^@^, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:17 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:19 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:20 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:20 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:21 (eighteen years ago)
― lex pretend, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:21 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:22 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:23 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:23 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:24 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:25 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:25 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:26 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:26 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:26 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:27 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:27 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:28 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:28 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:29 (eighteen years ago)
― Just got offed, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:29 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:30 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:32 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:33 (eighteen years ago)
― dan m, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:33 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:34 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:34 (eighteen years ago)
You've told him lies now for so long Yet still he's ready to forgive He's got you back and that's all he wants It's a lot more than I'm left with You don't care Now that you're gone But you know How much I miss you? It's not fair After all you've done That I'm so... I still want to kiss you And throwing presents straight away Because you could never take them home Always scared what he might say But always leaving me alone You don't care Now that you're gone But you know How much I miss you? It's not fair After all you've done That I'm so... I still want to kiss you You told him what he wants to hear And so you got another chance But I was yours for seven years Is that what you call a dalliance?! You don't care Now that you're gone But you know How much I miss you? It's not fair After all you've done That I'm so... I still want to kiss you
― grimly fiendish, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:35 (eighteen years ago)
― Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:35 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:36 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:36 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:37 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:38 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:38 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:38 (eighteen years ago)
― Just got offed, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:39 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:40 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:44 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:45 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:45 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:46 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:46 (eighteen years ago)
― Ms Misery, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:46 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:47 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:47 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:47 (eighteen years ago)
― dan m, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:48 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:48 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:48 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:49 (eighteen years ago)
― dan m, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:49 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:49 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:50 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:50 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:51 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:51 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:51 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:52 (eighteen years ago)
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:52 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:53 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:53 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:54 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:54 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:55 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:55 (eighteen years ago)
― g-kit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:55 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:56 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:56 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:57 (eighteen years ago)
― the schef (adam schefter ha ha), Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:58 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:59 (eighteen years ago)
― TOMBOT, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:00 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:00 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:01 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:03 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:04 (eighteen years ago)
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:05 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:06 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:07 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:07 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:08 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:08 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:09 (eighteen years ago)
― grimly fiendish, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:11 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:11 (eighteen years ago)
― Pashmina, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:11 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:13 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:14 (eighteen years ago)
― Surmounter, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:14 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:14 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:15 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:15 (eighteen years ago)
― Matt DC, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:15 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:15 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:16 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:16 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:17 (eighteen years ago)
― dan m, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:18 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:18 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:19 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:20 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:23 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:25 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:26 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:26 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:27 (eighteen years ago)
― kv_nol, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:27 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:28 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:29 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:30 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:31 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:34 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:35 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:38 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:39 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:40 (eighteen years ago)
― grimly fiendish, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:40 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:40 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:41 (eighteen years ago)
― alkie cat, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:41 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:41 (eighteen years ago)
― blueski, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:42 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:44 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:45 (eighteen years ago)
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:46 (eighteen years ago)
― Jordan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:47 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:50 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:52 (eighteen years ago)
― That one guy that quit, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:54 (eighteen years ago)
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:55 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:56 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:58 (eighteen years ago)
― stevienixed, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:06 (eighteen years ago)
― gff, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:12 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:23 (eighteen years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:26 (eighteen years ago)
― ryan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:28 (eighteen years ago)
― ryan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 17:30 (eighteen years ago)
― Douglas, Thursday, 10 May 2007 19:03 (eighteen years ago)
― chicago kevin, Thursday, 10 May 2007 19:16 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:11 (eighteen years ago)
― admrl, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:12 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:25 (eighteen years ago)
― admrl, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:26 (eighteen years ago)
― chicago kevin, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:28 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:33 (eighteen years ago)
― Laurel, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:40 (eighteen years ago)
― Eazy, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:57 (eighteen years ago)
― kenan, Thursday, 10 May 2007 21:58 (eighteen years ago)
― nathalie, Friday, 11 May 2007 12:02 (eighteen years ago)
― 696, Friday, 11 May 2007 12:05 (eighteen years ago)
i dont kno if i could ever b this
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:34 (fourteen years ago)
depends on the situation- are the "other" man/woman if the couple have an open relationship?
or does the "other woman"/"other man" status imply that this is a secret?
makes a big difference I think
even though an outside partner can have a destructive effect on a partnership even when things are open- it always depends upon what the encounters mean to the people involved
― the tune is space, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:50 (fourteen years ago)
if you are looking for some sex or a bit of a laugh and definitely don't like the person, prob fine.
if you like the person, don't even let them tell you they fancy you until they're single.
― I see what this is (Local Garda), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:52 (fourteen years ago)
there is someone who is in a committed relationship who's commitment is out of town, and he is texting me ... :/
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:54 (fourteen years ago)
i don't know them well but still
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:55 (fourteen years ago)
i know they're not open
xpost oops- should have said are you the "other man" etc.
if you are into this person but don't wanna homewreck or keep secrets, then it's fair to bring it up openly
― the tune is space, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:57 (fourteen years ago)
he's so cuuuuuuuuute
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:58 (fourteen years ago)
are you friends with both halves of the relationship? or just the one who is texting you?
― the tune is space, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:03 (fourteen years ago)
don't.
― goole, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:03 (fourteen years ago)
good question dr3w. just the one who is texting. that's the thing.
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:07 (fourteen years ago)
serious dick move if you do this surm, so don't
― ex-heroin addict tricycle (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:07 (fourteen years ago)
and the other thing is that we've been e-flirting for like MONTHS now (and by flirting i mean gay flirting which is worse)
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:08 (fourteen years ago)
ok ok :(
yeah, if it was an open relationship then that's one thing, but if it's not, you're going to feel weird about it
this is not to say it wouldn't be hot, but there's more to life than hot sex-
― the tune is space, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:13 (fourteen years ago)
says the man who has been on an unusual streak of lucky lately
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:14 (fourteen years ago)
no i hear you. but it's like, i'm not getting any younger here. shouldn't i do something like this while i'm still young and can pull off being bad? i know, dumb question.
― i like lucy (surm), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:16 (fourteen years ago)
I mean, you felt weird enough about it to post here- if you were basically able to successfully rationalize it then you would not have done that-
so I think you wanted to be talked out of it
you could always hang out with him but not have sex and just masochistically flirt/tease each other, too, y'know
― the tune is space, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:18 (fourteen years ago)
I had the possibility of being this fairly recently, and my gut reaction was to run like the fucking wind. I wasn't all that into the girl though, don't know what I would've done if I had been.
Being only friends with one half of the couple definitely makes it somewhat better, still will almost certainly lead to bad messy things IMO. If you're willing to go through those to be with someone, go for it... Just for sex though? Nah.
― Inevitable stupid dubstep mix (chap), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 00:58 (fourteen years ago)
don't do it, you'll lose your baby
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOrPz0i0fMs
― buzza, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 01:13 (fourteen years ago)
yeah don't do it surm. Ending up in that situation without knowing is different to knowing and doing it anyway. You're a senstive, good person imo...I don't think you need sex badly enough to do that to someone you've never met. And those situations are never, ever clean and easy to get out of. Who the hell knows how it ends once you start.
thus endeth the lecture. :D
― VegemiteGrrrl, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 01:37 (fourteen years ago)
and I really, really don't like the people in these relationships who initiate these kinds of hookups. #moralhighhorse
― VegemiteGrrrl, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 01:39 (fourteen years ago)
ok i'm not doing it.
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:25 (fourteen years ago)
<3
― VegemiteGrrrl, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:53 (fourteen years ago)
I mean obv if you have been reading gaythread you will know that I am going to say DO NOT DO THIS, YOU MIGHT FEEL FINE NOW AND THEN GUILTY 2 WKS LATER
― vienn?tta (Stevie D(eux)), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 04:15 (fourteen years ago)
development:
we didn't do it
but the bf found our IM conversations and now knows the intent was there
my friend is fucked :(
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:49 (fourteen years ago)
damn
― call all destroyer, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:49 (fourteen years ago)
That was an awfully quick turnabout for the books. Oh dear :(
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:56 (fourteen years ago)
he feels really bad. he's a good guy. it's sad. monogamy is weird.
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:59 (fourteen years ago)
best possible outcome
― dr more bs (jeff), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:19 (fourteen years ago)
I don't think monogamy is the issue, but being honest, straight-forward, and trustworthy are great qualities to have not only in life, but in your relationships.
Deception is way weirder than monogamy.
― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:20 (fourteen years ago)
shasta otm
― VegemiteGrrrl, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:21 (fourteen years ago)
i acknowledge that honesty is the issue, but there would be no need for deception if monogamy weren't such an issue for so many people. i don't think deception is weirder than monogamy. i think they're both just as weird.
