# Threesome



## Overtheheels

During or before your marriage or whatever, have you ever had a threesome? How was it? Did you do it in relationship or not?


----------



## Bobby5000

It's wrong in the context of a marriage. You should have some flexibility in spicing up things in a monogamous relationship, and if you want her to wear or do something within reason, hopefully it can be done but nothing more. Hopefully you value your marriage sufficiently not to try something stupid.


----------



## PHTlump

I haven't done it. But I can tell you that it's playing with fire. For every thread I've seen where a successful threesome was tried (successful meaning it didn't blow up the relationship), there are probably 10 where everything went to hell.

So, 90% chance of permanently screwing up, and even ending, your marriage. Probably 8% chance of screwing it up a little bit, but you can both get over it, and 2% chance of you both enjoying yourselves. Personally, I don't like those odds.


----------



## Caribbean Man

I've done it when I was single ,and it was pretty confusing.
It was never really a fantasy per se of mine.

If you're married , please stay clear of this type of behaviour. IMO, that stuff is risky business and many people who try it relationships suffer because of it.

Here's a link to another thread right here on TAM that might be able to answer some of your questions:

Threesomes and so fourth. 
 

Basically it's about the experiences of those who've had threesomes. 
Those who are for and against it.


----------



## Married but Happy

I agree that it can be playing with fire, as PHTlump says. Beyond that, I think we hear about the ones where problems occur. It's a reporting bias issue. Why would we ever hear about the ones that went well? Unless someone is responding to a thread about one that went wrong, that is? I suspect that most go well - or at least don't create significant problems - and it's only the others we hear about. There are still enough of those that you should think and talk very seriously before pursuing it.


----------



## CuddleBug

Overtheheels said:


> During or before your marriage or whatever, have you ever had a threesome? How was it? Did you do it in relationship or not?



If you are single or have on open dating relationship, its really up to you.

But if you are married, a 3 some is a horrible idea. Most marriages end up in divorce over this but not all.

If I brought home another woman, she starts having sex giving my wifee oral while I have doggie style with this other woman, watching my wife's face reactions. Sure, every guys dream right? What if my wife loves it too much? She divorces me for this other woman. Or what if this other woman is tribbing my wifee, and I'm having anal sex with this other woman? I love it so much I always want her over and eventually leave my wife for this woman. Divorce occurs.

What if this other woman is doing my wifee 69, while I have sex with this other woman PIV at the same time?

This is a fantasy of mine but I will never entertain it, even though I would like to.

If you open that box, you will never be able to close it again. Play with fire and you will be burned. You can always watch porn and keep that fantasy as that.


----------



## 312cpl

We've always been dead against it. This last year while we haven't come out and said it, seem more open to the idea. Honestly, after I turned 50, my social phobias and walls really came down. I am much more open minded to a lot of things, including a MMF or FFM. I think if the ideal situation came up, we would take it. Otherwise, I don't think we'd go looking for it.

No, I have not. But, I am interested.


----------



## over20

Let alone ruining my marriage...I would worry about getting an STD.


----------



## sh987

I can't imagine a scenario which would allow this to work in my marriage. Call me crazy, but I don't want to have sex with other women... Just my wife.


----------



## OhGeesh

Overtheheels said:


> During or before your marriage or whatever, have you ever had a threesome? How was it? Did you do it in relationship or not?


Someone always get's less attention always a little awkward not a fan. Like it fois gras........I did it, but I prefer the all consuming 1 on 1 sex versu adding a 3rd wheel.


----------



## Dannie1348

Like most guy its a factice of having a threesome but would I do it maybe not , more than happy to try new and different things in the bedroom but threesome not for everyone . So if its not broken don't fix it !!


----------



## Amstel

Is there any satisfaction in doing threesome? It is just perveted conception of the human in condoning such practise, nothing more than that.


----------



## Shazz1991

Had a couple of MFFs since married. I've a bi side and it's better to let hubby share than do it behind his back.

Did some MMFs (and more) before I met hubby both in (with other bfs) and out of relationships. Wouldn't rule it out in future (nor would hubby) but not in a hurry to do it.

It was all fun.


----------



## NobodySpecial

There is a pretty good book called Opening Up if you are interested in responsible non-monogamy in the context of caring relationships.


----------



## WallaceBea

I have had 3, 2 with my husband. Both times, they just happened. In my experience, threesomes are not something that can be planned. They just need to happen on their own. 
You definitely need to talk about it before hand with you partner, make sure you know how the other person feels about the topic, ect. And always have a de-brief after the fact, talk about what you liked, what you didn't like. 
We enjoyed are threesomes, they brought us closer together, and also brought me closer together with the other girls who participated.


----------



## Jellybeans

Never did this because I know it's not something that would ever escape my mind and leave a black mark on the relationship.


----------



## firebelly1

I have been the third in threesomes with couples and I did feel like a third wheel, especially since I'm not bi. Not something I really want to do again for my own sake but if I had a partner who wanted to do it, I would be open to trying. 

I have been exploring the swinging lifestyle of late and I've seen some happily married couples who swing / do threesomes and it enhances their marriage. I know that's hard for some folks to get their heads around (especially us ladies) but it seems to be true. Not true for everyone. It totally depends on the reason you're doing it, how you're doing it, whether or not you are careful of your partners feelings, etc. It doesn't work if you currently have an unsatisfying sexual relationship with your spouse and you're trying to "fix" it. It can work if you are both happy with the relationship and just want to add a little spice to it.


----------



## tinybuddha58

I have done it before when I was single. My husband, but then fiance brought it up before since he knew I was into kinky stuff but I quickly rejected it b/c i actually wanted our relationship to work and was afraid that it would be ruined over it. I thought that I might always wonder if he enjoyed her more.


----------



## NobodySpecial

firebelly1 said:


> I have been the third in threesomes with couples and I did feel like a third wheel, especially since I'm not bi. Not something I really want to do again for my own sake but if I had a partner who wanted to do it, I would be open to trying.
> 
> I have been exploring the swinging lifestyle of late and I've seen some happily married couples who swing / do threesomes and it enhances their marriage. I know that's hard for some folks to get their heads around (especially us ladies) but it seems to be true. Not true for everyone. It totally depends on the reason you're doing it, how you're doing it, whether or not you are careful of your partners feelings, etc. It doesn't work if you currently have an unsatisfying sexual relationship with your spouse and you're trying to "fix" it. It can work if you are both happy with the relationship and just want to add a little spice to it.


You don't hear about swinging on boards like this. No one wants to get lambasted by people with big assumptions about something that they don't understand. There are the mild not for me folks. More power to you! Know thyself! To threats against your life for your moral depravity! Woo hoo. Sign me up.

The truth is that women tend to be all in or all out. The vast majority of jealously issues, IMO, come from the men. But jealousy is the smallest issue and the easiest to overcome. Pressure from one partner to fulfill their own needs at the expense of their partner's is the lead cause of crap.

The folks for whom swinging has enhanced their marriage are the quietest group within mainstream discussion. There is no need for them. There is no advice that folks like Tristan Taormino haven't already covered. In my opinion, it is at least as much philosophical as emotional.


----------



## firebelly1

NobodySpecial said:


> You don't hear about swinging on boards like this. No one wants to get lambasted by people with big assumptions about something that they don't understand. There are the mild not for me folks. More power to you! Know thyself! To threats against your life for your moral depravity! Woo hoo. Sign me up.
> 
> The truth is that women tend to be all in or all out. The vast majority of jealously issues, IMO, come from the men. But jealousy is the smallest issue and the easiest to overcome. Pressure from one partner to fulfill their own needs at the expense of their partner's is the lead cause of crap.
> 
> The folks for whom swinging has enhanced their marriage are the quietest group within mainstream discussion. There is no need for them. There is no advice that folks like Tristan Taormino haven't already covered. In my opinion, it is at least as much philosophical as emotional.


Yeah - I'm feeling like I will stop talking about or trying to defend anything but monogamous marriage on this board 'cause you can't really have a discussion about anything else.


----------



## Machiavelli

firebelly1 said:


> Yeah - I'm feeling like I will stop talking about or trying to defend anything but monogamous marriage on this board 'cause you can't really have a discussion about anything else.


Sure you can. I'm a big believer in polygynous patriarchy and don't mind saying it. Only the women here have a problem with that.

My opinion is that FFM is fine and dandy. Same for FFFFFFFM.


----------



## Anonymous07

over20 said:


> Let alone ruining my marriage...I would worry about getting an STD.


:iagree:

I don't imagine a threesome going well. Personally, I don't want to have sex with anyone other than my husband. I think sex is something special and shared between 2 people who are in love/completely comfortable with each other. I wouldn't be a fan of having a 3rd wheel.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Machiavelli said:


> Sure you can. I'm a big believer in polygynous patriarchy and don't mind saying it. Only the women here have a problem with that.
> 
> My opinion is that FFM is fine and dandy. Same for FFFFFFFM.


