Log in

No account? Create an account
29 June 2005 @ 07:58 pm
Gay (or str8) Relationships...  

I'm curious! We of course know that there are many 1 on 1 monogamous gay relationships! I think it's something that at least MOST of us wish for. BUT...what do you guys/gals think about nonconventional relationships? Commited trios or more? Is this something you could do? Something you desire? There is the Howard Roffman set of pics (One above) featuring a commited 3some...In the story that Jase and I are writing, I have a group of 5 married elves...I must admit, as a fantasy, I find this idea kind of exciting, but in reality, I wonder if I could do it! I'm ashamed to admit it, but I can be VERY jealous...shocking, I know! LOL!! SOOOOOOOOO...what do y'all think? Could you be involved in a nonconventional relationship? What kind do you see yourself in?

To help, I found this list on a Gay LJ community (Not sure where...sorry!)...thought it was interesting...

1. The possession by a woman of more than one husband at the same time; -- contrasted with {monandry}.
2. Generally the husbands are subservient to the Mistress.
3. Usually involves communal living arrangement.

Polygamy :
1. The having of a plurality of wives or husbands at the same time; usually, the marriage of a man to more than one woman, or the practice of having several wives, at the same time; -- opposed to monogamy; as, the nations of the East practiced polygamy.
2. The state or habit of having more than one mate (male or female).
3. Generally has a Master in which the wives / mates are subservient.
4. Usually involves communal living arrangement.
5. Usually but not neccesarily exclusive / closed.

1. The state or practice of having several wives at the same time; marriage to several wives.
2. Historically used term to describe a poly "family".
3. Usually involves communal living arrangement.

Polyamory :
1. "Loving more than one". This love may be sexual, emotional, spiritual, or any combination thereof.
2. "Polyamorous" is also used as a descriptive term by people who are open to more than one relationship even if they are not currently involved in more than one.
3. Loosely used in the past few decades to mask "swingers" groups under a poly label.
4. Members may or may not be "faithful" and practice "open relationships".
5. May or may not have Master / subservient hierarchy.
6. Sometimes involves communal living arrangement.

Polyfidelity :
1. Relationship involving more than two people who have made a commitment to keep the sexual activity within the group and not have outside partners. (Rumor has it that this term was coined by the group Kerista.)
2. Often has a Master and subservients.
3. Usually involves communal living arrangement.
4. Elements of Polyequity sometimes involved.

Polyequity :
1. Poly relationships that are not primary / secondary based, yet not really about being "equal".
2. "Secondary" pertains to issues like long-term marriages or relationships that add new partners and those partners desiring to have equal respect and to be of equal value without necessarily being equal in all the ways acquired by long association and relationship investment (like children)."
3. Not neccesarily exclusive.
4. Sometimes involves communal living arrangement.
5. Usually does not have Master and subservients (members are more "equal")

Line Marriage:
1. Poly relationship with empahsis on polyfidelity.
2. The group is usually even-numbered (4 / 6 / 8 ect.)
3. This family is generational : usually an older couple, mid-aged couple, younger ones; and as the elders die, new and younger couples are added to the group, thus truly perpetuating the family.
4. Usually involves communal living arrangement.
5. Master(s) are typically the elders.

1. Often a single person merely haveing sexual relations with many different people.
2. Sometimes a couple will regard their "open relationship" by this term.
3. Usually does not involve communal living arrangements (sometimes yes).
4. Normally does not involve feelings of love or committment.
5. If a master/slave situation occurrs it is usually just for "play" reasons.

Jase: Heartslavetopassion on June 30th, 2005 01:05 am (UTC)
I love fantasizing about committed threesomes or even the elve's 5some. I think it is very interesting. I also think it is acceptable as long as it works for the people involved.

I could be a a committed three-some. It would have to be a peaceful well-oiled machine though. I am a fixer and I would give myself a stroke trying to keep everything calm if there were problems.
I know I could serve and love two strong men but I would also feel it was my job to be the buffer to keep them from butting heads or feeling slighted. So I would probably keep myself a nervous wreck. lol!

This was really informative! Thank you for posting all these definitions!

~smooches~ I love you!
Mark: gay Skater loveboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:14 am (UTC)
Awwwwwwwwww...you are such a sweetheart, Jase! You'd work yourself into such a frenzy, baby!
I think you are very smart to say it would take a well oiled machine! The multiple partnership would have to be very mature and NOT give in to jealousy! (BTW, I'm not sure if anyone knows this, but YOU are one of the MOST mature people I've ever known!)
(no subject) - slavetopassion on June 30th, 2005 01:21 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:38 am (UTC) (Expand)
turtleinashell on June 30th, 2005 01:08 am (UTC)
Wow, this is a lot to think about. I don't know about some things. I can't say I've never thought about it all or entertained ideas, etc, but ... like you, I don't know if I could. Even if I'd never had any kind of religious taboo teachings, I don't know. I guess you don't know some things unless you try, so the real question is, Can you bring yourself to try?