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:24 (fourteen years ago)
there's no need to turn this into a conversation about whether or not my friend was in the wrong. the answer to that is obvious. all i'm saying is i constantly marvel at how much drama the issue of monogamy causes.
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:26 (fourteen years ago)
I have been the other flan
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:34 (fourteen years ago)
and I am always searching for another flan
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:35 (fourteen years ago)
there's no difference between good flan and bad flan
― My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (Princess TamTam), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:44 (fourteen years ago)
flan stans the lot of you
― VegemiteGrrrl, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 06:46 (fourteen years ago)
Monogamy isn't weird in a committed healthy longterm relationship. It seems perfectly natural to me. Monogamy maybe difficult in unhealthy / failing relationships?
― Super Cub, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 07:35 (fourteen years ago)
If I'm getting with someone, and that someone is already in a relationship, I think it's their responsibility to deal with that, not mine. I don't think it's a case of collective responsibility at all.
Obviously if you're friends with all the parties involved then it changes things around somewhat.
― 전승 Complete Victory (in Battle) (NotEnough), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 09:54 (fourteen years ago)
The monogamy debate is a long hard one (fnarr). I think monogamy's hella weird, even speaking as someone in a committed healthy long-term relationship. But "it's a possibly artificial structure imposed by society" or whatever doesn't give you an excuse to break someone's heart.
If you're going to take this rampantly individualist view, perhaps it is their responsibility/duty not to hurt the other person, but isn't it your responsibility to yourself not to act like a reprehensible dickhead?
Anyway, surm, I'm glad you didn't do it.
― emil.y, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:00 (fourteen years ago)
If you're single and the interested party is not, your singleness never absolves you of the requirement to respect any known third party, who is being massively disrespected by a partner who is putting themselves on the cheater's continuum. Generally, the more longwinded the rationalization on the part of the attached person claiming their monogamous relationship is actually open, the higher chance of it being bullshit - and in any case, it's easy for someone to slag off a flagging partner to a person who will never meet them and for me, it never reflects well on the speaker. Personally, if I were the notional singleton here I would be mortified at the thought of being an accessory to something I'd never do if I was in a relationship - no matter how much the relationship might suck, you deal yourself a rotten karmic hand if you aren't brave enough to end it and be alone before starting something new. Of course, people's relationships are all different but the person you owe a bit of vetting time to see if all is kosher or not is, ultimately, yourself.
― champagne in the arse (suzy), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:26 (fourteen years ago)
Relationships and the emotions of the parties involved are extremely complicated and mixed up and sometimes situations get blurry and things happen that shouldn't. I mean, not that this is news to anyone but it's life and shit happens. I think people are often really quick to cast aspersions on hypothetical situations or people/situations they actually know nothing about. I'm not saying that cheating or deception on the part of someone in a relationship is OK by any means, just that things are rarely as black and white as they might seem to an outsider. There have been other threads like this and people are really quick to get high and mighty. That said, I do think Suzy is right and that absolving yourself of all responsibility as the 3rd party is complete bullshit and a very strange view to take.
― ENBB, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:45 (fourteen years ago)
live and let live, on the other hand, booo...
― Mark G, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:47 (fourteen years ago)
I don't think that surm had any moral responsibility to avoid this out of fear of cuckolding the guy or whatever, but the way I think about it is this: sometimes people shoot other people over instances of cheating. That's just the way it is and sometimes it's the quiet ones. I wouldn't get teary-eyed about hurting some guy's feelings, but I also wouldn't even pull some shit like this if I expected the other guy would so much as key my car. It's an issue of self-preservation.
― kkvgz, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:49 (fourteen years ago)
In Surm's particular situation I think he did the "right" thing too for many many reasons. It sounds like this dude was just horny and wanted a piece of ass while his SO is out of town and that sort of behavior/motivation is almost always creepy and gross.
― ENBB, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:53 (fourteen years ago)
my two:
it isn't a situation I like to cast judgement on because it's not something I'd have to deal with, and therefore I can't say with any level of confidence that if it were me, that I'd have the willpower to say "no" on moral grounds. I might, I might not...I don't know.
With that said, I don't think it matters whether you know the other person or not. I got in a heated argument about this on FB with some dude who was acting holier than thou on the other side of the arg.
I've seen people say (in this thread and out) that it isn't your responsibility to respect the relationship, but imo that's bullshit. If you're aware that someone is spoken for, and not in an open relationship, and you choose to cavort with them, you're going to be causing someone anguish (and probably more than one person).
A lot of it also depends on context, ie, who initiated the proceedings. If you're initiating things with the taken party, then that's pretty reprehensible. If they approach you first, well then it's more difficult for sure. With me personally, though, no matter what action I chose, I know I'd have an image of the third party that was getting fucked over in my head, and that would bother me a lot.
There are situations where someone who is already spoken for falls in love with someone else, and IMO that's a completely different scenario, as it happens, and it's hard to control. But even in those situations, an open and honest conversation should be had to explain this, rather than sneaking behind their back.
so I hafta say suzy otm in this thread.
― felching in the dark (San Te), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:59 (fourteen years ago)
first sentence should say "something I've HAD to deal with" -- ie, it hasn't happened to me yet.
also by "some dude" i mean literally 'some dude' and not al. lol
― felching in the dark (San Te), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 13:00 (fourteen years ago)
ST otm.
― ENBB, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 13:03 (fourteen years ago)
Generally it's our responsibility to put as little bad shit out into the world as possib, right? Everybody has their bad-shit weaknesses and it's not really all that useful to argue about which are badder, although I suppose I do personally think that gradations exist. But anyway.
Getting in between two other people, even if one of them put you there, is bad shit that you and world just do not need. Glad you felt the same, surm. :)
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 14:51 (fourteen years ago)
f I'm getting with someone, and that someone is already in a relationship, I think it's their responsibility to deal with that, not mine. I don't think it's a case of collective responsibility at all.
See, when my bf cheated on me last year and then dumped me for that girl - who is a friend of us both and knew perfectly well we were a long term couple - EVERYONE said to me "dont be angry at her be angry at your BF".Fuck that shit. I was angry at them BOTH. It takes two people to say yes, for christs sake.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 00:32 (fourteen years ago)
!! oh man so sorry Trayce. I've been there. I forgave the one who asked for forgiveness after they split. The other one is dead to me.
― bien-pensant vibe (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 3 February 2011 00:38 (fourteen years ago)
but he's so cuuuuuuuuute
― dr more bs (jeff), Thursday, 3 February 2011 00:54 (fourteen years ago)
Shakey - thanks. I'm over it now and in fact on good terms with the ex again - but I cant bring myself to go places I know they'll both be, which has been ruinous for my social life because she's friends with basically everybody I know and they all think she's the bees knees :(
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 00:56 (fourteen years ago)
(that is of course my choice, but still)
god, that sucks Trayce.
re: monogamy conversation upthread. I'm sure I'll sound like a jerk here...this is not really in reference to anything that's been specifically said, just something I sort of feel and has been rattling around in my head:
as far as cheating goes, monogamy doesn't have anything to do with it, imo. I don't think I really care about it one way or another...but the whole "monogamy is weird anyway so w/e" idea seems like a rationalization. There's no 'ideal state' for human relationships, because we complicate EVERYthing. The only way to navigate any of it, any kind of relationship at all, is to just, well, be good to each other. Everyone deserves to be treated decently, whether they're adhering to some perceived imposition of monogamy or running around with 9 wives or sleeping with the neighboring swingers. We need to care about each other.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 01:02 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah basically thats what it boils down to hey.
I mean I cant talk. I have cheated on partners. I rationalised it at the time in various ways ("its a LDR and I never see him"/"I've been unhappy for months and we'll probably break up") but it still wasn't the right thing to do. Even if, maybe, I confess a microscopic prickle of delight in taboo things like it, sometimes.
I'm sure we all do if we're honest.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 01:04 (fourteen years ago)
I always go over this in my head and I'm always hoping that the outcome will be that he'll pick me over the other woman instead of the usual "I have to run off with her, she's my soulmate!". I recently read an article stating that this situation has to do with a guy's lack of emotional growth or refusal to "grow up", so he usually runs off with a younger girl. It was part of a university professor's lengthy study of why young women get into relationships with older men.