Ew!  Whatever floats your boat. I guess. My only beef is with people who insist on the use of the term polyGAMY to describe non marriage relationships that are more appropriately named polyAMOROUS since there is no purported marriage involved. Because really, the Mormons did not screw with the word polygamy at all. And for most poly people, marriage and legal rights are not even in it.


----------



## xakulax

Honestly I don't really see what the appeal is I know that might sound strange coming from a guy who single but personally it just look like an extremely awkward and uncomfortable situation to be in personally maybe its more of an ego boost thing then for sexual gratification just not my thing.. Now public sex however that a different story.


----------



## firebelly1

Machiavelli said:


> Sure you can. I'm a big believer in polygynous patriarchy and don't mind saying it. Only the women here have a problem with that.
> 
> My opinion is that FFM is fine and dandy. Same for FFFFFFFM.


 Right. Sorry Mach. Of course you're right.  Multiple women with one man= good; multiple men with one woman = wrong. 

Interesting how in both scenarios people think the woman is being disrespected.


----------



## married tech

Long before marriage. MFF and yes I really enjoyed it (and no cousins were involved) but no I would not do it now with my wife or otherwise. 

Older wiser and to be honest not that ambitious any more. A right proper MFF threeway is quite a bit of a workout and is best to be left as a good memory from days gone by and nothing else..


----------



## TiggyBlue

Have had a couple of mmf threesomes when I was single, personally not something I would do in a relationship.


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

I'll keep working on trying to get my wife to have sex with me ... then maybe, lol.


----------



## 6301

Machiavelli said:


> Sure you can. I'm a big believer in polygynous patriarchy and don't mind saying it. Only the women here have a problem with that.
> 
> My opinion is that FFM is fine and dandy. Same for FFFFFFFM.


 I remember when I was in the army and was stationed in Germany back in the 60's and found myself one night taking two girls back to my apartment. I was at a party, struck up a conversation with one girl, she agreed to come back to my place ans then her girlfriend came over and next thing I have two coming with me.

Well, let me tell you that at the time I was not quite 21 yet and not only full of testosterone but full of macho too and I was thinking that these women are in for the ride of their life.

We get back to my place. Had a drink then headed into the bedroom and after round one, I was lord and master.

Round two? Hey the boy was doing his job but it's taking a bit longer. Couple drinks and all of a sudden the tables got turned. I soon realized that there ain't no way in hell I was going to out do two women. 

What happened was that they were bot in their early to mid 30's with a ton of experience and they found a guy who needed to be taught a lesson. Needless to say, I got my ass handed to me.

Come Monday morning I can barely walk and when my buddies started asking how it went,...............I lied.

I lied through my teeth and made it out like they were begging for mercy. I never told the truth about that night to anyone until I was in my late 40's, early 50's when I heard a few friends talking about what it would be like to be with two women at the same time. 

I just saw that FFFFFFFM and it took me back to a time when two women took my ass to the cleaners.


----------



## Holland

Machiavelli said:


> Sure you can. I'm a big believer in polygynous patriarchy and don't mind saying it. Only the women here have a problem with that.
> 
> My opinion is that FFM is fine and dandy. Same for FFFFFFFM.


There are also plenty of men that have a problem with it. Thank The Universe I live in a country where it is actually a criminal offense.


----------



## firebelly1

6301 said:


> I remember when I was in the army and was stationed in Germany back in the 60's and found myself one night taking two girls back to my apartment. I was at a party, struck up a conversation with one girl, she agreed to come back to my place ans then her girlfriend came over and next thing I have two coming with me.
> 
> Well, let me tell you that at the time I was not quite 21 yet and not only full of testosterone but full of macho too and I was thinking that these women are in for the ride of their life.
> 
> We get back to my place. Had a drink then headed into the bedroom and after round one, I was lord and master.
> 
> Round two? Hey the boy was doing his job but it's taking a bit longer. Couple drinks and all of a sudden the tables got turned. I soon realized that there ain't no way in hell I was going to out do two women.
> 
> What happened was that they were bot in their early to mid 30's with a ton of experience and they found a guy who needed to be taught a lesson. Needless to say, I got my ass handed to me.
> 
> Come Monday morning I can barely walk and when my buddies started asking how it went,...............I lied.
> 
> I lied through my teeth and made it out like they were begging for mercy. I never told the truth about that night to anyone until I was in my late 40's, early 50's when I heard a few friends talking about what it would be like to be with two women at the same time.
> 
> I just saw that FFFFFFFM and it took me back to a time when two women took my ass to the cleaners.


There is way too little detail in that story.


----------



## Machiavelli

married tech said:


> Long before marriage. MFF and yes I really enjoyed it (and no cousins were involved) but no I would not do it now with my wife or otherwise.
> 
> Older wiser and to be honest not that ambitious any more. A right proper *MFF threeway is quite a bit of a workout and is best to be left as a good memory* from days gone by and nothing else..


Definitely reserved for the age 30 and below crew.


----------



## Machiavelli

Holland said:


> There are also plenty of men that have a problem with it.


Most likely the husbands of all those FFFFFFFs.


----------



## tacoma

Done it when single.

Wouldn't consider it within my marriage.


----------



## doubletrouble

Had a few MFF adventures and one MMFF when I was much younger. No strings, just fun with friends. I wouldn't do it these days because I'm in a committed relationship and am, um, much older now. But I remember it being a lot of fun.


----------



## WyshIknew

Well apart from anything else, what if the other guy says "lets get started" and whips out King Dong?

Ok, silly of me, insecure, pathetic. I know.

But I wouldn't mind betting some of my hard earned money that a lot of other guys would feel the same.

I can just imagine the ad in the personals section.

_Wanted, guy for threesome, must not be better endowed than me._


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> Again, what does age have to do with anything?
> 
> You guys are making me feel ancient just because I'm way over 30.


I am WAAAAAAY over 30. I agree with you. We are old.  And age has nothing to do with it.


----------



## NobodySpecial

WyshIknew said:


> Well apart from anything else, what if the other guy says "lets get started" and whips out King Dong?
> 
> Ok, silly of me, insecure, pathetic. I know.
> 
> But I wouldn't mind betting some of my hard earned money that a lot of other guys would feel the same.


Yup! No doubt that THAT happens. Makes for an awkward moment. The guy who can come out with his confidence intact after that is a rock star.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Nope. Never while married. While single, had several close calls - things just playing out that way - but they all fizzled out. Only known one woman interested in planning such, but we never found a third.

Edit: Oh wait... one professor and her husband my first year of college. So one MMF. Forgot about that. She was hypersexual and he was just hanging on for dear life. TBH, it was a little unnerving. Also, she wasn't one of *my* professors... just a professor at my school, and SHE picked ME up. They had this play down pat.


----------



## doubletrouble

therosenberg said:


> Again, what does age have to do with anything?
> 
> You guys are making me feel ancient just because I'm way over 30.


Dear girl, it was about 30 years ago this happened in my life.


----------



## ReformedHubby

therosenberg said:


> Again, what does age have to do with anything?
> 
> You guys are making me feel ancient just because I'm way over 30.


The age thing does matter if you're a man. I think of myself as still pretty good, but I know I don't put it down like I used to in my twenties. I think that's what the men are referring to.


----------



## DoF

therosenberg said:


> Why? I'm almost 40 and I enjoy threesomes.
> 
> What does age have to do with anything?


Yeah, but you are not the one doing the physical work.....

:scratchhead:

It also has to do with DEMAND of females involved......

And I'm sorry to hear.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DoF said:


> Yeah, but you are not the one doing the physical work.....
> 
> :scratchhead:
> 
> It also has to do with DEMAND of females involved......
> 
> And I'm sorry to hear.


Unless they are demanding more of each other. :smthumbup:


----------



## therosenberg

DoF said:


> Yeah, but you are not the one doing the physical work.....
> 
> :scratchhead:


I'm not doing physical work during sex? What kind of sex are we talking about here then? 

What is this passive sex thing you speak of?


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> I'm not doing physical work during sex? What kind of sex are we talking about here then?
> 
> What is this passive sex thing you speak of?


I had the same thought. If there is a bull, Imma gonna ride it!


----------



## therosenberg

NobodySpecial said:


> Unless they are demanding more of each other. :smthumbup:


Exactly. I don't just sit there watching while Rick is with another girl. Rick likes to watch me with her too.

It's physically demanding for everyone involved. I don't get this idea that men are the only ones who do the physical work during sex!


----------



## jaharthur

therosenberg said:


> Exactly. I don't just sit there watching while Rick is with another girl. Rick likes to watch me with her too.
> 
> It's physically demanding for everyone involved. I don't get this idea that men are the only ones who do the physical work during sex!


