IvoryTowers

My understanding of orientation is that it involves attraction to a gender, not just an act. That's why men in all male settings (like prison or boarding schools) will have sexual contact with other men without considering themselves gay (or bi). If you would think about being with a man sexually and are attracted to men as well as women (although maybe less than women) you are probably bi (which is just fine, honestly). If you think about specific acts, you are probably just curious and open minded. Lots of people are willing to explore, especially in the context of a threesome where there's less pressure to go all the way. Labeling that as a specific orientation (I am bi) is overkill.

*Heavy sigh* If someone sat down with me and said "I'm a bank robber, wanna swing?" I'd say no. I wouldn't ask if he was driven to it because he had 3 starving children at home and if he'd really exhausted all other choices before turning to crime. I'd just say no. In the same way, I'd say no to a cheater, and not try to figure out if his backstory excuses him. If you are going to accuse everyone else of misreading, misrepresenting and misquoting you, perhaps you should be more careful yourself. Your analogy is false because it doesn't match my original premise. And as for the stupid "don't judge" claim, are you serious? We judge people all the time. That's called ethics. If you say a person beating a small child would you say "I should really find out if he has tried other options and if his beating is justified" or would you call the police? Do you really think that someone who cheats on a spouse and a swinger are exactly the same? If not, you've made a judgment. If yes, well, I'm done responding to you anyway.

Mr. Ivory here. I keep hearing the phrase "equal love" here, and I don't think that's the way most poly people think about love. In order for me to be poly, I don't have to be in a romantic relationship with someone other than Mrs. Ivory and whom I love as much as I love Mrs. Ivory. That's crazy. Every love relationship is different, and no level of love is more or less valid than any other. The defining characteristic of poly is simply that poly couples allow for the possibility of multiple love relationships beyond the primary one. These relationships may or may not include sex. This, I think, answers Chicup's question about the difference between a long-term swing partner and a poly secondary, teritary, etc. I think a lot of people accept the mono-normative notion that one can only really have one "true" love, and that one person must devote all of his love to that one person in order for it to be "real" love. So the idea becomes that loving another person must diminish the love one has for his primary. But we don't apply this standard to other kinds of love. If a couple has a second child, they don't have to tap into the limited pool of love for the first child and fish out some love for the second (thereby loving the first child less). They just manufacture some more love. Poly is the same way. I love Mrs. Ivory. If I meet someone else whom I also love, then I'll create some more love. I'll still love Mrs. Ivory just as much. I'll just love that other person as well. Yes, I'm capable of that much love. Understanding this concept is key to understanding poly.

I really shouldn't respond, but somehow I can't help myself. Okay, RaysWays, let me try again. If I understand you correctly you want to argue that in some situations, men may be cheating because the wife is withholding sex to manipulate and even hurt the husband, and that to judge him as an immoral person is wrong. That morality is context dependent and therefore in circumstances where the husband has sex unilaterally denied him, he has the right to seek it outside of marriage. Is that right? Here's my problem (actually, I have huge problems with your continued casual and unsupported gender claims, but neither of us is going to win that fight). How can I know? Maybe the guy has been denied sex for absolutely no good reason, maybe he can't leave his wife because she's threatened to take the kids and run to Bora Bora, or the divorce will ruin him financially, or both. But I CAN'T know the truth. Obviously, this guy can't introduce me to his wife to confirm that she's a manipulative bitch who won't sleep with him, cause if he could do that, it wouldn't be cheating. So I'd have to take his word. I'm not comfortable believing a stranger who tells me that not only is his wife refusing him sex for no good reason (he's an innocent victim who has done nothing wrong), and that he's tried other solutions before cheating (he's tried or suggested opening the relationship, getting therapy or at least a physical checkup and in each case it has failed or she's refused outright), but that divorce is simply impossible and so there is NO OTHER SOLUTION but going behind his wife's back for sex. In my mind, such a situation you propose is possible, but I think it is unlikely all those elements would be present, and, as I said before, even if they were all present, how would I know? So my original point stands. I'm not going to help someone cheat because my moral code says helping one person hurt another is unacceptable and I can't know for sure that a marriage is so dead that cheating won't hurt the other spouse. Just because my marriage is open doesn't mean I'm obligated to feel sorry for and help other people deal with sexual frustration. So no, I would never play with a cheating spouse, no matter what he claimed about his situation.