― Has No Shame (MintIce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 01:56 (fourteen years ago)
That could be argued from either gender I think, because I suspect it's one chasing one's youth in general.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 02:13 (fourteen years ago)
i wasn't saying that monogamy is weird as a rationalization for anyone's behavior -- i simply genuinely believe that monogamy is strange. i just cannot imagine getting that upset about it. that's just me.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:16 (fourteen years ago)
in conversations like these, i think there's a difference between making excuses for something and establishing the reasons for something. they are very different things.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:19 (fourteen years ago)
do i believe that monogamy sets people up for failure? perhaps, in certain situations. is that an excuse for cheating? no.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:30 (fourteen years ago)
Are you taking the stance that monogamy is a social contstruct we feel obliged to stick to, or something people do by choice? I mean I like to think it's mostly the latter for people, that they dearly want dedication with somoene who is dedicated to, and adores, them ahead of anything else.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:35 (fourteen years ago)
i think it is both. it is a social construct, AND we want that sort of dedication. part of wanting it comes from the construct, part of it is instinctual. i also believe there are many ways of dedicating yourself to someone wholly in the absence of sexual exclusivity.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:36 (fourteen years ago)
at the same time, jealousy is something a lot of people just can't get around. i totally understand.
it just seems like monogamy is the assumption that is considered correct, or automatic, and sometimes this causes problems. i guess it just boils down to being in agreement, which is, like, really hard.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:42 (fourteen years ago)
I kind of wish I felt more like you do! Its hard when you become so attached to someone and cant leave room for possibilities.
Which is weird, because I now live with my ex bf, and I love him dearly - I love him completely unconditionally and I'd jump in front of a bus for him, tbh - but I have no problem with the fact we're just companions now and he has other gfs and i have other bfs.
Which is weird and confusing but not unpleasant!
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:59 (fourteen years ago)
surm OTM, mostly.
i mean, in my experience my friends in open/poly relationships are about as successful as my friends in monogamous relationships, but part of me thinks that deviating from the 'standard model' might force you to really think through and be conscious of what the exact dynamics of yr relationship are, and ideally communicate when figuring it out. like...monogamy is easily assumed enough that it lets you not interrogate yr relationship in a variety of other ways.
(i say this as someone who is in a monogamous relationship at the moment, but nonetheless)
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 04:30 (fourteen years ago)
its a sick lifestyle for sick people dont fool yourselves
― My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (Princess TamTam), Thursday, 3 February 2011 04:34 (fourteen years ago)
Not that I at all want to give any leverage to what you just said I want to make it clear I'm not in a poly relationship. I'm not in a relationship at all with anyone.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 04:43 (fourteen years ago)
i wasn't suggesting you were Trayce - I was just speaking broadly + in response to surm's posts, and thinking aloud. and i'm presuming-slash-hoping that TamTam is being vaguely tongue in cheek. relationships are far too complicated for me or anyone else to be making broad statements about what works in *every* situation.
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 04:58 (fourteen years ago)
― i like lucy (surm), Wednesday, February 2, 2011 10:36 PM Bookmark
I think this kind of gets at the misleading nature of the term "social construct" in a lot of contexts. I.e. just because it's a "social construct" doesn't mean you can just think your way out of it, because we come to expect certain things as norms and learn to react to things certain ways and there can be very real emotional consequences for some people when those norms are violated or expectations aren't met.
― hey boys, suppers on me, our video just went bacterial (Hurting 2), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:05 (fourteen years ago)
Alex: nah I more meant tamtam than you, but all good :)
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:11 (fourteen years ago)
Sure. And thus you figure out whether you're the kind of person for whom these social constructs are incredibly meaningful or whether they're less central to how you deal with things, and you model your interactions with other people accordingly.
The point of calling something a 'social construct' isn't to deny the real power that it exerts, but to highlight that it isn't the only possibility.
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:13 (fourteen years ago)
I mean....race, gender and sexually are all socially constructed and all have very very very real and practical impacts. But giving yourself the power to conceptualize them as less than 'mandatory' categories gives you the freedom to approach them in different ways and deal with the sometimes profoundly negative impacts of such essentializing in new and creative ways, right?
Recognizing that these ideas can and DO change lets us at the very least begin to examine them. Re: 'monogamy' - you're telling me it meant the same thing in the 30s or 40s or 50s as it does now? Marriage and monogamous/committed relationships at one time were mostly about controlling the sexual behaviour of women via marriage, while their husbands were....freer under the veneer of monogamy to do as they pleased, somewhat. That doesn't mean that monogamy is bad or meaningless but it certainly is a set of expectations whose application is anything but consistent over the course of modern history.
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:18 (fourteen years ago)
Yes, both those sides I had in mind too, well put. Its somethign I've pondered a lot tbh. I hated it when I was cheated on, but Ive cheated on people. Am I a hypocrite? Or just human?
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:19 (fourteen years ago)
Imo, if people can't handle monogamy, they don't have to. There are plenty of polyamorous people out there (I'm best friends with one), and at least the expectations are set up front.
― felching in the dark (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:20 (fourteen years ago)
xp (this is now way off topic for this thread, because i'm still a pretty conservative moralist re: being the other man/woman. if someone has voluntarily decided to be part of a committed monogamous relationship, while you still aren't responsible for their behaviour, empathy and prudence if nothing else demand that you respect that.)
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:22 (fourteen years ago)
xp Yeah, San Te, that was my point, basically.
― Alex in Montreal, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:23 (fourteen years ago)
yes yes it's all true, i just sometimes wonder how many ppl enter these monogamous relationships not thinking how hard it is gonna be.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:27 (fourteen years ago)
i have witnessed this firsthand with more than a few amigos.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:28 (fourteen years ago)
Well it aint easy at all...in my last relationship I got tempted a lot. Its hard.
But its also easy for me to be loyal because I'm more introverted and am not in serious relationships as often...but obv my situation is not everyone elses.
The thing is, temptation isn't a sin, but if you aren't open and don't talk through such problems, there's a higher chance of things getting sketchy.
― felching in the dark (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:32 (fourteen years ago)
But surm, you make it sound like monogamy is some impossible thing, when really for most people it just isnt.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:32 (fourteen years ago)
i do make it sound like that, you're right, and that can't be accurate. but like ... isn't it a LOT harder than most ppl care to admit? or talk about?
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:34 (fourteen years ago)
yeah, maybe that's more of it...that people don't think about the work that goes into a good relationship, and it becomes a garbage in/garbage out equation for a lot people who only skate around the surface of it. That's not to say that you are guaranteed "success" by putting in that work, you can still get hurt or have things end badly, but it does bother me that people don't always approach relationships with the kind of care and forethought and openness that is needed. It's weird. Years of human existence, among the same mistakes over and over and ... Lol.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:36 (fourteen years ago)
oops that was a few xposts ago.
But still kind of applicable, I guess.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:37 (fourteen years ago)
omg i feel like i'm on some sort of slut brigade
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:41 (fourteen years ago)
monogamy is hard. No one should ever say that it isn't. And maybe thats why it is not for everyone. You have to know yourself pretty well going in, and you have to be willing to learn about your failings as you go...it becomes a process of weaving your weaknesses with your partners strengths, picking each other up when the other falls and not so much beig selfless as thinking about two people, not just one. I don't think you can have a good monogamous relationship just going about it the way you went about single life...together is different, and you have to be willing to adjust. People want it to be a certain way, but the reality is often that you have to make it work, it doesnt just magically come together after a few years or months of being in love.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:44 (fourteen years ago)
and I am not at all directing any of this at anyone, surm or anyone here, and if what I say sounds lecturey or judgemental that's not my intent. I'm just sharing how I have approached this myself, and speaking personally I'm monogamous, have been my whole loge but I have never had thie confidence or mindset to go after other partners or felt that I needed that, so my view is pretty limited.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:47 (fourteen years ago)
Loge? Life, ugh .
loge!!
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:48 (fourteen years ago)
And I grew up with parents who were essentially in a loveless marriage so I'm not mindlessly stanning for monogamy. I think seeing what my parents had just made me more apt to rule out what I didn't want in a relationship, and only commit when I felt like I was getting something I truly wanted, and not just someone who paid attention to me (that took a LOT of learning)
oversharing now. Sorry for derailing.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:51 (fourteen years ago)
Monogamy is hard yeah, and of course everyone has times they're bored with their partner or see "the path not taken" or whatever. Some say we're not wired to have the one partner for life. That said I dont nesc. equate monogamy with "only one partner ever for life". I just mean when you *are* with someone, you're with them and just them.
Serial monogamy? Yeah thats my middle name baby.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:51 (fourteen years ago)
i mean
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:54 (fourteen years ago)
when we're talking about monogamy here, we're talking about sexual monogamy right? cuz obv emotional and sexual monogamy are 2 different things, but when i think about monogamy, i mainly think about it sexually
... does that make sense?