Umm. See, as men age, the equipment just ain't what it used to be, if you get my drift.


----------



## therosenberg

jaharthur said:


> Umm. See, as men age, the equipment just ain't what it used to be, if you get my drift.


Oh, I get that. But DoF made it sound like women are just there, waiting for the guy to take care of their sexual needs. Basically, the man is active and women are passive. In my experience, sex is _never_ like that! Hence my response


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

therosenberg said:


> I don't get this idea that men are the only ones who do the physical work during sex!


A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.

About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).

I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.
> 
> About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).
> 
> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


That is sad.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> That is sad.


I agree. 

You know what else is sad? How many women want the lights down really low... not for mood, but because they're self-conscious about their bodies. I'm thinking "What? Uh... I'm wanting to have sex with you... obviously I REALLY like your body."

Even some of the most gorgeous women, with bodies I'd call damn near perfect, have this issue.


----------



## therosenberg

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence.
> 
> About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).
> 
> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "*wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work*!" has occurred.


Hahaha! That's awesome. But yeah, I get it.

I could never do that. Just stay there and wait for him do all the work? I'm already pretty hyper as it is. But sex, to me, is so much fun! I can't imagine myself being passive during sex. 

If this was true for all women, sex between ladies would be utterly boring! Which it isn't, in my experience.

But yeah, I know where you're coming from


----------



## therosenberg

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I agree.
> 
> You know what else is sad? How many women want the lights down really low... not for mood, but because they're self-conscious about their bodies. I'm thinking "What? Uh... I'm wanting to have sex with you... obviously I REALLY like your body."
> 
> Even some of the most gorgeous women, with bodies I'd call damn near perfect, have this issue.




That's really sad!


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.
> 
> About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).
> 
> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


You live in, like, Georgia, or something. Your experience is pretty much universally nothing like mine.


----------



## married tech

> Definitely reserved for the age 30 and below crew.


I don't know about that entirely. Some reasonable expectations from all participants would be needed.

My tractor still runs good but I just don't think I have the fuel to plow two fields at a time at full throttle any more. 



> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


Similar experiences and thought here as well. I ran a marathon and she just walked around the block while telling me where and how I should run for her.


----------



## doubletrouble

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I agree.
> 
> You know what else is sad? How many women want the lights down really low... not for mood, but because they're self-conscious about their bodies. I'm thinking "What? Uh... I'm wanting to have sex with you... obviously I REALLY like your body."
> 
> Even some of the most gorgeous women, with bodies I'd call damn near perfect, have this issue.


This is especially true with women who've had CSA or abusive relationships. 

The flips side is women who aren't above average in looks, who say things like "whatever you want" and don't care where, when, or what the lights are doing. 

The trick is, then, to convince your beautiful partner she'a average? lol No I don't think so. Patience, love, understanding, and slooooowwwwlly pushing her boundaries.


----------



## therosenberg

married tech said:


> I don't know about that entirely. Some reasonable expectations from all participants would be needed.
> 
> My tractor still runs good but I just don't think I have the fuel to plow two fields at a time at full throttle any more.


But that's kind of the point we were making earlier!

It's a threesome! It's not two girls taking turns to be with a guy. It's three people having sex together. The girls will be with each other, too. Well, in my experience, that's how it works.


----------



## ReformedHubby

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.


I have heard of this but I can't say I've ever encountered it. My friends referred to women like this as "starfish". Because well.... they just kind of laid there. Interestingly enough they felt that the prettier the girl was the more likely she was to be this way. I can't say I agree with that.


----------



## ReformedHubby

therosenberg said:


> But that's kind of the point we were making earlier!
> 
> It's a threesome! It's not two girls taking turns to be with a guy. It's three people having sex together. The girls will be with each other, too. Well, in my experience, that's how it works.


Correct, and this is probably the reason that my threesome experiences did not live up to my fantasy. Shamefully my male ego assumed that it would be all about me (stop laughing!!!). For whatever reason it never did anything for me to watch two women pleasure one another, so that part of it doesn't really add any additional excitement for me.


----------



## NobodySpecial

ReformedHubby said:


> Correct, and this is probably the reason that my threesome experiences did not live up to my fantasy. Shamefully my male ego assumed that it would be all about me (stop laughing!!!). For whatever reason it never did anything for me to watch two women pleasure one another, so that part of it doesn't really add any additional excitement for me.


I am not laughing. That is exactly what my husband said. Though the second part DID add additional excitement for him once he realized it could.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

doubletrouble said:


> The trick is, then, to convince your beautiful partner she'a average? lol No I don't think so. Patience, love, understanding, and slooooowwwwlly pushing her boundaries.


Dunno where you were going with this. If I have her naked in a dark room, I'm way past tricks... except for that one I do with my tongue.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

ReformedHubby said:


> I have heard of this but I can't say I've ever encountered it. My friends referred to women like this as "starfish". Because well.... they just kind of laid there. Interestingly enough they felt that the prettier the girl was the more likely she was to be this way. I can't say I agree with that.


I'd call a mildly positive correlation there. I've heard it as "starfish" too.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> You live in, like, Georgia, or something.


haha Gotta love the south. Its freak on one hand and holy roller on the other... and even freaky holy rollers here and there (don't ask).


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> haha Gotta love the south. Its freak on one hand holy roller on the other... and even freaky holy rollers (don't ask).


So, in earnest, DO you live in the south? That would explain why speaking to you feels like speaking to a Martian! Seriously no offense intended! But you and I seriously live on different planets! I am in the north east.


----------



## doubletrouble

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Dunno where you were going with this. If I have her naked in a dark room, I'm way past tricks... except for that one I do with my tongue.


In an LTR, with a beautiful woman with body dysphoria, you need to consider those things. 

OTOH, if it's just fvcking, just get out your bag o' trix and get going.


----------



## therosenberg

NobodySpecial said:


> So, in earnest, DO you live in the south? That would explain why speaking to you feels like speaking to a Martian! Seriously no offense intended! But you and I seriously live on different planets! I am in the north east.


I wonder what it feels like talking to me, then. I'm Mexican!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> So, in earnest, DO you live in the south? That would explain why speaking to you feels like speaking to a Martian! Seriously no offense intended! But you and I seriously live on different planets! I am in the north east.


Yep. Smack dab in the middle of the bible belt. That said, I haven't been here *that* long. I'm from Baltimore, MD and lived most of my life between there and NoVA.


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> I wonder what it feels like talking to me, then. I'm Mexican!


I don't know much about Mexico. But I was not talking about the weather climate but the social climate. In the states, the north east and the south could not be more different. I live in one of the least religious states in the country, for example. And NO ONE admits to being not christian (forget atheist!) in some places of the south. Southern belles don't ****. They are good girls. I cheerfully **** because it is fun... Really. Another planet.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

therosenberg said:


> I wonder what it feels like talking to me, then. I'm Mexican!


Go back through your wormhole to your own dimension!!


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Yep. Smack dab in the middle of the bible belt. That said, I haven't been here *that* long. I'm from Baltimore, MD and lived most of my life between there and NoVA.


You do know that VA and MD are south of the Mason Dixon line? Tee hee. That explains a lot.


----------



## GettingIt_2

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.
> 
> About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).
> 
> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


Dang, Dvls, where are you getting your hookups? Not where the women of TAM hang out, that much is obvious!


----------



## Machiavelli

therosenberg said:


> Why? I'm almost 40 and I enjoy threesomes.
> 
> What does age have to do with anything?


Male testosterone starts dropping after age 25 and by the time you get to age 30, your machine has a hard time rebounding for girl #5 on up. This gets worse with age, unless a guy is taking steps to keep his testosterone high.

Incidentally, it has been proven that men who maintain harems have higher testosterone than monogamous men over the course of the day.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> You do know that VA and MD are south of the Mason Dixon line? Tee hee. That explains a lot.


Old news. Any southerner knows that its all sh*t north of Tennessee nowadays.

At least that's what they say... I'm here for the job, cost of living and daisy dukes. 

My family paahks their cahs in Rhode Island... well, the ones that didn't randomly migrate to Arizona and California. We're just a little late on the westward migration. I'm holding out now for Hawaii.


----------



## therosenberg

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Go back through your wormhole to your own dimension!!


Hahaha.



NobodySpecial said:


> I don't know much about Mexico. But I was not talking about the weather climate but the social climate. In the states, the north east and the south could not be more different. I live in one of the least religious states in the country, for example. And NO ONE admits to being not christian (forget atheist!) in some places of the south. Southern belles don't ****. They are good girls. I cheerfully **** because it is fun... Really. Another planet.


I know what you meant, I was just playing 

I know what you mean about the social climate in the States. I lived in New York for a long time, I went to college there and from time to time, I still spend long periods of time there, because of my job.

In Mexico, the situation is interesting. In the cities, people tend to be open-minded and, just to give you an idea, same-sex marriage is legal in the capitol city and other major cities such as Cancún.