I don't quite see why "non-entangling love...for what she is" is not real love or wouldn't count somehow as poly. We moved from swinging to poly because for both of us (but especially me, Mrs. Ivory) sex without an emotional connection wasn't appealing. However, that doesn't mean we're looking for someone to move into our house and share every moment of our lives. We are open to pretty much any level below that, from friends with benefits to long term lover. So far, there hasn't been any jealousy or fear as we've pursued connections, nor has it made us feel distant or separated (quite the opposite in fact). But then, ever since our relationship started, we've each had close friends of both sexes (our wedding party was gender mixed on both sides). So we're used to having emotional ongoing relationships with people of the opposite sex, and thanks to swinging we're comfortable with non-monogamy. Mixing the sex and the emotions seemed like a natural step and so far has been quite successful for us both.

I wouldn't want to be Mr. Ivory's everything! If I go away, then he has (is) nothing. I don't want Mr. Ivory to be enough for me because I don't want to think in terms of any human fulfilling me or making me happy. To me, to suggest that a person fulfills a need or want in another person is perilously close to suggesting that person is an object. The logic goes: I need X to be happy (sexually fulfilled/financially stable). I want to be happy. Therefore, I need to keep X so that my happiness isn't lost or threatened. We romanticize this idea--"You complete me" for example but also the long standing cliche of giving away one's heart. Since we'd literally die without our heart, this suggests that we would die emotionally without the other person. That introduces an element of fear and need into the relationship. I'd rather acknowledge happily that Mr. Ivory will always need and want other people, interests and things in his life and that I will never be enough for him. What a terrible burden that would be!

Spybunny, I applaud you for deciding to go ahead with the divorce. Not because of the swinging, but because this marriage seems to have already died. I'm mostly working off your post in the other thread here, but I've been struck (and yes, I know I'm only getting one side of the story) by your husband's almost total lack of awareness to your needs. You had to get smashed to go through with your first swing encounter and afterward you threw up. Your husband's reaction? To feel "close enough" to tell you about two affairs? Mr. Ivory notices if I'm slightly grumpy! If I were throwing up from emotional trauma (or any other reason), you can be damned sure he wouldn't pick that moment to drop a bombshell like that! And you say that other women have actually pointed out to your husband that you are unhappy and he's pushed you to continue with the event anyway, which reinforces the idea that he is focused on his own pleasure even when it causes you pain. It's one thing to have a need and try to get it fulfilled. It's entirely another thing to see that you are causing someone you love emotional pain and pretend to yourself that if she just "keeps at it" everything will be fine. Add to that his attempt to get you back on meds when you withdrew from him, his apparent acceptance of your inability to kiss him and his claim that you weren't an equal partner (which was true, or he wouldn't have bullied you, but still), and you've set before us a picture of a narcissist who is willing to mow down others to get what he wants (because he pretends he has NEEDS not wants). Honestly, I would not want to raise boys with such an example of masculinity before them. Get out and let him find what he wants (or thinks he wants) without further damaging you.

First of all, no part of the marriage contract includes sex. Culturally, we may all believe that sex is part of marriage, but it is not part of the marriage contract the way paying for your trash pick up is. You seem to be thinking of prostitution: the exchange of money for sex. Second, your sexism in 2009 is astonishing. No doubt you believe you are arguing based on facts, but as others have pointed out, you might be deeply surprised (if you step outside your limited base) to find that many men also withhold and deny sex. I have a friend who had a child 4 years ago. Since then, her husband has had sex with her 5 times, always after her begging and pleading. Apparently, he sees her as "mom" now and sleeping with a mom just disgusts him. So don't assume. Third, just how do you know every cheating man has a)tried to solve the problems with his wife b)told that he can't even masturbate c)even been denied sex! You can't seriously believe that every man who cheats or wants to cheat has a wife who completely refuses to have sex with him and won't begin to deal with the issue, but refuses to allow him any relief in other ways. Can you? Really? But most important--that's not my call. Male or female, a cheater is someone who decided that lying to and deceiving their spouse is the best (easiest) way to deal with a problem or that lying to/deceiving their spouse is not a big deal (those people who figure "what he doesn't know won't hurt him.") Why on earth would I want to have sex with such a person? What else is he lying about--STIs? His ability to deal with swinging? Don't tell me "I have to stay married for the children" or "He's a horrible person and deserves to be cheated on" or "I don't want to hurt her, I still love her and getting sex elsewhere allows me to keep the relationship going." I do not need, want, or allow your drama and unresolved issues to muck up my life. I don't see that as "castigation" but as practical (I protect myself from fallout) and ethical (I don't help people lie and cheat).

