You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   42-66   67-84       
 
Author Message
18 new of 84 responses total.
jazz
response 67 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 4 21:45 UTC 2002

        One thing, to bring these two threads together, that's always bugged
me is the way that some people don't seperate a sexual preference and a
lifestyle.  They really don't have anything to do with each other, other than
the fact that some groups seem to center around little in the way of common
interest except for a common sexual preference and a love for drama.
brighn
response 68 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 4 22:41 UTC 2002

#66> Since you asked so nicely, I'll stop picking on Jon. ;} All the same,
I can't resist this, but I'll provide this preface so you KNOW I'm joking:
 
What, Julie? Now I'm supposed to be nice to Jon because HE's pregnant?
Boyoboy, you're just two peas in a pod, aren't you? Special treatment all
around.
snowth
response 69 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 5 23:57 UTC 2002

(I'm glad you said it Paul, I was just about to make fun of Julie for the same
thing, but (a) you got to it first, and (b) you're already in trouble for
picking on the soon to be parents. :)
jaklumen
response 70 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 10:17 UTC 2002

brighn: ignore e-mail reply then, I hadn't read this yet

yeah, yeah, I'm pregnant too, about to give birth to a fat cake
jazz
response 71 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 14:38 UTC 2002

        While reading through a book on the therapeutic techniques of Milton
Ericson, I noticed that, in almost every example of the great therapist's
work, he was deliberately acting as a normative, not just working with the
subject's problems, but also bringing them back in line with his percieved
notions of what a person should think and feel, and what their role in society
should be.  It troubled me, and it still troubles me.

        I'd also like to state that the idea that, if you are bisexual, that
you can and should have one partner of each gender, isn't necessarily a part
and parcel of bisexuality.  I can't see how it's any different than a
heterosexual or homosexual who prefers, say, blondes and brunettes,
rationalizing that they should then have one partner of each gender.  If
you've got an arranged polygamous relationship, or you're not in a committed
relationship, then you are of course free to do as you've negotiated, or as
you will.  But if you go introducing the idea of bi privilege into a committed
relationship, don't be surprised if it has negative effects, and don't blame
bisexuality for it.
phenix
response 72 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 15:18 UTC 2002

i'll take a burnette, a redhead and a blonde please.
with a side of gradients, maybe some blue or artificial red
morwen
response 73 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 17:22 UTC 2002

jazz:  hmm.  Maybe I need to have this "bi privilege" thing defined 
for me because I don't recall ever saying I was claiming it.
jazz
response 74 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 18:11 UTC 2002

        It's a local term for the concept that, if one is bisexual, one can
or should have a partner of each gender.  Jon mentioned it a couple of
responses back, though not by that term, but I'm too lazy to go back and
quote.
phenix
response 75 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 18:25 UTC 2002

oh hey, she can have a freind, as long as i'm the male partner for both
michaela
response 76 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 18:47 UTC 2002

I've already told my boy that he can have a boy, but I get to watch...or at
least take pictures.  He was all for it, but then he realized it would still
feel like cheating, even though I'd said it was okay (and encouraged it). 
I feel bad that he won't get the experience of being with a guy, but I'm also
okay that he feels weird about touching anyone but me.  :)
oval
response 77 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 22:53 UTC 2002

menage a trois?

jazz
response 78 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 23:42 UTC 2002

        I think that's what she's getting at.

        I actually had a girl I was in a committed relationship with bring the
idea up.  I wasn't really into it.  It would've been unhealthy for the
relationship unless it was just the right person.
oval
response 79 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 23:50 UTC 2002

yea, it's easy to find a dynamic of 3 that's comfortable for everyone.

oval
response 80 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 6 23:52 UTC 2002

err .._not_ easy.

michaela
response 81 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 7 04:25 UTC 2002

Um, no.  I didn't want a threesome.  I wanted to watch and/or take pictures.
That does not mean "threesome".  It means watch.

      :)
jaklumen
response 82 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 7 05:40 UTC 2002

resp:74  but then there is also the Bisexual Grand Slam, which is a 
double of that variant.
oval
response 83 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 7 23:18 UTC 2002

you think you could watch without wanting to jumo in? heh, i doubt that.

michaela
response 84 of 84: Mark Unseen   Apr 8 07:31 UTC 2002

I don't doubt it.  I know myself.  :)
 0-24   25-49   42-66   67-84       
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

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