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:55 (fourteen years ago)
sexual and emotional monogamy are the same thing to me. One person at a time. Not for life, but the person you are with is the person you're with.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:57 (fourteen years ago)
i see. well, the difference btw the 2 is at the crux of my relationship with my boyfriend - he is the person i am like with. the only person. we both acknowledge that we cannot imagine sharing our lives with anyone else. but we can occasionally share a night with someone else.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:59 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah its all part of the one package for me? Like if i had a bf and he slept with someone else but said he still loved me and no one else, I'd be... well not furious but certainly hurt and confused!
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 05:59 (fourteen years ago)
But again this brings it back to the deception thing.
If you're discussing it thats different.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:00 (fourteen years ago)
yeah i mean that's like what the rules are
but you see how they can be very different, right?
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:00 (fourteen years ago)
I get it, and I can see how it works, but personally there's no way I could do that. Feels a bit like hair-splitting? I dunno. Hi I am a square, lol
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:02 (fourteen years ago)
i know - i mean it just begs the question of sex vs love. some ppl can't disentangle the two, and some ppl can
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:02 (fourteen years ago)
really gettin at the crux of the issues here folks, stay tuned
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:04 (fourteen years ago)
:::marie osmond nutri-system infomercial:::
I feel like you lose something by separating them? I dunno
But I love where this is going, learning a lot
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:05 (fourteen years ago)
Would I be way out of line saying this is something more common in gay circles? and I mean no disrespect by that but it just seems something a lot of my gay friends seem more comfy with?
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:07 (fourteen years ago)
yeah I was gonna say but didn't know quite how to raise it
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:09 (fourteen years ago)
omg no you're right!
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:10 (fourteen years ago)
i mean, there's probably something to the whole like wired for babies thing
and also men are dogs
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:11 (fourteen years ago)
i always wonder if that sort of separation isnt so much more common in gay circles as it more socially acceptable to be open abt
but like everything theres no hard & fast - i wld be devestated if my bf slept w/ someone else & hes feels the same. if i love a person thats it for me, its just them
― Lamp, Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:12 (fourteen years ago)
yea I had a tough time with my g/f two exes ago because I was deeply in love w/ her but a mad amount of guys wanted her and tried (either under my nose or behind my back) to steal her from me. the thought of even the possibility of her cheating on me made me feel physically ill.
but it never happened, as she was very trustworthy in that regard.
― felching in the dark (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:14 (fourteen years ago)
still miss her a lot but that's another story bleh
Oh man, that makes me think of the "someone better will come along and steal my man cos why wouldnt they he's so awesome" thing I was plagued with like mad with the last one. Fuck my insecurities.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:17 (fourteen years ago)
yea but it's understandable. people are pricks and they do shit and we are afraid they'll do shit to our loved one. i had a 'friend' (air quotes for sarcastic emphasis) who asked my g/f at the time if we were still dating (cuz he badly wanted her)...and he asked this standing 10 feet away from me.
she replied "YES, asshole!" to him, and that made me like her even more.
― felching in the dark (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:20 (fourteen years ago)
i bristle at the suggestion that monogamy is somehow 'harder' to do than poly/open - the reason most people prefer to be monogamous is because it's easier, emotionally, logistically, etc., for a myriad of reasons that are really obvious if you just think about it
― My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (Princess TamTam), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:29 (fourteen years ago)
good point tam tam
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 06:35 (fourteen years ago)
^^^
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 13:01 (fourteen years ago)
I mean yes, monogamy can be tough but I know that personally I could never be in an open relationship and the only ones I've seen that seem to work really well have involved gay men. I was friends with a married couple who were open and at one point propositioned me. Nothing ever even happened but the amount of drama that resulted (basically the other woman in their 3some got insanely jealous and flipped out) was ridiculous and ruined the friendship. Maybe it can work for some people but I can't really see how it's any easier.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 13:12 (fourteen years ago)
i've seen it work for a few people but only in very limited and controlled doses. An OPEN open relationship seems to mean "fucking you until i find someone who can cook and will show up if i'm hospitalized oh and do you want to catch a movie friday"
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 3 February 2011 13:41 (fourteen years ago)
i have been with my boyfriend for about 9 years now. we have been open for a good amount of it, and our commitment is very strong and dear. but we are allowed to have sex with other people. and sometimes we do the 3way thing. but never have we once wanted to go out to dinner with anyone else. that's just how it is, he's the one. but we're both, like, guys.
i'm sure this is all on the open relationship thread but whatever.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:21 (fourteen years ago)
also let it be said that the emotional stuff isn't really allowed with others. a certain amount of it you can't control, but
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:22 (fourteen years ago)
i will absolutely admit that i dunno how this works in a same sex relationship
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:24 (fourteen years ago)
xpost If it's a mutually agreed upon arrangement, then to each his own, I say.
I don't see anything wrong with what you've described.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:26 (fourteen years ago)
Obviously this is a gross generalization for which I'll probably get shit but I think one of the reasons that it works better for gay male couples is that men are, on the whole, more likely than women to be able to just fuck someone without emotions getting involved.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:33 (fourteen years ago)
And probably also something to do with the way sex and hookups are viewed within gay culture (again generalization) that I'm not quite sure how to articulate but will think on it and see if I can explain what I mean better.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:39 (fourteen years ago)
i think what you're trying to say is that boys will be boys
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:42 (fourteen years ago)
lol <3
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:43 (fourteen years ago)
that is a generalization, but not a gross one. monogamy works for me as a gay man in part because sexual & emotional intimacy are so very tightly associated for me; i really can't indulge in the former without risk of the latter.
i mean, i've had meaningless sexual encounters when i was single, for certain, but i couldn't ever sleep with someone i know without it getting complicated.
monogamy keeps things pretty straightforward for me in that respect.
xp to enbb
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:45 (fourteen years ago)
i could absolutely have a meaningless sexual encounter without it getting complicated; that's never been a problembut i also do like the comfort of serial monogamy so it's a balance
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:47 (fourteen years ago)
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, February 3, 2011 1:10 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark
Hey Surm - what did you mean by this? Just curious cause now I'm thinking hard about this and think this might be otm to another one of the reasons open relationships are less likely to work for straight couples than gay.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:52 (fourteen years ago)
i mean, i think women are more likely to seriously think about what would happen if they got involved with someone else.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:55 (fourteen years ago)
the maternal instinct may come into play. a lot of animals choose their sex partners based on reproductive factors, it's like a biological thing.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:58 (fourteen years ago)
http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/blogs/smitten/0708-sex-at-dawn-cover_sm.jpgthis book to thread
― ergonomically chromium plated fish slice (La Lechera), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:00 (fourteen years ago)
x-posts Right. I think also there's a biological aspect to certain things like jealousy among straight couples that arise from a sort of innate drive to procreate. See also societal attitudes about male v. female sexuality that filter into how couples deal with one another and also play into this at least on some level.
I get so wary of getting into conversations like this because I realize that these are touchy subjects and if I'm not absolutely certain of what I want to say then I get nervous because I'm afraid it'll come out wrong and ppl will jump all over it.
Sorry this is so off topic now.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:01 (fourteen years ago)
that Sex at Dawn book is a really good read
― gallagher 3 (latebloomer), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:08 (fourteen years ago)
no i feel u E, i try not to be so self conscious about posting something bcuz otherwise i would never post, but i think we're all good
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:08 (fourteen years ago)
maybe i'm hopelessly antiquated but i happen to think that reserving your physical affection for one person is pretty huge as a symbolic display of dedication; i know that advancing some sex-as-spiritual-currency concept here might earn some eye-rolling & scorn but whatever, i like my sex to be meaningful!
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:13 (fourteen years ago)
I don't think that's antiquated at all Elmo. I'm the same and that's why I said upthread that I could never be in a poly/open sitch.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:16 (fourteen years ago)
i think that's more than understandable, and a lot of people feel that way. what i have reacted to defensively in the past, tho, is the suggestion that a sexually open relationship is devoid of dedication that is just as meaningful. that i disagree with.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:24 (fourteen years ago)
i am certainly not saying that this is what you are suggesting, just getting it out there.
but yes! i think that's so cool. and meaningful. and sweet.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:30 (fourteen years ago)
i think that's more than understandable, and a lot of people feel that way. what i have reacted to defensively in the past, tho, is the suggestion that a sexually open relationship is devoid of dedication that is just as meaningful. that i disagree with.― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, February 3, 2011 8:24 AM (7 minutes ago)
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, February 3, 2011 8:24 AM (7 minutes ago)
I really don't think that's what's being suggested dude, it's when one partner "opens" the relationship against the other's wishes/agreement/understanding is where it gets fucked up. See your example above.
― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:33 (fourteen years ago)
yeah i dunno, sometimes i feel that there's an expectation for gay men to be more permissive & open than straight ppl, per e's generalization -- sorry if i come off as defensive about it but i've definitely felt monogamy to be openly disparaged in some queer quarters for being politically regressive or whatever
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:34 (fourteen years ago)
Thread title: "being the other man/woman"Not: "open vs. monogamous relationships"
etc.
― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:35 (fourteen years ago)
― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Thursday, February 3, 2011 4:33 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
as i said, i know that is not what was being suggested. i was just having a conversation.
and as conversations tend to do, this one has gone from cheating to open relationships, and there's nothing wrong with that. it's just an ilx thread, no a thesis paper.
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:38 (fourteen years ago)
but thanks for the pedantry anyway ;)
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:39 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, I was going to say. This isn't the first time a thread has veered off topic and it's not the last time and Surm's statement was perfectly fine in the context of the conversation at that point.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:43 (fourteen years ago)
and not related to the issue about which he revived this thread but that' OK
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:44 (fourteen years ago)
eh well if we want to bring it back to the topic we could revisit the discussion we had on the gay thread about how some gays seem to think there are no ethical issues when hooking up w/ married men because the wife is "his problem, not mine"
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:49 (fourteen years ago)
i still think that's fucked up and i've been thinking about it a lot since that came up on the gay thread
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:51 (fourteen years ago)
this issue is also further complicated by the fact that it is like a fetish, and sort of rationalized along those lines
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:58 (fourteen years ago)
I've been wondering about it from a, I dunno, anthropological point of view.
Maybe it's something to do with some gays maybe deliberately wanting/needing to define their relationships differently from traditional hetero relationships? And closeting has to feed into that somewhere, I think. Being part of a group that has had to hide its sexuality, and in a lot of cases still does, that 'coming out', or finding a gay community aspect has to create a mindset of freedom that's more heightened for some people. Don't quite know how to express it so if that makes no sense blame my lack of morning coffee :)
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:32 (fourteen years ago)
I meant to write that as "traditional hetero relationships" so as not to imply any judgement. but I probably blew it.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:34 (fourteen years ago)
I'd been approached a few years back by a much younger girl who was into me...it was very awkward and she was very very persistent and the temptation was killing me. I hadnt been with nor flirted with another woman in 13 years at the time. No matter how clouded my judgement was I never went through with any of it. There was no way I could have done that to my wife or myself...especially after seeing first hand what cheating did to my parents.
So I went home and beat off.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:52 (fourteen years ago)
You're a good man, charlie brown..
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:53 (fourteen years ago)
Last Temptation of Chris
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:55 (fourteen years ago)
she asked me to "f her on the bathroom sink".
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:56 (fourteen years ago)
That's a little forward.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:57 (fourteen years ago)
wow
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:58 (fourteen years ago)
she was beyond forward. it was extremely awkward...if i was 21 at the time i would have bent her over right there.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:58 (fourteen years ago)
lol i love u
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:59 (fourteen years ago)
i feel that since i've been married women seem to flirt with me a whole hell of a lot...is it the wedding ring thing? Do women really have a thing for married guys.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 17:59 (fourteen years ago)
is it this challenge to get someone who is unattainable?
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:00 (fourteen years ago)
i dont get it.
Yeah, I've definitely been approached by women more since I've been married than I ever was before. Maybe its because I just don't care and that reads differently? I don't know, but it is interesting.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:01 (fourteen years ago)
yeah maybe because im not out looking to meet girls...who knows.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:04 (fourteen years ago)
Just hypothesizing because married men have never had much appeal for me, but I guess a) the unattainable, b) once you attain it, you're more powerful than he is because he can't tell or let it get out there and you have a lot less to lose, and c) you can hit it without speculating over long-term, it's a very fleeting and of-the-moment thing and you don't have to set your sights on a rel'ship afterward.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:23 (fourteen years ago)
Also it's possible she just really liked you?
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:24 (fourteen years ago)
maybe she did really like me or just wanted to get laid. anyhoo she wasn't my type...and even if she was...forget it.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:26 (fourteen years ago)
I don't think flirting necessarily means someone is interested...a lot of times it is just for fun.
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:26 (fourteen years ago)
this was over aggressive flirting this was basically walking pornography.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:27 (fourteen years ago)
Thinking even more about b) above, married men might be the rare occasion when a woman can hit it just for the hell of it, and end up MORE powerful than the dude afterward, instead of somehow at a disadvantage for having "given it up." Hmm. Dunno.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:28 (fourteen years ago)
Okay, when I wrote that I didn't see "f her on the bathroom sink". In that case, ¯\(°_°)/¯
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:28 (fourteen years ago)
also it was weird because i had been overweight for 8 years and was suddenly slim and was never hit on in years except for a gay man once...which was flattering.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:29 (fourteen years ago)
do married women get hit on in this fashion?
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:30 (fourteen years ago)
Oh, I'm sure. Flirting is fun. I just have been flirted with a lot more by random women since I got married than I ever was before.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:31 (fourteen years ago)
Yes this Jon ^, except its more since i've lost weight and been married.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:32 (fourteen years ago)
ive also been flirted with by other married women....its a weird world this.
Married men are kinda "safe" to be nice to, I think might have something to do with it. Not in chris' case, obv. But in the case of daily niceness that is often interpreted as being flirtatious, when a guy is already hitched it's kinda relaxing not to be on guard and trying to send only the "right" or safe messages all the time.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:33 (fourteen years ago)
Well, yeah, but that kind of reads like you don't think men can tell the difference between everyday niceness and flirting.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:37 (fourteen years ago)
I think that that is true for at least a double-digit percentage of the male populace.
― Catsupppppp Grind (kkvgz), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:40 (fourteen years ago)
otm
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:40 (fourteen years ago)
Ugh, another men are morons thread.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:41 (fourteen years ago)
thats what i was going to say, a lot of my married friends would take everyday niceness as flirting and would be all "dude, this chick is DTF"
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:43 (fourteen years ago)
then i'd have to bring them down 25 notches.
I mean, yes, there are men who have trouble distinguishing the two, but it feels like we were too close to slipping into broad generalizations.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:44 (fourteen years ago)
Hey, I used to have a married friend who I was nice to and I thought it was obv safe because his wife even WORKED WITH US, BOTH, and I didn't worry about it. His wife ended up making a public statement about how she didn't trust me OR him, and he tried to take me out to lunch and tell me a a "secret." I have never back-pedaled so hard in my life.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:44 (fourteen years ago)
Sounds like that was more the wife's issue than his, at least from your condensed version. I'm sure it was much more difficult and involved than that. Sucks though, definitely.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:46 (fourteen years ago)
the secret was that he had a horse cock.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:47 (fourteen years ago)
Look, whatever, I'm just sayin' it would be nice to be able to relax around guys and think that they will reliably get the msg that other stuff is off the table and also off the bathroom counter now that you mention it. Married guys can seem to offer that opportunity.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:48 (fourteen years ago)
lol that was an xp but it works for you too, Mr Mom.
Also I was a total innocent then, and actually trusted that their marriage was an unbreakable bond and OF COURSE nothing else could be happening because that would Be Wrong. Wouldn't be that dumm now. I don't think.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:49 (fourteen years ago)
in my case i've been flirted with more since i've been married but i think it's because i don't give a shit anymore. fwiw to me monogamy isn't even a question for me. i look at my wife and i see my best friend and a particularly kind and decent soul, and even if i could get away w/something i wouldn't do it because my guilt would be too deep, and that doesn't even get into the lesser factors of STDs and how it would affect the third party in the long run, and i should also mention that i'd never cheat on anyone no matter how bad the relationship was. i'd simply end it with them first.
― omar little, Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:49 (fourteen years ago)
Laurel, I'm not disagreeing with you, I just wish we didn't have to paint all men with a broad brush.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:50 (fourteen years ago)
i also find it strange the types that flirt with me...i get a lot of prepsters and nice looking business like ladies and i am the complete opposite...im a heavily tattooed, t shirt and jeans dude who wears docs.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:52 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, I'd like to clarify that I've also never cheated on a romantic partner and I don't even think about cheating on my wife. My brain pretty much automatically blurs the potentially attractive features on other women.
But when I was still single, I wouldn't give a damn if a potential one-night stand was in some kind of boyfriend/girlfriend dating relationship. Other than if I thought they might be strapped.
