The Relationship Thread: Because Superhero Forums are Full of Sexperts! - - - - - - - - - Part 28

[Reef Goddess]

The best relationship I had was polygamous (me and two guys).

Sadly I had to move to a different state and so was unable to maintain the relationship. One of the guys was willing to move with me, but I told him not to. The other was less committed.

More women should try to having multiple boyfriends, it adds a lot more variety. Most men are competitive by nature so when there's two in a relationship they'll work extra hard in keeping you happy in the process of trying to upstage each other.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Talked to a nice girl on POF and she actually replied twice but has since stopped. That was like two and a half weeks ago and she was online like 10 mins ago. Online dating is garbage!!!!!

 

[Anita18]

The best relationship I had was polygamous (me and two guys).

Sadly I had to move to a different state and so was unable to maintain the relationship. One of the guys was willing to move with me, but I told him not to. The other was less committed.

More women should try to having multiple boyfriends, it adds a lot more variety. Most men are competitive by nature so when there's two in a relationship they'll work extra hard in keeping you happy in the process of trying to upstage each other.

Multiple guys wouldn't be for me at all, since I don't think too hard about relationship logistics or details or even being impressed. It's not my personality - I just want stability and support.

I wasn't "in demand" by guys anyway so one is perfectly good enough for me!

But I agree that there's a lot of social stigma over things like that. People tend to gravitate to what's expected from society and it doesn't even occur to them that anything else is possible.

If you can believe it, we've actually been more adventurous in bed after marriage than anytime before, and this includes what my husband's tried with other women before meeting/marrying me. Trust and being non-judgmental is huge.

I mean, I guess taking someone home for a one-night stand, you might as well try whatever since you'll never see them again, but it's more important for some people to have long-term trust in someone.

 

[Feenix]

The best relationship I had was polygamous (me and two guys).

Sadly I had to move to a different state and so was unable to maintain the relationship. One of the guys was willing to move with me, but I told him not to. The other was less committed.

More women should try to having multiple boyfriends, it adds a lot more variety. Most men are competitive by nature so when there's two in a relationship they'll work extra hard in keeping you happy in the process of trying to upstage each other.

Unless they're screwing other women.

 

[Reef Goddess]

They weren't. I wouldn't have allowed that.

 

[Feenix]

They weren't. I wouldn't have allowed that.

Haha, right.

 

[Reef Goddess]

Haha, right.

I kept a short leash on both of them, they would've have to been very crafty to get something like that past me without me knowing.

 

[PacificBoy]

Openly polygamous? As in the two male paramours in question are aware of the other?

 

[Reef Goddess]

Openly polygamous? As in the two male paramours in question are aware of the other?

Very openly.

 

[PacificBoy]

Very openly.

Interesting dynamics. Were there any setout rules of engagement? That is, could more people/partners have been brought in or was it strictly you at the center and two other guys? I'm curious.

 

[Feenix]

I kept a short leash on both of them, they would've have to been very crafty to get something like that past me without me knowing.

You said it yourself. Guys are competitive. So why would they bother competing for your affection when they could get it somewhere else?

And what gives you the right to keep them on a "short leash?" Sounds like you just wanted two patsies to control. Nice.

 

[Kane52630]

 

[Anita18]

You said it yourself. Guys are competitive. So why would they bother competing for your affection when they could get it somewhere else?

And what gives you the right to keep them on a "short leash?" Sounds like you just wanted two patsies to control. Nice.

And I think if anything, her situation would only work if she were Kim Kardashian hot and had a bunch of guys wanting to get in her pants.

Ain't no guys competing against each other to sleep with asexual-seeming tomboy me more.


As long as everyone's happy, but that kind of relationship isn't exactly sustainable. (Some guys are willing to be patsies to a Kim Kardashian.) It all depends on what you're looking for. -shrug-

 

[Reef Goddess]

Interesting dynamics. Were there any setout rules of engagement? That is, could more people/partners have been brought in or was it strictly you at the center and two other guys? I'm curious.

They were obviously not allowed to see other women. Most of the time the three of us hung out together, it wasn't like "I'll see you on weekdays and I'll see the other on weekends", I liked having them both around simultaneously, like an entourage.

There was, a bit of a rivalry between them but I made sure it never escalated into something worse.

You said it yourself. Guys are competitive. So why would they bother competing for your affection when they could get it somewhere else?

And what gives you the right to keep them on a "short leash?" Sounds like you just wanted two patsies to control. Nice.

Not all guys are so insecure that they have to be the only man in the relationship. There's a misconception (and a double-standard) that all men try to be the "alpha-male" and try to sleep with as many women as they can. There are lot of passive guys who have an adoration for strong willed women and don't mind being in this type of relationship. Without getting into details, some women aren't satisfied with just one man.

 

[PacificBoy]

They were obviously not allowed to see other women. Most of the time the three of us hung out together, it wasn't like "I'll see you on weekdays and I'll see the other on weekends", I liked having them both around simultaneously, like an entourage.

There was, a bit of a rivalry between them but I made sure it never escalated into something worse.

Everyone's entitled to whatever consensual adult relationship dynamic they want, conventional or otherwise, so if the two guys are up for it it's their prerogative, but it doesn't sound like much of a relationship to me; comes across as lopsided and more than a little cult-like in the manner of the dominion you've established.

 

[Feenix]

They were obviously not allowed to see other women. Most of the time the three of us hung out together, it wasn't like "I'll see you on weekdays and I'll see the other on weekends", I liked having them both around simultaneously, like an entourage.