Also, I'm the daughter of a Jewish man and a Muslim woman, which would be frowned upon outside the big cities. But in Mexico City no one cares. Most people mind their own business. I guess big cities are so full of people from all over the world, so many different cultures, tolerance had to develop naturally.

However, if you step away from the cities, people become more conservative, kinda like those southern places in the United States you're talking about


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Old news. Any southerner knows that its all sh*t north of Tennessee nowadays.
> 
> At least that's what they say... I'm here for the job, cost of living and daisy dukes.


Live the fun life of sexual repression! Rock it! She may look hot in her bikini and daisy dukes. But it will take you a wedding band or all kinds of nonsense to get in!


(please know that I am playing in what I think is the same kind you are.)



> My family paahks their cahs in Rhode Island... well, the ones that didn't randomly migrate to Arizona and California. We're just a little late on the westward migration. I'm holding out now for Hawaii.


Geez. Freakin southrens. They don't paaak cahs in Rhode Island. That is Boston. You need some edumacatin'. 

Hawaii sounds nice. Though more laid back you will never meet. The almost turn New Orleans from the Big Easy to massive hair across your butt. Though I was only there on vaca. So not sure what their real lives look like.


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> I know what you meant, I was just playing


My husband says I am a robot. I am sure it is true!



> I know what you mean about the social climate in the States. I lived in New York for a long time, I went to college there and from time to time, I still spend long periods of time there, because of my job.
> 
> In Mexico, the situation is interesting. In the cities, people tend to be open-minded and, just to give you an idea, same-sex marriage is legal in the capitol city and other major cities such as Cancún.
> 
> Also, I'm the daughter of a Jewish man and a Muslim woman, which would be frowned upon outside the big cities. But in Mexico City no one cares. Most people mind their own business. I guess big cities are so full of people from all over the world, so many different cultures, tolerance had to develop naturally.
> 
> However, if you step away from the cities, people become more conservative, kinda like those southern places in the United States you're talking about


I live in the rural area of a very liberal state. It is like night and day from the city I work in. Holy conservative, batman!


----------



## doubletrouble

So OP, do you have your answer? 

Now that we've totally threadjacked you


----------



## therosenberg

doubletrouble said:


> So OP, do you have your answer?
> 
> Now that we've totally threadjacked you


Haha!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Geez. Freakin southrens. They don't paaak cahs in Rhode Island. That is Boston. You need some edumacatin'.


The hell they don't!! And for some reason everything is "wicked" this and "wicked" that up there.

What I really wanna know is how you ask a person from Maryland if they know they're below the Mason Dixon. We can't be friends anymore.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The hell they don't!! And for some reason everything is "wicked" this and "wicked" that up there.


Ignoramus. That is NH.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Ignoramus. That is NH.


Just like a yankee to be so cold.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Just like a yankee to be so cold.


Capitalize Yankee to me, sir.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Just like a yankee to be so cold.


Funny. I knew you were a good guy. I don't get you at all. But I knew.


----------



## Created2Write

I would never consider a threesome, and I'd never be with a guy who was into that.


----------



## therosenberg

Created2Write said:


> I would never consider a threesome, and I'd never be with a guy who was into that.


That's interesting, I would never be with a guy who _wasn't_ into threesomes.


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> That's interesting, I would never be with a guy who _wasn't_ into threesomes.


The key. Know thyself.


----------



## doubletrouble

Created2Write said:


> I would never consider a threesome, and I'd never be with a guy who was into that.





therosenberg said:


> That's interesting, I would never be with a guy who _wasn't_ into threesomes.


And yet, you're both writers. Must be some common ground there somewhere.


----------



## NobodySpecial

doubletrouble said:


> And yet, you're both writers. Must be some common ground there somewhere.


Why would that imply common ground as it relates to threesomes?


----------



## Created2Write

To each their own. For me, I need to be with someone who will _only_ be into me, and me alone. Because when I'm into someone, I'm _only_ into them. My sexual desires, thoughts and fantasies are reserved for them and them alone. I worship them with my body, and I expect to be worshiped with theirs. I would find a man who wanted and pursued other women highly unattractive.


----------



## therosenberg

Created2Write said:


> To each their own. For me, I need to be with someone who will _only_ be into me, and me alone. Because when I'm into someone, I'm _only_ into them. My sexual desires, thoughts and fantasies are reserved for them and them alone. I worship them with my body, and I expect to be worshiped with theirs. I would find a man who wanted and pursued other women highly unattractive.


It makes sense. And I respect that.

I don't believe in sexual monogamy, though. Nor do I find it desirable.

But I understand your point!


----------



## Created2Write

I don't believe in polygamy or open relationships. Different strokes.


----------



## karole

I guess I took the "forsake all others" literally when I took my vows. It would kill me to see my husband do to another woman what he does to me. Nothing against those of you that do it, but not for me.


----------



## doubletrouble

NobodySpecial said:


> Why would that imply common ground as it relates to threesomes?


No, obviously not. Just thought well, they are both creative people, with 180 approaches to this one area. But maybe there's another area where they are far more in synch. 

Maybe not. Just a thought.


----------



## therosenberg

karole said:


> I guess I took the "forsake all others" literally when I took my vows. It would kill me to see my husband do to another woman what he does to me. Nothing against those of you that do it, but not for me.


Yup. To each their own!

If you're doing something you believe in and that makes you happy, then that's awesome!


----------



## barbados

Question for those who have / had threesomes : 

Do / did your experience(s) go in "both directions", meaning both MMF as well as MFF threesomes ?


----------



## therosenberg

barbados said:


> Question for those who have / had threesomes :
> 
> Do / did your experience(s) go in "both directions", meaning both MMF as well as MFF threesomes ?


Yes, we've been with another guy and another girl. Both experiences are completely different, in every way but they're equally fun and rewarding. I couldn't possibly decide which option I enjoy the most.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Created2Write said:


> I don't believe in polygamy or open relationships. Different strokes.


The word believe is weird. I believe that responsible non monogamy is not for everyone. I believe that it has worked for my husband and I in the past. I believe that you have the right and the responsibility to craft the best relationship for you. It is each and ever person's right and responsibility. I believe that thoughtful people of good character and integrity can rightly come to either conclusion about what is right for them.


----------



## NobodySpecial

barbados said:


> Question for those who have / had threesomes :
> 
> Do / did your experience(s) go in "both directions", meaning both MMF as well as MFF threesomes ?


I Can't Even. Ok, yes I can. Three is not my favorite number. But yes. MMF. FFM. See how uneven that is?


----------



## doubletrouble

NobodySpecial said:


> I Can't Even. Ok, yes I can. Three is not my favorite number. But yes. MMF. FFM. See how uneven that is?


A little OCD peeking through there, is it? 

I have not had MMF. The MMFF was one time. I'm not insecure about my stuff, I'm just not at all into men. *shrug* 

I've been hit on by gay guys, flattering, nice, but sorry, no.


----------



## PBear

barbados said:


> Question for those who have / had threesomes :
> 
> Do / did your experience(s) go in "both directions", meaning both MMF as well as MFF threesomes ?


Done both. Will likely do both in the future. Prefer the ones with two women. Go figure... 

In fact, I think it's my turn next...

C
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

doubletrouble said:


> A little OCD peeking through there, is it?
> 
> I have not had MMF. The MMFF was one time. I'm not insecure about my stuff, I'm just not at all into men. *shrug*
> 
> I've been hit on by gay guys, flattering, nice, but sorry, no.


There is not a single thing about me that is OCD. But I never know when I am going to say something to offend someone! 

It is good that you can be gracious to those flirtations while still knowing it is not for you.


----------



## firebelly1

Oh...don't want to start a fight...but curiosity is getting the better of me...rosenberg and C2W...there's a difference between a preference for monogamy, or not, but each of you has actually said you don't "believe in" the other. Not only do you prefer your thing but you also "don't believe in" the other persons thing. I'm assuming, C2W that you don't believe that non-monogamy is moral and rosenberg, I'm assuming you don't believe monogamy is reasonable? 

I have a preference (or, at least I'm figuring out my preference) and I believe in whatever truly works and makes other people happy.


----------



## therosenberg

firebelly1 said:


> Oh...don't want to start a fight...but curiosity is getting the better of me...rosenberg and C2W...there's a difference between a preference for monogamy, or not, but each of you has actually said you don't "believe in" the other. Not only do you prefer your thing but you also "don't believe in" the other persons thing. I'm assuming, C2W that you don't believe that non-monogamy is moral and rosenberg, I'm assuming you don't believe monogamy is reasonable?
> 
> I have a preference (or, at least I'm figuring out my preference) and I believe in whatever truly works and makes other people happy.