I know that I'm polyamorous, NOT a swinger, but I find it easy to love... and I mean really LOVE more than one person at the same time. I guess that's what makes it hard for me not being with anyone and loving so much.

Hmms. Much to think about.
Mark: guy Charlie BandWboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:26 am (UTC)
It's interesting to think about! I mean...who makes up the rules in such situations?
A supermarket punk rock television comedyliquid_gravity on June 30th, 2005 01:19 am (UTC)
Hm. I've read a couple of byrne's stories that revolve around a committed threesome and the idea is pretty intriguing to me. Of course, like Jase said, all 3 people would have to have chemistry and be willing to share themselves with 2 people instead of 1. It's an interesting concept, and I'd probably be willing to try it with the right people, but I can't imagine things like that ending well, especially if 2 of the people stay together and the 3rd is just kind of set adrift. People are social but also possessive...and I know that I can get jealous, so I don't know if it would be a really good idea for me to get involved in a committed threesome.
Mark: guy Farmers sonboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:31 am (UTC)
Yep...it would take real work, but I think if it worked, it would be awesome! 2 lovers, 3 salaries, 3 to divide the chores and responsibilities...if one of you is down, 2 to pick him up! A 3rd opinion to work out any problems. LOL...I'd have to do major work on my jealousy problem!
blue_aingeal: loveaingeal311 on June 30th, 2005 01:29 am (UTC)
I don't know, I just don't think I could ever do something like that. To me, part of that relationship is the most secure, devoted, and ultimate connection between two people. Like it's a dynamic that ties these two into one and adding a third just detracts from that devotion. I can't sit here and say that it's impossible for someone else, but I would have to be very, very sceptical of how successful it really is and how well it really works. Just from what I've read and been told, they don't work far more often than they do, but I haven't read or heard a whole lot.
Mark: gay kiss classicboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:37 am (UTC)
I understand what you are saying, Reese! I do like to imagine such scenarios...especially with one very special person involved. I think the jealousy comes in because, in our society, we have been raised and taught that relationships are for 2 people (and 2 str8 people at that). Like I said, I'm not sure that I could handle it, but I'm happy for those who can! I was really interested in what others thought!
Dale T. GreatOne: hugh jackmandgreatone on June 30th, 2005 01:46 am (UTC)

The most I'm getting is 4 elves:
Including oneself, count one behind, one in front, one underneath...

Well, OK, one sticking it in your ear. I guess that makes 5 then.
Mark: elf Sylvanboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:49 am (UTC)
ROTFL! These aren't Keeblers, hotstuff! These are tall, muscular supermodels with pointy ears! ;)
(no subject) - slavetopassion on June 30th, 2005 01:50 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:53 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - slavetopassion on June 30th, 2005 01:55 am (UTC) (Expand)
Treed1979a_trick_mind on June 30th, 2005 02:48 am (UTC)
I love that photo. I could almost see that as three str8 friends who have been together all their lives. Ok, so I am dreaming. :)

Tim and I are solidly into monogamy. We believe in the power of two and could never involve one or additional people in our marriage. I suppose there are threesomes, foursomes, etc., that work but I think they are scarce. Invariably someone is not going to get what he wants and needs from the relationship part or all of the time. Once it happens enough times, I see the relationship as being doomed. That said, the same thing happens in twosomes. Someone does not get what he or she needs. I don't know. I just know for us, two is a perfect number.
Mark: MeYahooMarkboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 03:16 am (UTC)
You know what, Rick? I couldn't imagine you and Tim as anything BUT two! I think what you two have is wonderful!
My thoughts are just roaming...I'm thinking for most people 2 IS the magic number...but maybe, just maybe...3 or more could be right for someone else...and for some folks, they just need to be the lone wolf!
(Deleted comment)
Mark: Hobbitsboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:21 pm (UTC)
I agree with you about the reassurance, Cassie! I would also need the reassurance for it to work for me! Even with 3 or more, I would need to feel special and needed.
Aurélienorey on June 30th, 2005 06:47 am (UTC)
Well knowing me, I cannot really feel comfy in a relationship with a master/sub thingie going on. My opinion is that love, sex and relationships are three different things. I can only envision a true committed relationship with one person but I can be in love with several while having sex with the whole bunch and more....
As everybody hinted, it prolly takes comfort, trust and loving levels that very few people are able to provide to make a 3some+ work for real.
Mark: guy Charlie orangeboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 01:23 pm (UTC)
I agree...like I said above, I would need lots of reassurance and I would have to feel needed and special.
Dan the gnomebrewergnome on June 30th, 2005 01:42 pm (UTC)
The story I put down for a while to work on an "easier" one while the first one stews has a race where all couples are three truly hermaphroditic partners (all three end up pregnant).