I don't know if this will help, but Mr. Ivory likes PleasurePlus. It has a baggy head area and so it provides more friction and less constriction. I wasn't sure where the constriction was happening with your penis, but thought I'd suggest it.

So several people in this thread have pointed out that women will back away from a man with permission because they realize he can never be theirs, that they're just a fuck buddy, etc. But other people have related anecdotes of single males fleeing as fast from a married woman. Stereotypes of male behavior should have those single guys jumping around like they just won the lottery--commitment free sex! So why are some single guys also freaked out by the idea of a married woman with permission?

I'm sorry, but I don't see her point of view at all. The excuse is beyond lame, it's a huge red flag. Let me restate this. She had a great time with a guy, and felt so guilty about it that she couldn't have sex with you until she secretly slept with him again to "prove" that it wasn't the size of his penis that made her see stars. And after she found that he wasn't as good the second time around she was willing to tell you and explain that she figured if you never found out it wouldn't be a big deal. Ummmmm, there are at least three things here that show she isn't being honest about her feelings or actions with you. Huge red flags!

Yes--a GIFT you GAVE, not a demand you unhappily excused because it was clear Ms. G was going to take what she wanted anyway. As The Fuse said, this isn't about her or him, it is about them as a couple. From what the OP wrote, it seems clear that they discussed her fears beforehand, she agreed to work on expanding her boundaries and he agreed to respect those boundaries while she was working. Obviously, if months from now, the OP decides she'll never be comfortable with full swap they will have to discuss and renegotiate, but that would be a discussion, not a unilateral decision by the boyfriend (or his penis) in the middle of a play session.

Just adding one more voice to the collection. I agree with everything everyone has said. He's not like an animal; he's using that as an excuse to stomp all over your boundaries. If someone came in with a shotgun and said "stop" I bet he could stop. If his mother walked through the door, I bet he could stop. He could control himself if he wanted to. I also wanted to question the other couple. If they knew you were only comfortable with soft swap, what was this woman doing letting your boyfriend (almost) penetrate her? I wonder if either they've gotten mixed signals from your boyfriend ("Oh she says she's softswap but when she gets going she's really comfortable with anything") or are in collusion ("If we go ahead and do it she'll see it really isn't that bad."). Either is appalling behavior. The other possibility is that she's self-centered and rude, and that's not much better. If you do swing again (and I agree with everyone that you shouldn't until your boyfriend PROVES he can respect your wishes), loudly and firmly make your wishes known to everyone involved. Don't be quiet or ambiguous; make absolutely sure that the other couple knows what your boundaries are and that they are completely solid at the moment.

Since Mr. Ivory and I are poly and meet people separately cheating isn't exactly cheating for us. By that I mean that if I came home and found him with another woman my first thought would be "Oops, I must have forgotten that he was seeing someone tonight!" Unlikely to happen, but during the final weeks of the semester I do get pretty absent minded! The only way he could "cheat" on me would be to have a secret relationship with someone that he completely hid from me and that would, of course, anger me a great deal because it would mean he was lying to me on a regular basis. I don't know if I'd end the relationship, but we'd have some serious, probably refereed discussions.

Yes, thank you for the update! I hope all continues to go well and I commend your husband for pausing, even with the good first meeting, before sleeping with her again. I wonder if her earlier fear was based on her belief that your husband was spinning a line about open marriages and this was a secret affair. With the internet so available, I could see her, after he repeated himself several times and you made your desire to meet her extremely clear, going on line and finding out about swinging. "Oh" she thinks, lightbulb going off "They really DO have an open marriage and this is a whole different way of thinking about relationships. I'm...well...interested." And thus the happy meeting. But then, I'm ever the optimist about people and want to ascribe good motives until I am forced to ascribe bad.