There was, a bit of a rivalry between them but I made sure it never escalated into something worse.


Not all guys are so insecure that they have to be the only man in the relationship. There's a misconception (and a double-standard) that all men try to be the "alpha-male" and try to sleep with as many women as they can. There are lot of passive guys who have an adoration for strong willed women and don't mind being in this type of relationship. Without getting into details, some women aren't satisfied with just one man.

They were your entourage and you kept them on a short leash?

That's not strong willed, it's self centered.

I believe in treating people well and with respect, regardless of the type of relationship you have with them. You just come across as a total jerk.

 

[terry78]

This thread will always win Thread of the Year. Always.

 

[Reef Goddess]

Everyone's entitled to whatever consensual adult relationship dynamic they want, conventional or otherwise, so if the two guys are up for it it's their prerogative, but it doesn't sound like much of a relationship to me; comes across as lopsided and more than a little cult-like in the manner of the dominion you've established.

No, it's my prerogative. If I tell two or more guys I want to be in a polygamous relationship strictly consisting of myself and multiple men and they agree to that, then it's a relationship of my design. Polygamous doesn't mean pansexual, it doesn't mean a free love commune. I knew I wanted multiple male partners devoted to one female, and I want our and found two willing guys.

They were your entourage and you kept them on a short leash?

That's not strong willed, it's self centered.

I believe in treating people well and with respect, regardless of the type of relationship you have with them. You just come across as a total jerk.

I make no excuses, I was definitely in charge. They preferred that. If you think that makes me a jerk, then so be it. I would be in that kind of relationship again, and I intend on it.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

So anyone here actually been to a Match.com Stir event? I went to one last year but I got there REALLY late near the end so I didn't really get to mingle or anything too much. Did meet a girl but it went NOWHERE and I haven't talked to her since. I am trying to break out of my shell and try meeting women in person instead of online. Another match.com stir event is happening next week in my area. It's only 6 bucks to but a ticket to the event and I am thinking I should go. Just wondering if anyone else had any experience with match.com stir events?

 

[Grabes30]

*Gasp!* ...and not hide behind a computer?!


.............No. No, I've not done that. (Dramatized for effect.)

 

[Anita18]

Everyone's entitled to whatever consensual adult relationship dynamic they want, conventional or otherwise, so if the two guys are up for it it's their prerogative, but it doesn't sound like much of a relationship to me; comes across as lopsided and more than a little cult-like in the manner of the dominion you've established.

For me, the word "relationship" implies some kind of commitment, and it sounds like there was commitment, even if Reef Goddess's commitment was spread across two guys.

And yeah, it's her prerogative if she wants relationships like that, but they certainly aren't for everyone, and wouldn't exactly sustain say, a parenting situation. As mentioned, I'm not impressed what guys typically do to win over a woman. (Neither are babies. )

Although two guys competing over who gets to do the laundry or housework might be interesting for me, since acts of service are literally the only things that win me over.

 

[Anita18]

So anyone here actually been to a Match.com Stir event? I went to one last year but I got there REALLY late near the end so I didn't really get to mingle or anything too much. Did meet a girl but it went NOWHERE and I haven't talked to her since. I am trying to break out of my shell and try meeting women in person instead of online. Another match.com stir event is happening next week in my area. It's only 6 bucks to but a ticket to the event and I am thinking I should go. Just wondering if anyone else had any experience with match.com stir events?

Hmm, never heard of them. But why not give it a try.

I've seen lots of events for singles on Meetup.com too, like hiking groups or other social activities. Might be more relaxed than showing up at a bar expecting to just meet "The One" there, which is a lot of pressure!

 

[PacificBoy]

For me, the word "relationship" implies some kind of commitment, and it sounds like there was commitment, even if Reef Goddess's commitment was spread across two guys.

And yeah, it's her prerogative if she wants relationships like that, but they certainly aren't for everyone, and wouldn't exactly sustain say, a parenting situation. As mentioned, I'm not impressed what guys typically do to win over a woman. (Neither are babies. )

Although two guys competing over who gets to do the laundry or housework might be interesting for me, since acts of service are literally the only things that win me over.

If she can get two fully functioning adult men to commit to her and her only, well, all the power to her. I question the two men really. "Entourage", "not allowed", "kept on a short leash" suggest being bound to her bidding and not to a mutually-giving relationship. A Fatal Attraction moment is a flash of jealousy away I tell ya. t:

From what I read of modern polyandry, the successful ones comprise men who willingly commit to it, commit to sharing one woman between the two of them. And not because the woman forbade them from seeing others.

Hmm, never heard of them. But why not give it a try.

I've seen lots of events for singles on Meetup.com too, like hiking groups or other social activities. Might be more relaxed than showing up at a bar expecting to just meet "The One" there, which is a lot of pressure!

Agree. There's nothing to lose. Chill, practise making small talk or conversing, meet potentially interesting people.

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

This Internet dating thing is tough... I guess I am not as stunningly attractive as I thought I was.
Luckily I have developed a thick skin these last couple of years and am not getting (too) devastated over the complete lack of replies! t:

EDIT
On a slightly serious note to anyone else who has dipped their foot in the pond of dating web sites, do you struggle as much as I do to come up with an interesting/witty yet non-formulaic opening message to those ladies you are interested in?

 

[Erzengel]

I'd really would just read someone's profile and just base questions on that. Oh you like traveling? What are some of your favorite places to visit or where did you just come back from?