― Catsupppppp Grind (kkvgz), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:54 (fourteen years ago)
^^^ basically this
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 18:57 (fourteen years ago)
preppy ladies LOVE a tattooed man, chris
kind of how like juggalos like me because they think i might be a SEXXXXYY LIBRARIAN TYPE LOLOL
― homosexual II, Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:05 (fourteen years ago)
i cheated on ex girlfriends without hesitation when i was younger and in school. once i got with my wife, who i met in college i never even thought about doing that to her.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:06 (fourteen years ago)
so its true that opposites attract.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:07 (fourteen years ago)
Never cheated in my life, except for the ex-gf who was looking for an excuse to dump me and claimed that a drunk girl trying to kiss me before I pushed her away was "cheating".
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:07 (fourteen years ago)
lol Mandee, I used to have a friend who was really into comic books and cat-eye glasses and super cheesy "pin-up punk" styles and she was eternally sad that really punk guys weren't into her but comic books nerds who were too shy to talk to girls thought she was the bee's knees. The charitable reading of that is that everyone is somebody's fantasy, I guess.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:12 (fourteen years ago)
i cheated on all my girlfriends up to me getting to age 23 or so. not proud of it. Cut it the fuck out when i realized it was not a good idea.had to google "DTF" by the way so thanks for that.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:13 (fourteen years ago)
of course for all i know most of my girlfriends probably cheated on me too.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:16 (fourteen years ago)
are you cute?
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:21 (fourteen years ago)
i've been called handsome...hahaha....
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:22 (fourteen years ago)
do married women get hit on in this fashion?not at allquite the opposite ime
― ergonomically chromium plated fish slice (La Lechera), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:32 (fourteen years ago)
not that it's anything to lament, of course -- it's kind of liberating in a weird way because the intense so not gonna happen vibeit's kinda like having all that tension erased and ppl can just be normal
― ergonomically chromium plated fish slice (La Lechera), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:34 (fourteen years ago)
Somewhere around age 25, I taught my brain to convert wedding rings into:
http://www.virginmedia.com/images/coralsnake-430.jpg
― Catsupppppp Grind (kkvgz), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:37 (fourteen years ago)
yeah I don't really get girls flirting with married men, then again I never really got flirting for sport.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:39 (fourteen years ago)
Being in a rel'ship (altho I've never been married) def made me feel freer not to shut guys down if they struck up convo in public. I'd be free to respond in a friendly way and as long as I know that my own behavior has been nothing but reasonable/polite, I don't have to worry about what they're doing to think or do. At some point it will come up, very reasonably, that I have a boyfriend, and it will all be a non-issue. Contemplating single-dom again, this will probably change.
― go peddle your bullshit somewhere else sister (Laurel), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:48 (fourteen years ago)
single-dom seeking single-sub
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:53 (fourteen years ago)
i cant imagine being single now, i wouldn't even begin to know how to approach women anymore or how to date. its all so confusing to me now.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:55 (fourteen years ago)
Its always uncomfortable when someone is intent on forcing their non-singleness into a conversation. I was at a work function with some of our consultants and talking about compeltely work-related projects with this woman who was going through complicated verbal contortions to make sure I knew she was engaged. "Oh yeah, I'm anxious to see how that project turns out, because the contractor is a joke. I mean, I'll have to drive my fiancee by the site sometime just to see it". Like, kinda forgivable if she had recently became engaged but she pointed out several times that they had been engaged for 8 months. I don't know, it was just weird and uncomfortable. Unless I really give off stong "I'mma tryin' to flirt with ya vibes when I make friendly talk".
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:55 (fourteen years ago)
Endquote in way wrong place there.
i also bet if i was single no one would flirt with me.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Thursday, 3 February 2011 19:56 (fourteen years ago)
i say all this as i sit at my desk with my finger knuckle deep in my nostril....WHAT UP LADIES.
I mean, one other person in this thread has actually met me irl and I hope I didn't give off crepey vibes. o_O
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:00 (fourteen years ago)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:01 (fourteen years ago)
I was pretty much joking (or so I hope!).
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:03 (fourteen years ago)
Haha, I realize that could be taken way out of context given the topic of this thread. The meeting was totally innocent.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:04 (fourteen years ago)
haha! that's me! nope, not that i recall. you gave me $$, i gave you gbv tickets. i think you drank some coffee. harmless.
― ergonomically chromium plated fish slice (La Lechera), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:07 (fourteen years ago)
i cant imagine being single now, i wouldn't even begin to know how to approach women anymore or how to date.
Now, try being in that position having been in relationships for 9 years without a break and then yr partner just up and buggering off so you have to start all over again. At 39.
*fun*.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:09 (fourteen years ago)
Mind you I am kind of enjoying it now, but it has taken almost a year to adjust.
― Cyclone Yazoo (Trayce), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:10 (fourteen years ago)
xxp
Man, Woman Interact; Successfully Avoid Creepage.
― Catsupppppp Grind (kkvgz), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:10 (fourteen years ago)
Haha, Onion headline I would like to see.
I would be scared to death to be single right now, but otoh, I think being out in the working world and networking has made me much much more comfortable talking to "strangers" than I was at any point in my life.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:11 (fourteen years ago)
Also, this is very tangetially related to this thread, but I saw a poster for the movie Hall Pass on my way back from lunch. I'd never even heard of this as a "thing" before, is this just Hollywood men trying to create something? Or have you heard of that use of "hall pass" before?
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:12 (fourteen years ago)
wrt the thread topic, i think there is a huge difference between a one-time, isolated infidelity and carrying on & on with someone in who's already in a committed relationship -- which is what the phrase "other woman" connotes, in my mind
i definitely had a poly situation for a while with a guy; he & his wife were both bi & poly and i was kinda his boyfriend (but not really). it was all cool & relatively little drama but in retrospect i was pretty miserable. on one hand, i nursed a resentment for being the spice in his life and really wished i could have his affection for myself; otoh i think i had a pretty poor estimation of myself at the time and didn't really think i was worthy of that sort of love & commitment. but i stayed in this arrangement for a couple years, even though i was unhappy. after i got together with my current boyfriend, i explained to my poly friend that things had changed for me and that i was monogamous; when i introduced him to my boyfriend, he tried to kiss me & i had to cut him out of my life because i felt i had to.
anyway -- just my experience being "the other woman."
― tangelo amour (elmo argonaut), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:39 (fourteen years ago)
I have thought about this a bit, and if I end up single again I am just not going to bother. I don't have the time, energy or patience to put any effort into dating at this point in my life.
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:42 (fourteen years ago)
btw "Another Woman's Husband" is one of my top 2 favorite Lifetime movies ever
Lisa Rinna is REALLY good in it
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:42 (fourteen years ago)
Lisa Rinna is a television movie goddess. Her and Tori Spelling.
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:43 (fourteen years ago)
omg yes
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:44 (fourteen years ago)
i had no idea rinna was so good!
She was also v. good on Melrose Place.
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:46 (fourteen years ago)
btw we are starting melrose place on netflix
i cannot
wait
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:46 (fourteen years ago)
I've been trying to talk my wife into MP for a loooong time, but she just won't do it. Too OTT for her. She'll watch The O.C. and the new 90210 (which is so awful now) all day long, but she won't get down with the ridiculous awesomeness that is Melrose Place. I miss the days of that and the ill-fated Models Inc.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:51 (fourteen years ago)
You are in for a treat. xp
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:52 (fourteen years ago)
I've been trying to talk my wife into MP for a loooong time, but she just won't do it. Too OTT for her.
at first i thought MP was some poly-sex acronym i'd never heard of
― mookieproof, Thursday, 3 February 2011 21:53 (fourteen years ago)
lol lol
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 21:56 (fourteen years ago)
It involves throwing your partner into the communal pool.
― Peyton Flanders (Nicole), Thursday, 3 February 2011 21:58 (fourteen years ago)
don't forget running over an ex-lover in your car
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:02 (fourteen years ago)
also wearing bad wigs
lisa rinna can come get it, if harry doesn't like it he can deal
― goole, Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:03 (fourteen years ago)
lisa rinna got her lips deflated after a while
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:08 (fourteen years ago)
God I should hope so. Jesus:
http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/lisa-rinna-lips.jpg
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:22 (fourteen years ago)
i know. she like talked about it on a show once. she was like "i know about my lips"
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:23 (fourteen years ago)
at that size I'm surprised she didn't have a speech impediment.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:39 (fourteen years ago)
Contrary to what may be commonly thought among men, I feel like those would pretty much be the opposite of good for, well, you know what.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:42 (fourteen years ago)
yeah when they're like that they're about sexy as a pair of wax lips.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:45 (fourteen years ago)
Exactly.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 22:50 (fourteen years ago)
it's like boob implants. at some point you have to know that they are less attractive than the most unattractive natural boobs, right?
