You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   33-57   58-73       
 
Author Message
16 new of 73 responses total.
oval
response 58 of 73: Mark Unseen   Jan 8 15:45 UTC 2002

it could be my turn to say something. or not. i feel like maybe it is.
although i can't figure out what to say. <shrugs>
eeyore
response 59 of 73: Mark Unseen   Jan 8 17:08 UTC 2002

Tag, Youre it!  :)
oval
response 60 of 73: Mark Unseen   Jan 8 21:33 UTC 2002

crap.
phenix
response 61 of 73: Mark Unseen   Jan 8 22:58 UTC 2002

heh. i wanna tag oval:)
sj2
response 62 of 73: Mark Unseen   Mar 7 08:38 UTC 2002

I don't have an issue with jealousy. I think its what you and your 
partner are comfortable with. I am ok with monogamy. Polygamy seems way 
too complicated to be fun. Managing emotions between two people is 
enough for a lifetime, i guess.
ssjgoten
response 63 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 23 22:36 UTC 2002

well i am new to this bbs, but if you want my opinion ,i think manogamy is
better because then you can have that one person and you dont have to worry
about pleasing so many people, but non-manogamous relationships you dont have
to worry about just one person, if you piss one person off, there's allways
someone else, just a thought

Goten Sayain

email me at: ssjgoten@cyberspace.org
jazz
response 64 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 24 16:52 UTC 2002

        Huh?
orinoco
response 65 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 24 22:24 UTC 2002

Manogamy.  You know, the cultural practice of marrying one's hand.  It keeps
you from having to worry about pleasing so many people.
michaela
response 66 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 25 03:00 UTC 2002

If you're ambidextrous, is it considered polygamy?
jazz
response 67 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 25 13:21 UTC 2002

        Is the masturbation scene in American Pie considered "missockany"?
phenix
response 68 of 73: Mark Unseen   Oct 25 18:53 UTC 2002

oodfayohile
romie
response 69 of 73: Mark Unseen   Feb 15 17:31 UTC 2003

no comment
otter
response 70 of 73: Mark Unseen   Feb 16 17:45 UTC 2003

resp:62 
Actually, polyamory (to be successful) requires that people communicate 
very openly and honestly regarding feelings, expectations, limitations, 
and a thousand other things. Open communication makes emotional issues 
infinitely more "manageable", no matter how many people are involved. 
When there are just two, it becomes far too easy to let communication 
lapse in favor of assumption. *That's* where I've seen relationships 
get into serious trouble.
void
response 71 of 73: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 07:17 UTC 2003

   I have yet to see any polyamorous relationship work out happily for
everyone involved.
jmsaul
response 72 of 73: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 00:52 UTC 2003

I have seen one do it.  Not without some apparent rough spots, but they've
weathered them so far as far as I can tell.
jazz
response 73 of 73: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 22:12 UTC 2003

        The key word, I guess, being "everyone".  I've seen stable polygamous
relationships work out, but never completely open polyamory without a stable
couple or triad at the centre.
 0-24   25-49   33-57   58-73       
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss