|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 73 responses total. |
oval
|
|
response 6 of 73:
| 
Dec 31 06:42 UTC 2001 |
<nod>
|
senna
|
|
response 7 of 73:
|
Dec 31 21:36 UTC 2001 |
Depends on what you mean by "best." If it's just a better sexual partner with
better proportions that can make you cum a bit better, that's no reason to
leave your current partner. There's a lot more to a relationship than that.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 8 of 73:
|
Dec 31 22:13 UTC 2001 |
Yes, and sexual compatibility is of varying importance to different
people. In any case, I think most people have had the experience of being
with someone with whom the were more sexually compatible than personally
(non-sexually) compatible, and vice-versa. I think a lot of the
attraction towards a "better" is the hope that someone else might offer
more of both. Intellectually, this is easy to understand. Emotionally it
can be difficult to accept that urge, or even that it exists, both for the
person feeling the tugs and for the current partner.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 9 of 73:
|
Dec 31 23:20 UTC 2001 |
resp:3 I agree that certain outside issues are a factor (but remind me
what a Friend of the Court is again?) and drawing such boundaries to
filter out such problems is a good idea.
I have read brighn's statements regarding polyamory, and it's my
understanding that boundaries must be set in such an arrangement,
too. Granted, they are not the same for monogamy, but they are there,
nonetheless, so I suppose the given is that any relationship(s) must
have structure and boundaries of some sort.
If I may back up a bit, it has been my observation that sex creates an
emotional bond, and I have not only watched the media, but people in
real life. I have seen, usually, that old lovers often may be either
on hostile or friendly grounds-- in reaction to the bond that was
created-- and rarely, is the feeling one of pure indifference, at
least from the outset. Men may be encouraged to downplay it, but I
think, honestly, there is always still a connection of some kind.
resp:4 and would your gf freak out if for some reason, you decided you
sexually needed another man? I know this has been discussed somewhere
before, but I still fail to understand why femme f-f sex is a male
fantasy, while the opposite isn't true.
resp:5 I keep wondering why society has been downplaying marriage in
general. I mean, not only is it opposed to just polyamory, it's
specifically unlawful to practice polygamy (or polyandry, for that
matter) in most world governments. Now, I don't promote polygamy
personally (and the LDS church outlawed it years ago-- that topic has
been discussed here before), but just for the sake of discussion, why
is that so? Marriage may not be the ideal option for everyone, but..
if someone believed that structure was a strong foundation to build a
marriage on, why not?
Perhaps the legal implications of marriage could be discussed (in
another item, if need be)? It is possible that it makes some legal
matters easier to deal with and examine, but I am not a legal expert.
(I ran out of steam on that point, and will wait for comments)
resp:7 It's not always proportions, although that's a popular
choice. A good deal of the time, it's sexual practice, such as
desiring a partner who wants 3-way sex, to practice BDSM, etc.
It should be considered that not all needs must be fulfilled by sex,
so platonic relationships can fulfill a number of them. We were
discussing the concept of "brotherly love" that seems to be lacking in
relations of heterosexual males, or relations between males that are
not sexual in nature.
|
oval
|
|
response 10 of 73:
|
Jan 1 02:17 UTC 2002 |
well i think that there can be instances where you find someone you're "more
compatible with" but i'm trying very hard to steer this away from the idea
that sex is quantitative like that. compatibility also has to do with getting
to know a person, figuring out what makes them tick sexually, and being
prepared to experiment and try out new things, so as to learn things about
yourself. sometimes you do meet someone who you just automatically click with
sexually and the sex is great, but then you may not really be emotionally
compatible, so that doesnt leave much after a bit of time. re#9 i find that
seeing 2 men together is very kinky and i like it! esp when .. .. ..
|
brighn
|
|
response 11 of 73:
|
Jan 1 19:10 UTC 2002 |
The only universal attribute of polyamory is that it's not monogamy. ;} That
is, there's the recognition that it's morally acceptable for a person to
develop intimate relations with more than one person, if that winds up
happening. Beyond that, it's always true that relationships will only succeed
if everyone involved has compatible expectations, and most polyamorous
relationships have rules of some sort.
|
oval
|
|
response 12 of 73:
|
Jan 2 01:23 UTC 2002 |
brighn, will you have sex with me?
|
brighn
|
|
response 13 of 73:
|
Jan 2 04:13 UTC 2002 |
That depends on whether I find you physically and intellectually attractive
when meeting you. I'm not adverse to the possibility at present.
|
oval
|
|
response 14 of 73:
|
Jan 2 04:47 UTC 2002 |
right on.
|
oval
|
|
response 15 of 73:
|
Jan 2 08:37 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
michaela
|
|
response 16 of 73:
|
Jan 2 08:40 UTC 2002 |
Um, Jon, I know several females, including myself, who get turned on by
watching two men kissing/petting/etc.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 17 of 73:
|
Jan 2 09:04 UTC 2002 |
resp:16 whoops. I went back and realized that I had stated a truism I
myself didn't really believe.. I mean, in general, I figured that
while a f-f scene is a male fantasy for quite a number of men (if not
a majority), I believed that the opposite was more of a minority taste
for women.
Why is that? Do women secretly fantasize about two men having sex?
Perhaps I should ask *why* it's arousing for you, if I'm not being too
bold.
I can't remember where we discussed the f-f sex fantasy, but we did
discuss it somewhere-- why the women tended to be femme, and not
butch; and that usually, the women were described as bisexual. Even
if they were described as lesbian, the portrayal was *never* realistic.
Therefore, is the female version of the m-m sex fantasy similar, or
different? How does it compare with media preference-- i.e., is such
a fantasy more arousing when it is in written form, which supposedly,
women tend to prefer, or when it is more visual, say, by video? Does
the content of the fantasy also differ, i.e., would it be similar or
different from what would be described in various gay media
(literature, video, or otherwise)?