Well, yeah. What I meant was that I don't believe sexual monogamy is natural. I believe is more of a social construct. But that, is of course, my opinion. I am not saying people who find monogamy desirable are wrong. I am only saying _I_ don't find it desirable. It's just not for me. But, unlike several people here, I don't take a condescending tone to those who think different than me and I sincerely apologize if I ever seemed to be doing that! 

I seriously hope that everyone here finds happiness by following the path they consider to be right for them.

I was merely saying my husband and I find threesomes to be incredibly fun, exciting and rewarding. It has worked for us for many years and sharing experiences such as this is one of the several reasons why our marriage is still going strong after seven years.

But, as I said, that's just my opinion 

By the way, you may call me Zazil. That's my name!


----------



## Caribbean Man

therosenberg said:


> Well, yeah. *What I meant was that I don't believe sexual monogamy is natural. I believe is more of a social construct.* But that, is of course, my opinion.


Ok.

Let me chime in here. This^^^ right there is where a lot of people get confused.
Whether or not sexual monogamy is natural is a completely different issue to whether or not it is_ desirable_.

You seem to be mixing up both.

You see , sexual non monogamy isn't " natural" either.
The only things that are natural to human beings is survival and death
That is , eat , defecate , and sleep. 
That's it.
Remove anyone of them from the equation and the result is the final thing that is " natural" to us human beings, death. 
Everything else is either social construct or as a result of social constructs.
Threesomes , swinging , non monogamy and even monogamy fall within the spectrum of constructivism.

When justifying human behavior, naturalness cannot be an issue. There’s nothing natural about reading, using toilet paper, wearing shoes or even living in houses, but without them, the quality of lives we now live would be drastically altered , and arguably , worse. 
Monogamy, in humans, is an acquired taste and a learned skill. It is a social construct that preceded almost all other constructs, and without it , our lives would drastically altered , definitely for worse.

For example, the monogamous construct is what ensures our offspring are taken care of, in fact scientist have theorized that survival of offspring is the main reason monogamy was created in the first place.

If it wasn't for monogamy,men in general would still have been having lots kids with various women and not feel obligated to take care of any of them. Their survival and ultimately the survival of our species would be impossible.
Incest would have been rampant because the idea of a family structure would be drastically altered or non existent .
Enter homozygosity or genetic related _ inbreeding depression._ 

That monogamy is a construct doesn't automatically mean that it cannot work. There is overwhelming evidence that proves otherwise. Non monogamy is a social construct too, that has NEVER worked. There is no evidence that proves otherwise.


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> Well, yeah. What I meant was that I don't believe sexual monogamy is natural. I believe is more of a social construct. But that, is of course, my opinion. I am not saying people who find monogamy desirable are wrong. I am only saying _I_ don't find it desirable. It's just not for me. But, unlike several people here, I don't take a condescending tone to those who think different than me and I sincerely apologize if I ever seemed to be doing that!


Oh goodness. You haven't seen anything!

I have been called evil, a cheater (despite full honesty), the end of the moral fiber of our society. Not married. (20 happy years).

The idea that one can be massively in love, committed to more than just a promise made on a day long ago, without sexual ownership blows a lot of people's minds.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Caribbean Man said:


> That monogamy is a construct doesn't automatically mean that it cannot work. There is overwhelming evidence that proves otherwise. Non monogamy is a social construct too, that has NEVER worked. There is no evidence that proves otherwise.


One could say non-monogamy has always worked... given that no "monogamous" society has ever been strictly monogamous. 

I think this may be indicative of a conflict between our biological interests and our social interests.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Caribbean Man said:


> That monogamy is a construct doesn't automatically mean that it cannot work. There is overwhelming evidence that proves otherwise. _Non monogamy is a social construct too, that has NEVER worked_. There is no evidence that proves otherwise.


How can you say that when there are thousands of happy, loving, committed people living it every day? What does it mean to "work"? My responsible non-monogamous relationship is stronger than the vast majority of the people you see in the WORLD complaining about their spouses, no sex, whatever.


----------



## Married but Happy

Caribbean Man said:


> That monogamy is a construct doesn't automatically mean that it cannot work. There is overwhelming evidence that proves otherwise. Non monogamy is a social construct too, that has NEVER worked. There is no evidence that proves otherwise.


I agree with much of you post, never mind the compelling evidence to the contrary (biological mostly). Monogamy and non-monogamy are indeed social constructs or paradigms, both motivated by emphasis on different biological imperatives. 

I question just how well monogamy actually works, but it is the prevailing paradigm and works well for some. I completely disagree with your statement that non-monogamy has NEVER worked. It has always worked for a small subset of people or in small groups, but has not worked (or perhaps has not been tried) at the large group or cultural level. One size does not fit all, of course, but may still fit most. Don't dismiss those for whom it does not fit, or try to make it fit them, is all I'm saying.


----------



## karole

If you don't want to be monogamous, then why get married?


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

NobodySpecial said:


> How can you say that when there are thousands of happy, loving, committed people living it every day? What does it mean to "work"? My responsible non-monogamous relationship is stronger than the vast majority of the people you see in the WORLD complaining about their spouses, no sex, whatever.


I think he means as the predominant social construct in any culture and not that it never works for individual couples.


----------



## Married but Happy

karole said:


> If you don't want to be monogamous, then why get married?


Why not? As long as you both agree to the terms you want to apply to your marriage. There are still many good reasons to get married, and monogamy isn't necessarily one of them.


----------



## NobodySpecial

karole said:


> If you don't want to be monogamous, then why get married?


Well for us, I can answer. We started out buying the monogamy cool aid. I considered myself christian back then. As the years went on, we changed. Both of us rejected a belief in god. We had a lot of discussion about what that does to the notion of morality. We concluded that morality was objective based on outcome.

We stay married because we have children. We live together. We do taxes together. We are madly in love. Why _wouldn't_ we be married. They used to say about gay people, they can't procreate, why get married? No one says that now.


----------



## NobodySpecial

^^ PS. There is SO much more to marriage than sex or sexual exclusivity. You see it here on the board all the time. People don't get that. Marriage is a quid pro quo certificate in exchange for sex arrangement. It is sad.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Married but Happy said:


> I agree with much of you post, never mind the compelling evidence to the contrary (biological mostly). Monogamy and non-monogamy are indeed social constructs or paradigms, both motivated by emphasis on different biological imperatives.
> 
> I question just how well monogamy actually works, but it is the prevailing paradigm and works well for some. I completely disagree with your statement that non-monogamy has NEVER worked. It has always worked for a small subset of people or in small groups, but has not worked (or perhaps has not been tried) at the large group or cultural level. One size does not fit all, of course, but may still fit most. Don't dismiss those for whom it does not fit, or try to make it fit them, is all I'm saying.


I think Dvl's got exactly what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that monogamy in terms of a widely accepted social construct has worked excellently to build society and civilizations. But it is not desirable on a personal level for many, that's why i also said it is an acquired taste.

There is nowhere in history where a non monogamous society didn't implode because of instability , or the ability to properly harness it's human resources.

Non monogamy works for _individuals_, but it cannot work or has never been proven to build any society or civilization.

That's why I factored in the incest component. There is nothing inherently or biologically wrong with incest , just like there is nothing inherently or biologically wrong with non monogamy. But if incest is allowed full scale, the result would be a genetically inferior population with to all sorts of weird diseases that we can't even begin to imagine.

Monogamy wasn't designed because of romance or love. That's another flaw in in non monogamous people's arguments against monogamy.It was designed for population control. People acquired a taste for it, and another construct came in, romance. Remember for thousands of years , marriages were arranged, dating is a recent construct not more than 100 years old. Biologically , one doesn't have to be " in love" to have sex or reproduce. But in order for offspring to survive, the father of the offspring must be legally tied directly to the nurturer, which is the mother. Hence , monogamy.


----------



## Caribbean Man

NobodySpecial said:


> *We stay married because we have children. We live together. We do taxes together.*


And this ^^^is what the monogamous construct was designed for.

Procreate
Keep the peace
Pay your taxes.

Everything else is entirely up to you.

That's how it has worked for thousands of years.
Before that , non monogamy, including poly-_anything _, failed.
That's the only way a society can advance and be productive.


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

NobodySpecial said:


> ^^ PS. There is SO much more to marriage than sex or sexual exclusivity. You see it here on the board all the time. People don't get that. Marriage is a quid pro quo certificate in exchange for sex arrangement. It is sad.


I am in a sexless marriage and it's been that way for years. If I stay in my marriage, because of our belief in monogamy, I will likely be celibate or close to it for the rest of my life. Because we don't have sex, we don't have emotional bonding outside of friendship and so our emotional connection is weak. We also have children. I'm sitting here thinking that what we have is a living arrangement that could be the same whether there is a marriage certificate or not. In other words, I fail to see the point of being married. You would have a difficult time convincing me that there is so much more to marriage.