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:04 (fourteen years ago)
I dunno I find pretty much all boob implants unattractive due to the weird scarring/stretch marks. plus they don't move. which is weird.
― bien-pensant vibe (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:06 (fourteen years ago)
I think that breast implants can be done well but most just aren't.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:08 (fourteen years ago)
When I was on spring break in Texas during lolcollege we met this girl who got implants and was paying for them by entering every wet t-shirt contest she could find. She was extremely proud of them, probably because they were pretty damn real looking.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:09 (fourteen years ago)
paying for them by entering every wet t-shirt contest she could find
there's some weird moebius-strip logic to this
― bien-pensant vibe (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:12 (fourteen years ago)
i hate fake boobs on a girl. they feel like a hard plastic kid's toy, not erotic at all. feel sad that societal pressure makes girls feel compelled to get them, I like girls with smaller boobs just fine! i mean if you wanna get em that's fine but I mean they don't even look good, they just sit there not moving.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:12 (fourteen years ago)
that being said, I've never dated a small breasted girl, but that's cuz I'm attracted to women with a few extra pounds in general.
I've def seen some pretty real looking fakes whereas I'm not sure lip injections ever look good but, of course, that could be because you only notice the really obviously bad ones.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:13 (fourteen years ago)
Oh yeah, definitely.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:15 (fourteen years ago)
i wonder how accurate fake cocks/balls generally are
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:18 (fourteen years ago)
I've been trying to talk my wife into MP for a loooong time, but she just won't do it. Too OTT for her.at first i thought MP was some poly-sex acronym i'd never heard of
yeah I saw it at the bottom of the thread before expanding to read all, and thought he meant Multiple Partners
― basically just a 2/47 freak out (sic), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:19 (fourteen years ago)
Worked with a gorgeous Korean woman who had implants. The sad thing was she was desperate to get her face done and I could not for the life of me understand why. Like she wanted her lips done and her eyes widened and all this stuff, and she had the MOST beautiful bone structure, she just did not understand what a knockout she was.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:21 (fourteen years ago)
question for the hetero males in here -- would you ever let your girlfriend do sexual things with another girl?
it's an interesting question to me as there seems to be almost an even split among people I know, half who would be jealous, half who would find it erotic and would allow it.
I was asked by my g/f in 09 if she could do things with another girl with me in the room. I said "yes" as well, frankly, such a thing felt like Christmas to me, but I realize other people could feel very jealous about that.
(It didn't wind up happening). also have to say i might not have been ok with it without me in the room.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:22 (fourteen years ago)
Interesting question. It is slightly more complicated because my wife is bi, so there would definitely be a greater chance of that happening for relatively valid reasons. She has mentioned before that she has never wanted to do a threesome or anything, she finds the dynamics too messy and complicated to really enjoy it (I agree with her on that, but don't have any ancedotal evidence to back it up). I don't think it likely that she would ever suggest it though, even if she sometimes sees an attractive girl and goes "I miss women". I would most likely say yes, depending on the ground rules - who is she, what's the relationship, etc etc.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:25 (fourteen years ago)
I sound a lot like your wife in that I'm bi but have never been with a woman in front of a partner for exactly the reasons she cited. Also for the same reasons that I could never be in an open relationship.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:30 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, I completely understand why she wouldn't want to do it and I'd never expect her to want to do that. But I'd lie if I said the thought wasn't a bit of a turn-on.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:32 (fourteen years ago)
My boyfriend in college asked me to do it all the time and tbph it was pretty annoying.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:33 (fourteen years ago)
lol, that's the thing. It always felt hypocritical to me that I wouldn't allow my girlfriend to have casual sex with another guy "because it's just sex", but that I'd be fine with her doing sexual things with another girl with me in the room.
but girl on girl is well...need I say more, for me it's a huge turn-on. but I've always struggled with the cognitive dissonance I feel in oking.
oh well, she's the only g/f I ever had that ever asked me though anyway.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:34 (fourteen years ago)
oh yea that's stupid, pressuring your partner into doing that is just ridiculous.
Yeah well he was sort of an asshole all around so.
― ENBB, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:35 (fourteen years ago)
Well, you know, you reach a point where you realize certain fantasies just aren't going to be fulfilled. lol
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:36 (fourteen years ago)
i just can't deal with that realization
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:38 (fourteen years ago)
it was funny though, one of my gay friends apparently made out with my g/f at a party, which I didn't find out until later, and she ok'ed it without mentioning it to me because she thought I'd be cool with it since he was gay and it was obviously recreational.
I don't blame him for it, he's a cool guy, and we're still close friends, but thought it completely retarded that she didn't even bother to ask me first. we were already broken up by the time I found out though.
I don't know what I would have said if I was asked, but it's just the point that she assumed that pissed me off.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:39 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, I mean, I still have the fantasies but I'm growing ever and ever closer to knowing they just won't happen.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:40 (fourteen years ago)
time will force you to deal with it
― bien-pensant vibe (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:41 (fourteen years ago)
yea when I finally forced myself to accept that I couldn't fuck Holly Would from Cool World, things finally got better for me
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:42 (fourteen years ago)
yeah i know i'm not looking forward to it fuck
that's interesting about the gay friend
we gay men tend to feel like we can take our liberties with women when sometimes it's just not true i guess
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:42 (fourteen years ago)
well I mean it wasn't really like that, per se. he's an upstanding guy, very professional and well respected, and I love him to death. he did ask her if it was going to be a problem, just wish he'd found me. I'm guessing she was like "ehh who cares he's fine, he knows you don't mean anything by it" (I can't remember what she said she said).
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:43 (fourteen years ago)
i might have allowed it anyway. they're both actors, it mighta been nothing more than a stage kiss essentially
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:44 (fourteen years ago)
but then again I'm a complete idiot
alright sorry to hijack, continue!
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:45 (fourteen years ago)
actors and emotions, a complete mystery, if you ask me
what do they mean
what do they feel?
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:45 (fourteen years ago)
to be honest, actors/actresses are some of the craziest people alive. you kinda have to be to be good at it.
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:46 (fourteen years ago)
also mass infidelity goes on
― i pl0p bombs like hiroshima (San Te), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:47 (fourteen years ago)
one of my half-actor friends was just saying that he doesn't think famous famous actors are capable of sustaining romantic relationships
― i like lucy (surm), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:48 (fourteen years ago)
I work with a gay guy, he's been in a relationship with another guy for about 10 years but he is kind of flirty and flighty, and he ALWAYS tries to make out with girls when he's drunk. He's made out with my friend a bunch of times. The one time he tried it with me I just shoved him away and he acted all surprised like I should have been flattered. He and his female friends all make out at parties like it's just sharing dessert and that's fine, but it's like, you can't just assume you can do that with everyone.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:51 (fourteen years ago)
if I was single I guess I would have, but not anymore.
― VegemiteGrrrl, Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:52 (fourteen years ago)
I would "share dessert" with all of these ilxors
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 February 2011 23:59 (fourteen years ago)
So I just thought of something that would bring this back to the original q
The college bf I mentioned upthread would ask me to do this a lot but often with a specific best friend of mine in mind. Years later (we were together for 4 in total) I asked him one night straight up if he'd ever cheated me. I kind of knew but just needed to know for sure. He said yes and that it had been with her. At first I didn't even believe him but a few phone calls to her confirmed it and it turned out that they'd messed around on a handful of occasions.
I was destroyed. The thing was that I had a train ticket to go visit her the very next morning and I got on that train. I cried off and on for the nearly seven hour trip and told her when I arrived that we were going to hash this out and then put it behind us which is exactly what we did.
There were no emotions involved just some drunken fooling around. I made it very very clear to them how hurt but I was able to forgive them. They both meant way too much to me to let some drunken idiocy destroy. I dated him for another year+ am still friends with him today and I was eventually the maid of honor in her wedding.
A couple years ago her brother died and she called me a mess from a combo of grief and heavy sedatives. She just kept repeating over and over how bad she still felt because of that and how screwing me over was her biggest regret. While I think that sometimes I am forgiving to a fault I've never regretted forgiving them because I knew that it meant basically nothing and that they were both truly sorry.
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:02 (fourteen years ago)
wait I just realized that was a really long story and that it really doesn't hark back to the question at hand except for the part where she's always felt awful about being the "other woman" - sorry about that
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:03 (fourteen years ago)
No it was a good story, sounds pretty rough but also sounds like it worked out a lot better than it might have otherwise.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:08 (fourteen years ago)
Also, your ex-bf = idiot
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:09 (fourteen years ago)
gosh that was a good story
― i like lucy (surm), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:10 (fourteen years ago)
x-post Yeah, he was a total idiot. That isn't even the tip of the iceberg of enormously dipshitty stunts he's pulled over the years but those are other stories for other threads. Maybe. lol.
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:15 (fourteen years ago)
Poll thread?
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:16 (fourteen years ago)
haha you're like our grandma
you're like "another time, another time"
― i like lucy (surm), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:17 (fourteen years ago)
ENBB is way younger and cueter than most grandmas, iirc
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:18 (fourteen years ago)
tote
― i like lucy (surm), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:18 (fourteen years ago)
like way
hahahaha <3
Listen, I used to want to be a writer. It's in my blood, this storytelling thing.
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:19 (fourteen years ago)
ENBB: cutest storyteller ever :)
― VegemiteGrrrl, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:20 (fourteen years ago)
aw :)
(hey VG I don't know if you got it but I webmailed you a couple days ago)
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:22 (fourteen years ago)
You did? :D!! I don't think I got it :( did you send it to s✧@r✧✧.✧3nny at g✧@i✧.✧*m?
― VegemiteGrrrl, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:27 (fourteen years ago)
This thread just got more interesting.
Jokes, jokes.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 4 February 2011 00:28 (fourteen years ago)
No I did it through ILX so it would have gone to whatever email you registered with.
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:28 (fourteen years ago)
Wait! i found it ENBB :)
― VegemiteGrrrl, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:32 (fourteen years ago)
:)
― ENBB, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:32 (fourteen years ago)
<3 <3
― VegemiteGrrrl, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:33 (fourteen years ago)
I should take this to another thread but quick question: if I've changed email addresses do I have to re-register?
― VegemiteGrrrl, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:34 (fourteen years ago)
yeah unfortch
― basically just a 2/47 freak out (sic), Friday, 4 February 2011 01:05 (fourteen years ago)
i had a one night stand with a coworker like four years ago and i'd had no idea he was married until about a month later
when he parades his baby around the office i give him the stink eye
― homosexual II, Friday, 4 February 2011 01:54 (fourteen years ago)
that's really very awful
― i like lucy (surm), Friday, 4 February 2011 04:42 (fourteen years ago)
i cannot imagine
i had a very close "friend" when i was younger who was bi, one night in a drunken flirty mess she asked me if I wanted to watch her and her female friend...of course i said yes, about 30 seconds into it once they were nude i freaked out and ran out of the room. DAMN IT.
But to answer the question above, I don't think I could watch my wife do that. I'd get jealous as I have trust issues anyways.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Friday, 4 February 2011 16:25 (fourteen years ago)
My weirdest story in this genre:
I flirted with a woman in a class, but it turned out she had a boyfriend, so I stepped away. A few months later I met her again and she talked about her boyfriend as though they were a thing of the past, so started hanging out with her. We drove to Mexico one night, got drunk, then came back to her place and fell asleep. In the middle of the night her boyfriend showed up and tried to kick me out of bed. I was too drunk and sleepy to leave, so I stayed and he laid down in bed with the two of us. In the morning the woman woke up to find herself between the two of us and was pretty freaked out.
― President Keyes, Friday, 4 February 2011 16:35 (fourteen years ago)
awesome.
― Cultivating a manly musk puts your opponents on notice (chrisv2010), Friday, 4 February 2011 16:36 (fourteen years ago)
that happened in a joe matt comic book
― dell (del), Friday, 4 February 2011 17:25 (fourteen years ago)
Talk me out of it. But I’m out my marriage and I want some uncomplicated fun. It’ll never lead to anything serious. The easy part: he lives several hours away. My best friend said to stop pursuing it but I rrrrreally like him. More like a friend with benefit? We’ll see.
― nathom, Friday, 3 January 2020 00:00 (five years ago)
unlikely to be uncomplicated if he doesn't have an arrangement? even if he does complications may arise
― bidenfan69420 (jim in vancouver), Friday, 3 January 2020 00:12 (five years ago)
my mil's boyfriend of like 20 years has been married and living with his spouse the entire time. It seems to work fine.
― Yerac, Friday, 3 January 2020 00:22 (five years ago)
My friend: her mother had three kids w her (also married) lover. None with the husband. So weird. Anyway we’ll see.
― nathom, Friday, 3 January 2020 00:39 (five years ago)
I did this inside of an arrangement and it was not uncomplicated.
He was an asshole who pressured her into an open marriage after she shut the door on threesomes, she was kind of my boss (I was barbacking a couple of nights a week for under the table cash, she owned the bar) and immediately pursued me. He didn't find anyone who'd fuck him for months (or maybe a year) and got increasingly assholish about it, she moved out of their house, started drinking heavily and started to get mad at me for not stepping up our relationship quicker. I noped the fuck out, I signed on for sidepiece sex, not dating someone 12 years older with three kids who wasn't even divorced.
Last I heard they were back together.
― Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Friday, 3 January 2020 00:53 (five years ago)
barbacking a couple of nights a week
you best believe i read this three times
― Banáná hÉireann (darraghmac), Friday, 3 January 2020 00:56 (five years ago)
anyway, if everyone knows, then sure nath
if someone doesnt, eh its shitty imo but lifes complicated right
― Banáná hÉireann (darraghmac), Friday, 3 January 2020 00:57 (five years ago)
xp I was young but thankfully not that dumb.
― Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Friday, 3 January 2020 00:59 (five years ago)
Xpost setting rules. just so i know what i’m getting myself into. fuck it, i need some fun. after these horrible two years, i need a break. don’t need a relationship, just some fun. we’ll see how it goes.
― nathom, Friday, 3 January 2020 23:12 (five years ago)
yeah, what's more fun than traveling several hours
― j., Saturday, 4 January 2020 01:33 (five years ago)
If it’s on a train, then nothing.
― Swilling Ambergris, Esq. (silby), Saturday, 4 January 2020 01:37 (five years ago)
Love train journeys tbh.
― Frozen Mug (Tom D.), Saturday, 4 January 2020 01:38 (five years ago)
nath is there any chance you could bang on the train
― j., Saturday, 4 January 2020 01:57 (five years ago)
coupling
― Banáná hÉireann (darraghmac), Saturday, 4 January 2020 01:58 (five years ago)
I recommend this until the exact moment that either party starts to feel any level of emotional attachment toward the other. Once that happens, sever contact immediately.
― kelis navidad (flamboyant goon tie included), Saturday, 4 January 2020 02:50 (five years ago)
― nathom, Saturday, 4 January 2020 03:06 (five years ago)
shouldn't this be on 77 though
― StanM, Saturday, 4 January 2020 03:27 (five years ago)
since apparently no one's gonna straight-out say it: we all want you to get laid -- but maybe first make sure you're not fucking up someone's family
― mookieproof, Saturday, 4 January 2020 03:34 (five years ago)
the other man/woman is the same category of person as bad tippers
― the girl from spirea x (f. hazel), Saturday, 4 January 2020 03:53 (five years ago)
In contrast, the married men I’ve slept with have been very generous with their tips
― kelis navidad (flamboyant goon tie included), Saturday, 4 January 2020 04:16 (five years ago)
To insure promptness, indeed.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 4 January 2020 04:20 (five years ago)
thought i said it, tbh mookie
― Banáná hÉireann (darraghmac), Saturday, 4 January 2020 06:29 (five years ago)
I was the other man once, maybe twice; I don't remember
― Sassy Boutonnière (ledriver), Saturday, 4 January 2020 06:31 (five years ago)
xp a bit too circumspect imo
life is indeed complicated tho
― mookieproof, Saturday, 4 January 2020 06:48 (five years ago)
Mookieproof for sure.
― nathom, Saturday, 4 January 2020 07:40 (five years ago)
whoever you hook up with right out of a long term relationship -- it's gonna be a mix of exciting and awkwardness and you will probably end up feeling like garbage. Idk whether it's better for it to be in this more garbage-feeling-prone context of the person being married/in a relationship -- like just go balls deep for potential garbage feelings? ... Anyway, you can always make a thread about it, create a throwaway gmail account to create a sock account to start the thread ... ah memories!
― sarahell, Saturday, 4 January 2020 22:28 (five years ago)
“Just go balls deep for potential garbage feelings” yup
― calstars, Saturday, 4 January 2020 22:34 (five years ago)
having a sure sense of self and an emotional support system is key, so you don’t fill up with resentment toward the public facing relationship and its attendant gestures of affection/appreciationbut i mostly advise against this tbh
― maura, Sunday, 5 January 2020 03:18 (five years ago)