Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#120229 - 09/17/19 08:59 PM Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA
CanisMachina42 Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1501
Loc: Ca
I don't fucking care if it is a massive trend, beyond princes, sheiks, polygamist Mormons, and kings with harems, poly-relationships, especially ones where the girl has a girlfriend, is a one way ticket to wanting to kill some bitches. It MUST need strict religious doctrine to work or something.

But more than bitching, this is a public service announcement to every dude that thinks he will live the dream of fucking two women 24/7.

Fantasy has stark contrast with reality.

In 3 person relationships (usually FFM) "M" is codename for scapegoat and bitch. You will never be sided with in fights, they will team up against you for fun, and even in calm seas you're still like a parent of a 18 year old. Snowed. You kind of get a shapshot of how it is but for the most part you will feel kept around so one of them's (or both) Father's won't disown the lesbian daughter. And intimacy will exist, it just wont include yourself.

It is also in your interest to NOT be a jealous type, as misery is proportional to that, in fact, you are better off paying escorts that will leave right after.

And Peter Steele made it look so glamorous.
_________________________
32.6
-117.1
Sea level
11:56 PM July, 1st 2019
Wrote Signature

Top
#120230 - 09/17/19 10:09 PM Re: Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA [Re: CanisMachina42]
LEVIATHAN'sabyss Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/15/19
Posts: 11
I wish I had this post about a year ago.

I second this PSA. It was a disaster. Granted I was drinking at the time and you really have to have your wits about you. Speaking of calm seas, you really are navigating a ship between two icebergs and there's rarely room for wake. And it changes things after. Not necessarily bad, just different. The discussion of children (in my case) will really test your foundations. It takes a strong, sharp foresight to keep things balanced if you're not all in a brainwashed cult. I was in one cult where the discussion of children almost cost lives, but I'll save that story for a future post...

Anyways, heed Canis advice, ye who enter there.
_________________________
"Of course we have free will, because we have no choice but to have it."
-Hitchslap

Top
#120233 - 09/18/19 11:37 AM Re: Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA [Re: CanisMachina42]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3370
Polyamorous is bullshit.
Threesome is fun for a night.
Not for long-lasting shit.

Besides, who wants to fuck the same two women 24/7?
Better go for broke if you want variety.
Don't get in a relationship and simply fuck around.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#120243 - 09/18/19 10:39 PM Re: Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA [Re: LEVIATHAN'sabyss]
samowens84 Offline
member


Registered: 09/29/16
Posts: 598
 Originally Posted By: LEVIATHAN'sabyss
I wish I had this post about a year ago.

I second this PSA. It was a disaster. Granted I was drinking at the time and you really have to have your wits about you. Speaking of calm seas, you really are navigating a ship between two icebergs and there's rarely room for wake. And it changes things after. Not necessarily bad, just different. The discussion of children (in my case) will really test your foundations. It takes a strong, sharp foresight to keep things balanced if you're not all in a brainwashed cult. I was in one cult where the discussion of children almost cost lives, but I'll save that story for a future post...

Anyways, heed Canis advice, ye who enter there.


If the situation is insincere, you're likely to find pain.

That can apply to monogamous as much as polyamorous relationships.

Just like how much loyal folks apear to you depends how capable and loyal you are to yourself.

Unless you love and respect yourself as a skill then your world will only reflect your own weaknesses or I adequacies, or an inability to accept your limitations.

Top
#120244 - 09/19/19 07:17 AM Re: Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA [Re: CanisMachina42]
XiaoGui17 Offline
veteran member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1317
Loc: Austin, TX
 Originally Posted By: CanisMachina42
It MUST need strict religious doctrine to work or something.
Not even then.

Funny story. This girl's father joined a polygamist cult as an excuse to get novelty pussy. His self-image of righteousness didn't mesh with his desire to cheat on his wife, so he convinced himself it was religious conviction instead of wandering eye.

As it turns out, the religious order doled out hot, young pussy based on church donations, and this dude was poor as fuck, so when he finally did get a second wife, she was old and fat.


 Originally Posted By: CanisMachina42
In 3 person relationships (usually FFM) "M" is codename for scapegoat and bitch.
Yup.

Like most bisexual women, I am attracted to maybe one man per every 50 women I find attractive. In order to be an attractive woman, you basically have to be a woman and have nothing wrong with you. In order to be a sexy man, you really have to have something actively going on for you. Sorry, life ain't fair.

Even so, I usually end up with men, because it's easiest to fall back on what's readily available. Who'd make the effort when they needn't do so? Dick is the low-hanging fruit.

That being the case, I'd be extremely skeptical of any woman who put forth the active effort to get pussy when she already has dick readily available. What you have there is a woman who doesn't like dick, my friend. Or, at the very least, doesn't like yours. But nah, I'm calling lesbian, because if it's just yours she doesn't like, it's still infinitely easier to find a different dick.

Sure, she'll suck it just as often as she needs to get whatever else she wants out of you. (And not once more.) But make no mistake--she wants you for something other than dick.

As a general rule, regardless of sex and orientation, polyamory just sounds ridiculously exhausting. With two people, the only dynamic you have to worry about is the one between person A and person B. With every person you add to the mix, you're adding a new dynamic between that person and every person already there. The more complicated the mechanism, the more moving parts, the more ways in which it can break.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#120248 - 09/19/19 01:43 PM Re: Three's Misery: A Polyamorous PSA [Re: XiaoGui17]
samowens84 Offline
member


Registered: 09/29/16
Posts: 598

The common mistake is to assume that there isn't a package deal. Often women have used men to network to meet other women. And IF a man is worthwhile, he gets to stay, if not, they usually tend to budge them to being gay.

Point being often there already are a bunch of "moving parts" that need to be accounted for and accepted so that either world isn't broken by an unequal relationship.

Everything has some measure of negotiations involved, and some females found it hard to accept that my world has moving parts like theirs, and so my bargaining power goes up and I'm more likely to have a rich and independent world to leverage respect kindness and consideration.

Contrary to the assumption of what others think things should be, if a man allowed a woman to use love to isolate him from friends family and other romantic interests, then her leverage could likely influence even against her best intentions to treat him with contempt as her world would look rich with friends and lovers and experience, while his by contrast might look dark and isolated and dependent on her for social interaction. This is what defines a "cuckhold" and what I will avoid. Being cuckholded isn't about whether a partner is faithful to the other, it's that.

The catch 22 is that male female relationships is unavoidable for me so if that had to happen in one form or another, then I'm pragmatic and make sure I get something out of it.

But I do have unique leverage. Because while everyone else seems to be whining about having a partner being heterosexual, LGBT or whatever, I'm willing to reject all partners and be alone unless I get a white female partner that will be as good to me as I will be to her.

That or nothing.

And I can care and nurture myself better than just some person. And so often much of the offers I'd gotten were inferior to what I can do for myself. And so in those cases being alone was preferred. I've even gotten offers from partners I love more than anything, but the proposed partnership was a bad deal for both of us, and often it's been me who's had to say no. But when I've done so, she often just runs to someone else instead of being comfortable alone.

And that was a problem. And how I knew she wasn't ready for a quality relationship.

And of course I will never abandon my family or loved ones, and since either option I had been presented prior to today, whether being gay or having my preferred partner would have had that effect, this is why I said no.

If I don't put my family first than any partner I would have had would have been toxic.

Why it's all or nothing by necessity.


Edited by samowens84 (09/19/19 02:30 PM)

Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.011 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 20 queries. Zlib compression disabled.