----------



## doubletrouble

CM, weren't there thousands of years of men having far more than one wife? The Bible is rampant with such accounts. Splinters of the Mormon church still practice polygamy, and they seem to be successful in multiple generations. 

You don't, however, see many cases where women have more than one husband. I'm not sure I can speak to that.


----------



## firebelly1

Yeah...I'm a little skeptical about the assertion that non-monogamy NEVER worked since I think most societies that look monogamous on the outside have a lot of non-monogamy going on. We don't know whether it's "working" or not because there is no record of it. 

Would it be fair to say, CM, that societies that pretend to be monogamous work better than those that are honestly non-monogamous?


----------



## firebelly1

This is something I still don't quite get about swinging in general, and maybe you folks who partake can enlighten me, but what keeps you from creating an emotional bond with sex partners that aren't your SO? I think that's what a lot of monogamous couples worry about threesomes - that my partner will now fall in love with the third person and leave me. Do you have rules around that? Do you just accept that that may be a consequence? What's your response to that?


----------



## NobodySpecial

JustSomeGuyWho said:


> I am in a sexless marriage and it's been that way for years. If I stay in my marriage, because of our belief in monogamy, I will likely be celibate or close to it for the rest of my life. Because we don't have sex, we don't have emotional bonding outside of friendship and so our emotional connection is weak. We also have children. I'm sitting here thinking that what we have is a living arrangement that could be the same whether there is a marriage certificate or not. In other words, I fail to see the point of being married. You would have a difficult time convincing me that there is so much more to marriage.


There might not be so much more to YOUR marriage. And I would not choose to live that way.


----------



## Married but Happy

firebelly1 said:


> This is something I still don't quite get about swinging in general, and maybe you folks who partake can enlighten me, but *what keeps you from creating an emotional bond with sex partners that aren't your SO?* I think that's what a lot of monogamous couples worry about threesomes - that my partner will now fall in love with the third person and leave me. Do you have rules around that? Do you just accept that that may be a consequence? What's your response to that?


Two thoughts on the bolded part: 

First, you don't typically see the other person often enough to form a signifcant bond, and it's rare that any bond would be reciprocated (swinging is mainly about recreational sex, versus polyamory, which is more about the the emotional bond/love). 

Second, it's not unusual to like and form a friendship with another couple, so that is an emotional bond. However, unless there are significant problems in the relationships, the existing bonds far outweigh potential new bonds, so new bonds aren't all that likely (every couple has to weigh these kinds of risks versus the perceived rewards). It would also require spending enough time with another couple for these bonds to grow, and sometimes that can happen - but I've yet to actually see it happen.

I had a two year long FWB arrangement, and while we formed a good friendship, it never came close to threatening my bond with my wife.


----------



## LongWalk

:iagree:

JustSomeGuy,

You are a smart guy. What have you got to lose by filing for divorce. You can still be friends with you wife after you divorce her. Furthermore, you can remarry and provide your children with a model of a healthy relationship. Your wife will also have a chance at happiness.

And if you are lucky filing for divorce will the catalyst to a sex fest of reconcilation – a new marriage with a new woman, born out of your wife experiencing a JC moment.

Look at it as a modern form of seduction.


----------



## NobodySpecial

firebelly1 said:


> This is something I still don't quite get about swinging in general, and maybe you folks who partake can enlighten me, but what keeps you from creating an emotional bond with sex partners that aren't your SO?


You accept it as a possibility. And it does not bother you.



> I think that's what a lot of monogamous couples worry about threesomes - that my partner will now fall in love with the third person and leave me. Do you have rules around that? Do you just accept that that may be a consequence? What's your response to that?


Marriage first. If anything puts that at risk, full stop. This rule is communicated to all in advance.


----------



## firebelly1

Married but Happy said:


> Two thoughts on the bolded part:
> 
> First, you don't typically see the other person often enough to form a signifcant bond, and it's rare that any bond would be reciprocated (swinging is mainly about recreational sex, versus polyamory, which is more about the the emotional bond/love).
> 
> Second, it's not unusual to like and form a friendship with another couple, so that is an emotional bond. However, unless there are significant problems in the relationships, the existing bonds far outweigh potential new bonds, so new bonds aren't all that likely (every couple has to weigh these kinds of risks versus the perceived rewards). It would also require spending enough time with another couple for these bonds to grow, and sometimes that can happen - but I've yet to actually see it happen.
> 
> I had a two year long FWB arrangement, and while we formed a good friendship, it never came close to threatening my bond with my wife.


Not sure if I'm going to be able to articulate this enough for it to make sense, but as I've been considering and researching swinging, I have realized that you would have to have a really, genuinely close emotional bond and trust with your SO in order for it to work. You would have to be able to trust your SO without question. 

And the truth is, I have never had a relationship like that with a man. Not in either of my two marriages. Not in any boyfriend / girlfriend situation. I unconsciously thought that the institution of marriage or the understanding of exclusivity would create that kind of emotional bond but now realize that kind of bond is a thing unto itself, separate from whatever construct it belongs to.


----------



## doubletrouble

I never have either, firebelly. The multiple partner events I had did, in some cases, include some married people, but not me.

I've been cheated on in every LTR I've been in. So that breaks the trust I may have had, and did have in my first marriage. 

Wait, the first threesome was during that marriage. The other gal was single, a friend of the wife's.


----------



## Married but Happy

I'm sorry that you have not experienced that deep bond with someone. I think you can have a good relationship without it, based on love and respect, but not a great relationship. The bond can grow in time, of course, but it doesn't for some.

I think your are right:



> that kind of bond is a thing unto itself, separate from whatever construct it belongs to


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> Ok. Yes, I was just posting about that on the swinging thread.
> 
> My opinion is that if your marriage is not solid enough, one or both spouses will end up cheating. Having sex with someone else will only make the faults in the marriage all the more evident.
> 
> As I said on the swinging thread, if my husband is not happy in our marriage, he will end up leaving, he will end up with someone else. It might happen with one of the girls with whom we have sex, but it might happen with someone he meets at work. If the marriage is solid, that's not going to happen.


Exactly. The difference is not relying on threat of punishment or whatever to remain in love, but relying on your love and commitment.



> And either way, preventing my husband from having sex with other girls or meeting other people wouldn't be the solution, because that would only be sweeping our problems under the carpet. The only solution is to address the marriage's real problems.
> 
> Of course, if your marriage has problems, swinging or threesomes is probably not a very good idea. But not because having a threesome is bad, but because it's an activity that requires the marriage to be pretty solid.


A. MEN.


----------



## NobodySpecial

firebelly1 said:


> Not sure if I'm going to be able to articulate this enough for it to make sense, but as I've been considering and researching swinging, I have realized that you would have to have a really, genuinely close emotional bond and trust with your SO in order for it to work. You would have to be able to trust your SO without question.


I agree with this.


----------



## Caribbean Man

firebelly1 said:


> Yeah...I'm a little skeptical about the assertion that non-monogamy NEVER worked since I think most societies that look monogamous on the outside have a lot of non-monogamy going on. We don't know whether it's "working" or not because there is no record of it.
> 
> Would it be fair to say, CM, that societies that pretend to be monogamous work better than those that are honestly non-monogamous?


lol,

You guys are confusing _desirability_ with functional efficiency.
In the context of the functional efficiency of a society , strict monogamy is not an issue.
Who a person has sex with when they are married is not the state's business , just as long as you 

1] Get married to ONE person
2] Take care of your offspring.
3] Pay your taxes.

Monogamy was designed to harness the human resources of society and build it.

Non monogamy was designed strictly for pleasure. As a social construct, it cannot and has never built anything , whereas , monogamy has built our present civilization and those of our ancestors.

Only monogamous marriages are recognized by the state.
Non monogamous casual unions are not illegal, but they are not recognized.

So it might be more accurate to say that monogamy has succeeded where non monogamy has failed in the past, but in many societies, there are many different types of unions.


----------



## Caribbean Man

doubletrouble said:


> CM, weren't there thousands of years of men having far more than one wife? The Bible is rampant with such accounts. Splinters of the Mormon church still practice polygamy, and they seem to be successful in multiple generations.
> 
> You don't, however, see many cases where women have more than one husband. I'm not sure I can speak to that.


Yes of course, there were many thousands of years where polygamy was practiced, but that too , failed.
Polygamy was even practiced among the Jews to an extent.
But the Roman occupation of Jerusalem, put an end to that.

A few countries still legally recognize polygamy legally, but they are mostly pariah states with no existing social order, run by tribal warlords like Somalia, Afghanistan and Yemen.


----------



## firebelly1

I still haven't figured out how to include multiple quotes in my replies...but, DT, I haven't been cheated on, but I can still say I did not have the level of trust with any of my SO's that would be needed to swing. I'm not sure swinging is for me, but just wouldn't it be great to have that level of trust in anyone for any reason? 