I think it takes a lot of communication. A lot. I know several polygamous people who are very happy, and a few who are very not. If it works for you and you can maintain that level of communication, I think it's wonderful.

For me? Not going to happen. Why? Too much ADD. As it is, I can barely maintain my focus on ONE person (no really, I'll start thinking about entirely other subjects). More than that, and I'd just overload and lie there, thinking about crochet or something.
Markboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 03:27 pm (UTC)
LOL! Awwwwwwwwww! Yeah...y'know, I forgot my own ADD! That would definately play into it!
Your story sounds interesting, Dan...I wonder how that would affect our own culture...everyone being fully hermaphroditic!
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 03:38 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 04:03 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 04:54 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 06:07 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 06:12 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 06:28 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 06:33 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 06:39 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 06:53 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 09:38 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 01:44 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 02:14 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 02:18 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 02:33 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on June 30th, 2005 06:57 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on June 30th, 2005 10:10 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 01:45 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 02:21 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 02:30 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 02:34 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 12:15 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 12:30 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - brewergnome on July 1st, 2005 12:32 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on July 1st, 2005 11:09 pm (UTC) (Expand)
guardian1 on June 30th, 2005 04:19 pm (UTC)
There was a very good film a year ago
"A Home at the End of the World"
about a 3-way (it's now available on
DVD) with guy Colin Farrell, guy Dallas Roberts, and gal Robin Penn
Wright living together in Woodstock,
managing a restaurant together, and
hopping in and out of various beds,
including each other's. There's one scene where Farrell and Roberts dance together on their porch at night which I found deeply moving. Oh yeah,
they have a baby together and it all
seems to work out well since each one
of them is a little daft to begin with. BTW when the film was first released it had a scene of Farrell
full front nude, but they felt audiences were too distracted by his
substantial assets, and understandably so. They took it out (damned!) Maybe somewhere in cyberspace that scene lives on.
Mark: Thinkerboywondermark on June 30th, 2005 06:04 pm (UTC)
VERY interesting, EDTD! That sounds like a movie that I'd like to see!
LOL...I've heard that Colin has immense assets! I'd also heard that his full frontal was cut from a movie due to the distraction! I didn't know which movie...now I do! Maybe it will be edited back in on DVD in a "Director's Cut"! :)
A.M.ultimategirl on July 5th, 2005 09:50 pm (UTC)
I could handle adding another male to the household.
Mark: gay Threeboywondermark on July 5th, 2005 11:15 pm (UTC)
OMG! LOL! I had to read that twice! GO ANNE!!!!
(no subject) - dendroidman on August 29th, 2005 04:51 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - ultimategirl on August 29th, 2005 11:08 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - dendroidman on August 30th, 2005 02:52 am (UTC) (Expand)
dendroidmandendroidman on August 29th, 2005 05:02 am (UTC)
it might be a nieve opinion. (lately most of mine have been) but i find myself liking several people. and i don't just meen the light encounter either. im talkin about real relationships but unfortunaly its several people and at the same time. (i've never actually done it mind you) and what usualy kills me the most is finding out that the different people that i like in that way don't like each other. personlly i would have no problem with a relationship with more than two people. and adding to your guyses little ADD talks. having several people to split the consentration isn't such a bad thing. actually i NEED several things to keep my mind busy. (right now im writing this post, answering my mail, and chatting with my friends) its not that i can split my attention but more of i have to. lol if that makes sence.
Markboywondermark on August 29th, 2005 01:32 pm (UTC)
Makes sense to me, Den! I think it's a definate option for some people! A commune type situation! As with anything, it's not for everyone!
(no subject) - dendroidman on August 30th, 2005 02:45 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on August 30th, 2005 01:27 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - dendroidman on August 31st, 2005 03:56 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on August 31st, 2005 06:27 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - dendroidman on September 2nd, 2005 03:35 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - boywondermark on September 3rd, 2005 12:07 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - dendroidman on September 3rd, 2005 05:10 am (UTC) (Expand)