..that was more where I was trying to get at.
|
oval
|
|
response 18 of 73:
|
Jan 2 09:42 UTC 2002 |
#15 wasn't related. think i'll rewrite it and make it a thread when i'm less
hungover.
#17 i can't speak for other women or media, but imho it is just plain sexy.
i don't know why, it just is. it also makes fooling around with two men a lot
more fun. i guess i'm speaking more in terms of personal experience than
seeing images or movies, but sex in general doesnt interst me unless i'm some
how involved real time. i am also not generally interested in people who
consider their 'sexual orientation' the major part of their identity as a
person. maybe i can muster up a better response when my brain is functioning
more properly.
|
oval
|
|
response 19 of 73:
|
Jan 2 10:30 UTC 2002 |
he means by 'friend of the court' parental disagreements, custody battles,
child support, etc.
|
brighn
|
|
response 20 of 73:
|
Jan 2 14:52 UTC 2002 |
the most obvious theory about why so many men seem to find f-f sex
interesting: They find watching sex interesting, and because m-f sex is
threatening because it means a DIFFERENT male is succeeding, and m-m sex is
threatening because it interacts with internal gay desires which are in
denial, or is boring because there are no internal gay desires with which to
interact, the only thing that's left for a mildly homophobic heterosexual male
with moderate to low self esteem is f-f sex. Since "mildly homphobic
heterosexual male with moderate to low self esteem" describes the majority
of American males... ;}
Of course, hedonists just enjoy watching sex, and make no real distinction
in gender of the participants (even if they're strongly heterosexual, they
can still enjoy *watching* homoerotic situations, if the people involved are
enjoying themselves).
|
michaela
|
|
response 21 of 73:
|
Jan 2 20:52 UTC 2002 |
Women enjoy watching two men for just about the same reasons men like watching
two women. :) It's fun.
|
phenix
|
|
response 22 of 73:
|
Jan 2 20:55 UTC 2002 |
re #20: not neccissarly, they could find watching men on men pretty boring.
or find watching sex boring in and of it's self, as opposed to participating
|
brighn
|
|
response 23 of 73:
|
Jan 2 21:29 UTC 2002 |
#21> I disagree. As I said, most men who enjoy watching f-f sex don't enjoy
watching m-m sex, so it's more complicated than "it's fun."
|
oval
|
|
response 24 of 73:
|
Jan 3 04:57 UTC 2002 |
brighn, i agree with #20. but somehow i'm trying to figure out why it's
different for women. meaning, most women who enjoy m-m sex are also not
threatened by f-f or m-f sex either. (i'm assuming). so the notion of these
women enjoying it because they are "mildly homphobic heterosexual females with
moderate to low self esteem" doesnt' seem to apply in exactly the same way.
i've known hetero women who are quite comfortable with m-f AND f-f, but not
m-m. maybe that's just because their boyfriends arent, and they don't want
them to be because THAT would be threatening. so maybe it all boils down to
the same point anyway - feeling threatened/insecure. bisexuality is something
that seems to be accepted among women, but not as much among men. bi men are
often just seen as gay, even though they dig women too. while bi women are
just seen as being sexually liberated and kinky. so a woman accepting m-m may
feel that that also means she must accept the fact that her male partner could
be turned on by men as well, which could make her paranoid that her lover may
be gay, which threatens her. (and maybe that strap-on just ain't her thang.
;P) make sense? (and hedonists just plain aren't bothered by all the societal
pressures and emotional insecurities, but i think there are many different
forms of hedonism.)
|
michaela
|
|
response 25 of 73:
|
Jan 3 08:47 UTC 2002 |
Oh, I was saying "it's fun" in reference to myself. I don't know why other
women like watching it. I think it's because men are sexy, and having TWO
sexy men doing sexy things is just...sexy. ;-)
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 26 of 73:
|
Jan 3 09:01 UTC 2002 |
so, in part at least, similiar reasons.
|
brighn
|
|
response 27 of 73:
|
Jan 3 14:50 UTC 2002 |
#24> I did kind of address that. Women's sexual insecurities in our culture
tend to be in different realms than men's sexual insecurities, so they're
threatened by different things. There's always going to be a component of
people who just enjoy watching, and don't carry a lot of baggage into it.
*shrug*
|
flem
|
|
response 28 of 73:
|
Jan 3 20:56 UTC 2002 |
Oh, I remember what I was going to say. One of the reasons that I often find
it more interesting to watch (recordings of) f-f sex, as opposed to m-f
or m-m, is that, for some odd reason, it's often more artistic. It's sometimes
very sensual, very erotic, in the sense that there's a difference between
erotica and porn. Not always, or even often, of course; most "girl on
girl action" is porn of the least interesting kind, but the rare exceptions
seem to be less rare than for hetero sex.
|
brighn
|
|
response 29 of 73:
|
Jan 3 21:36 UTC 2002 |
#28> I'd agree with that, from my own viewing experiences.
|
oval
|
|
response 30 of 73:
|
Jan 4 06:45 UTC 2002 |
i'd also like to share that brighn asked me the other day in party if i am
in fact a "cock tease". now, the fact that we live several states away from
each other aside, what exactly makes a person a cock tease? i mean, does this
really exist or is it just something men say when a woman gets turned off?
or even if she's just teasing you? some people get off on being teased a
little. it makes the actuality of it happening that much more intense. but
that actuality often never happens when people act like impatient children
- right brighn?
maybe it's just the way that "mildly homphobic heterosexual males with
moderate to low self esteem" behave.
please clarify.
|