And MarriedbutHappy...I am sorry I haven't had that either. But there's a certain aspect of it that makes me feel not so bad about my recent divorce. I was living a lie and hoping the bandaid of "marriage" would keep it all together. Better now that I know it was a lie and that I'd rather have something else.


----------



## jaharthur

NobodySpecial said:


> We started out buying the monogamy cool aid.


So now monogamy is the equivalent of Jim Jones and The People's Temple?

Wow.


----------



## Married but Happy

jaharthur said:


> So now monogamy is the equivalent of Jim Jones and The People's Temple?
> 
> Wow.


Indeed. The parallel is that monogamy is indoctrinated. The difference is that monogamy is a far more beneficial construct. The question may be, when does "cult" become "culture"?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Married but Happy said:


> Indeed. The parallel is that monogamy is indoctrinated. The difference is that monogamy is a far more beneficial construct. The question may be, when does "cult" become "culture"?


Well the same arguments can be used for any of the other constructs that we slavishly follow and which control even our freedom of thought..

Economics is a social construct and is only an ideology or supportive of an ideology.

When does religion as a construct go too far?


----------



## Created2Write

NobodySpecial said:


> The word believe is weird. I believe that responsible non monogamy is not for everyone. I believe that it has worked for my husband and I in the past. I believe that you have the right and the responsibility to craft the best relationship for you. It is each and ever person's right and responsibility. I believe that thoughtful people of good character and integrity can rightly come to either conclusion about what is right for them.


It is my right to _believe_ what I do. And I don't believe in polygamy or open relationships. I don't think badly of those that do, or anything, but it's not something I believe in.


----------



## Created2Write

firebelly1 said:


> Oh...don't want to start a fight...but curiosity is getting the better of me...rosenberg and C2W...there's a difference between a preference for monogamy, or not, but each of you has actually said you don't "believe in" the other. Not only do you prefer your thing but you also "don't believe in" the other persons thing. I'm assuming, C2W that you don't believe that non-monogamy is moral and rosenberg, I'm assuming you don't believe monogamy is reasonable?
> 
> I have a preference (or, at least I'm figuring out my preference) and I believe in whatever truly works and makes other people happy.


You would be correct. I see open relationships and polygamy as adulterous/cheating, but others see it differently so for them it obviously wouldn't be cheating.


----------



## doubletrouble

Overtheheels said:


> During or before your marriage or whatever, have you ever had a threesome? How was it? Did you do it in relationship or not?


So OP, some of us have, some haven't. 

Some like it, some don't. 

Some used to and don't now, some never did before but are thinking about it now. 

:smthumbup:


----------



## NobodySpecial

Created2Write said:


> You would be correct. I see open relationships and polygamy as adulterous/cheating, but others see it differently so for them it obviously wouldn't be cheating.


Cheating:

https://www.google.com/search?q=def...ahoo:en-US:official&client=firefox&channel=sb


----------



## NobodySpecial

Created2Write said:


> It is my right to _believe_ what I do.


:scratchhead:I am pretty sure I said exactly that.


----------



## Created2Write

Monogamy "cool aid"? 

lol. Okay. 

Whatever lifestyle others choose to have is entirely their business and none of mine. But that doesn't mean that people who prefer sexual exclusivity are somehow blind, or don't value sexual pleasure, or are doomed to a lifetime of boredom. I've known of relationships that were open/polygamous that were successful, but they were few and far between. Whereas the opposite, a marriage/relationship that broke and shattered because of polygamy or others brought into the marriage bed, is more common from what I've seen. That leads me to think that monogamy _is_ natural for most people. 

I'm happy for any couple who manages to maintain a happy, respectful relationship these days, regardless of lifestyle. I don't think their love is any less real than the love I have for my husband, and I don't think worse of people living a life different than the one I've chosen. I _don't_ appreciate the implication that I'm somehow less enlightened just because I'm hot for one man, and only one.


----------



## NobodySpecial

therosenberg said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Lying, betraying someone's trust, that's cheating!


She nails it on the adultery definition. But then one asks, in the context of full honesty, is adultery bad? It is a round about discussion.


----------



## Created2Write

Like I said, some don't see polygamy as cheating. That's their perogative. It doesn't change how I see it.


----------



## firebelly1

MarriedbutHappy - I can't find it again to quote - but at one point you'd said you had a FWB situation for a while. So, what kept that situation from becoming more than Friends? Did you purposely limit the amount of time you spent with her (him?) or limit the types of conversations or was it just a matter of the personality involved wouldn't have led you to falling in love? Curious in the context of what keeps swingers from falling in love with their non-SO partners.


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

NobodySpecial said:


> There might not be so much more to YOUR marriage. And I would not choose to live that way.


But that's what I mean. Imagine living in your marriage without sex and with the thought that you may never have sex again. Suddenly, all these things that YOU think makes your marriage so much more take a backseat. If you are starving, that 5-star restaurant isn't so special anymore, all you care about is eating. The fact that you wouldn't live that way simply underscores that it is that important. Some people are able to convince themselves that there are more important aspects to their marriage (children, security, etc.) but I would say that the majority of those people (who have at least an average sex drive) are unhappy in their marriage and are living a life well short of its potential. Most people don't enter into marriage with an understanding that their sex life is over. 

I love my wife. We have a great natural chemistry in most areas other than sex. We make each other laugh. I'm a good father to my children and that is important to her. She is a good mother and that is important to me. She is a very nice person who is outgoing, fun, trustworthy, compassionate and has a great deal of personal integrity. While we have differences in how we envision our lives, she is a good wife and I think it might be tough to find someone who has all of those positive traits that are important to me. I don't want to divorce but I also don't want to live my life being celibate with no physical intimacy. In other words, there is more to our marriage than our 'sexual contract' but the sexual contract, whether it is monogamy or not, is a VERY big deal and in my mind is a dealbreaker if we are not on the same page.

Now, I am not saying that a marriage that is non-monogamous isn't worth having if both partners are comfortable with that arrangement. In my view monogamy is very much a part of the marriage contract and I can understand why many people would wonder what the point is of being married if you are going to have sex with other people. I feel that way in part because I am not very good at separating sex from intimacy. Many people can and more power to them; it is up to them if non-monogamy is their sexual contract. However, let's not pretend that the sexual contract isn't an integral part of marriage.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Created2Write said:


> Monogamy "cool aid"?
> 
> lol. Okay.


I meant the whole package. The pretty white dress. God taking care of me if I say my prayers. Just BEING married because that was the next thing to do. When some of those ideas came crashing down for me, it opened the door to reevaluation of a lot of stuff.



> Whatever lifestyle others choose to have is entirely their business and none of mine. But that doesn't mean that people who prefer sexual exclusivity are somehow blind, or don't value sexual pleasure, or are doomed to a lifetime of boredom.


Of course not.



> I've known of relationships that were open/polygamous that


Polygamy refers to multiple MARRIAGE which is illegal in the US. I think you may mean polyAMOROUS. But I am not sure. Maybe you live somewhere where polygamy is legal, though I am not sure where that would be.



> were successful, but they were few and far between.


I would venture a guess that you have no idea. Most of us don't share this information. We hide in closets no different than gay people used to have to do.


----------



## NobodySpecial

JustSomeGuyWho said:


> But that's what I mean. Imagine living in your marriage without sex and with the thought that you may never have sex again. Suddenly, all these things that YOU think makes your marriage so much more take a backseat. If you are starving, that 5-star restaurant isn't so special anymore, all you care about is eating. The fact that you wouldn't live that way simply underscores that it is that important. Some people are able to convince themselves that there are more important aspects to their marriage (children, security, etc.) but I would say that the majority of those people (who have at least an average sex drive) are unhappy in their marriage and are living a life well short of its potential. Most people don't enter into marriage with an understanding that their sex life is over.


Ok. I have no idea what that has to do with alt lifestyles. 



> I love my wife. We have a great natural chemistry in most areas other than sex. We make each other laugh. I'm a good father to my children and that is important to her. She is a good mother and that is important to me. She is a very nice person who is outgoing, fun, trustworthy, compassionate and has a great deal of personal integrity. While we have differences in how we envision our lives, she is a good wife and I think it might be tough to find someone who has all of those positive traits that are important to me. I don't want to divorce but I also don't want to live my life being celibate with no physical intimacy. In other words, there is more to our marriage than our 'sexual contract' but the sexual contract, whether it is monogamy or not, is a VERY big deal and in my mind is a dealbreaker if we are not on the same page.
> 
> Now, I am not saying that a marriage that is non-monogamous isn't worth having if both partners are comfortable with that arrangement. In my view monogamy is very much a part of the marriage contract


You have every right to live your life however you want. I, personally, don't find contracts that interesting. I am not making a promise made on a hot July day 20 years ago the center of decisions. If I wanted a friend, I could have a friend. I would not need to be married to be friends. 





> and I can understand why many people would wonder what the point is of being married if you are going to have sex with other people.


And I guess people can wonder what the point of being married is if you don't have sex at all. I already described the point from my view.


----------



## Married but Happy

firebelly1 said:


> MarriedbutHappy - I can't find it again to quote - but at one point you'd said you had a FWB situation for a while. So, what kept that situation from becoming more than Friends? Did you purposely limit the amount of time you spent with her (him?) or limit the types of conversations or was it just a matter of the personality involved wouldn't have led you to falling in love? Curious in the context of what keeps swingers from falling in love with their non-SO partners.


The main reason I didn't fall in love is that I was (and am) very deeply in love _already_ with someone who is an excellent match in every way. My FWB was also a friend to us both, and would also have ended our arrangement if it ever started to go out of bounds. Boundaries are important, and we're good at maintaining them where we want them. And while we've also been in a poly relationship previously where there were emotional bonds, this FWB arrangement did not inspire romantic feelings in me or my FWB, and neither of us wanted them.


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

NobodySpecial said:


> Ok. I have no idea what that has to do with alt lifestyles.
> 
> I am not speaking to alternative lifestyles ... I am responding directly to your following assertion
> 
> *^^ PS. There is SO much more to marriage than sex or sexual exclusivity. You see it here on the board all the time. People don't get that. Marriage is a quid pro quo certificate in exchange for sex arrangement. It is sad.*
> 
> Marriage is a sexual arrangement. There is some level of understanding, implied or explicitly stated, when you enter marriage. It could be celibacy, monogamy or non-monogamy but there is some agreement and I think it is an integral part of marriage. You DO see it all the time on this board ... when one partner chooses to abandon that arrangement ... either by cheating (by its very definition breaking the arrangement without the agreement of other person) or deciding not to have sex for whatever reason. I imagine it is the source of many problems with swinging. Most people enter relationships with an understanding of monogamy. Couples may decide to explore swinging but I would guess that in most cases it is one person who really wants to do it with the other person not completely invested. Same with open marriage arrangements.


----------



## DarkHoly

therosenberg said:


> We have been involved in this type of activities since we started dating and it has brought us nothing but fun. I'm surprised to see so many people here labeling it as "wrong". It's not wrong, it's not right, it depends on the couple, it depends on the relationship.
> 
> I think that if the two of you want to do it, and you're open-minded enough to deal with it, it can be a lot of fun!


Well hi there.


----------



## Created2Write

I'm aware that polygamy is illegal in the U.S. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. 

And your guess that I "have no idea" is way off base. But thanks for the assumption.


----------



## NobodySpecial

JustSomeGuyWho said:


> You DO see it all the time on this board ... when one partner chooses to abandon that arrangement ... either by cheating (by its very definition breaking the arrangement without the agreement of other person) or deciding not to have sex for whatever reason. I imagine it is the source of many problems with swinging.


Not in my experience. People who are having marital problem DO try swinging. It is not a great idea. It is akin to having a baby in the hopes of solving marital problems. Swinging tends to bring those marriage to a close pretty quickly and those people are off the radar.

But among people who are happily doing this within their marriage, abandonment, cheating and the like are nearly unheard of. Why would a person do by deception what they can do with honesty? Also, when someone gives you that degree of trust, you grow a much stronger sense of responsibility to protect that trust. I know my husband would never ever ever intentionally do anything to hurt me. Ever. And he knows the same of me. And this came from being trusted. And being trustWORTHY. So many people live in fear of trusting. I am not afraid. MIGHT he kick me in the emotional teeth with my trust? He could have. But I risked giving it to him. And I am so glad I did!


----------



## NobodySpecial

Created2Write said:


> I'm aware that polygamy is illegal in the U.S. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
> 
> And your guess that I "have no idea" is way off base. But thanks for the assumption.


What do you mean by marriage? Marriage is a legal entity. How would someone achieve it if it is against the law? Or are you intentionally using a charged word that is colored by Mormon history?

So you already know who in your neighborhood is actually effectively hiding their lifestyle. I can tell you for 100% certainty, if you looked at our life from the outside, you could never tell.


----------



## doubletrouble

There's a TV series called Sister Wives. Fundamentalist Mormon family (some might say splinter faction) who live a polygamist lifestyle. 

The first wife the guy married legally. The other three married him "under God," in other words not an official, legal ceremony, but still binding to them. 

That's about the only way you could do that lifestyle in the US and remain legal.


----------



## NobodySpecial

doubletrouble said:


> There's a TV series called Sister Wives. Fundamentalist Mormon family (some might say splinter faction) who live a polygamist lifestyle.
> 
> The first wife the guy married legally. The other three married him "under God," in other words not an official, legal ceremony, but still binding to them.
> 
> That's about the only way you could do that lifestyle in the US and remain legal.


That is exactly why for many of us polyAMORY is a much more accurate word to describe what is going on. I think people use the word polygamy on purpose as a pejorative. But I guess no one uses the word monoamory. They just say monogamy regardless of actual marital status. 

Oh well. No one wanted an English lesson.


----------



## DoF

therosenberg said:


> We have been involved in this type of activities *since we started dating *and it has brought us nothing but fun. I'm surprised to see so many people here labeling it as "wrong". It's not wrong, it's not right, it depends on the couple, it depends on the relationship.
> 
> I think that if the two of you want to do it, and you're open-minded enough to deal with it, it can be a lot of fun!


I'm not labeling it as wrong. Whatever floats that boat. If you are happy, that's great.

HOWEVER, I do have to point out something (in bold). Your entire relationship started off based on swinging etc. So it's COMPLETELY different from your usual dating/relationship monogamy > jumping into swinging scenario many of us recommending against getting into.

Your situation is worlds apart.

I would be curious to see what happens when and if you 2 (or even 1) ever decide to not share anymore. Now you would be closer to what we are discussing. 

AND I would also recommend AGAINST heading down that road as well.....it would probably end badly.


----------



## DoF

therosenberg said:


> Now that _is_ an interesting point!
> 
> Never really considered it that way.




:sleeping:


----------



## 6301

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> A lot of women don't do much of anything. Some even refuse to be on top due to simple lack of confidence - either in their having control or in their own bodies.
> 
> About the most physically demanding thing many women do is a bj... and while most women will go down, there's also plenty who won't do that either (yes, I know there's plenty of men who won't either).
> 
> I'd say I did the vast majority of the physical exertion in most of my sexual experiences. Seeing her all worn out and sweaty afterwards, I'm sorry to say the random thought "wtf are you all worn out for... I did all the work!" has occurred.


 Not the case when I was with those two women. I got my ass mauled and they knew what they were doing. 
Teaching a young guy that he's was a figment of his own imagination and got taught a lesson. It's funny now but it was a brutal lesson back then.


----------



## vellocet

Never had a 3some, never want to, and don't want a woman who has had one.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

vellocet said:


> Never had a 3some, never want to, and don't want a woman who has had one.


Curious as to the last part... what's the reasoning there?


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Of the non monogamous posters on this thread, how long have you each been with your (main) partner?


----------



## vellocet

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Curious as to the last part... what's the reasoning there?


Just don't.

EDIT: If I have to pick a reason, then I would simply say that envisioning someone I'm with to have engaged in a 3some would make me probably want to vomit.
Its just not a behavior in a woman I'd want.


----------



## Omego

Overtheheels said:


> During or before your marriage or whatever, have you ever had a threesome? How was it? Did you do it in relationship or not?


Never, and I don't see how one could accept seeing their husband, wife or partner being intimate with someone else. I don't understand how that could cause anything other than excruciating pain, unless the two are not emotionally bonded or even emotionally attached, in which case the thrill of new sexual experiences would override any potential problems.....

But in this case, wouldn't one want to seek out a relationship where there is an emotional AND physical bond? A relationship where you don't want to share or be shared?

Anyway, can't get my head around this one at all.... It's an interesting subject but I don't understand how it works.


----------



## NobodySpecial

nuclearnightmare said:


> Of the non monogamous posters on this thread, how long have you each been with your (main) partner?


22 years.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Omego said:


> Never, and I don't see how one could accept seeing their husband, wife or partner being intimate with someone else.



I hate it when people use the word "intimate" as synonymous with having sex. There is SO MUCH more to intimacy than sex, and so much more to sex that intimacy.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

NobodySpecial said:


> 22 years.


yours was an open relationship from the beginning? or you decided on that at some point afterwards....

children? (sorry..if you have a post elsewhere that answers all this you can just direct me there)


----------



## hookares

I guess if one were to consider the act "by proxy", I've been a part of several gang bangs, but just didn't happen to be present when they happened. (somebody has to work in order to earn the funds to pay the freight).
Can't imagine getting involved, even now that I'm not interested in long term relationships.


----------

