Politics and Porn

[Primalex]

You just saw the phrase "A girlfriend will let you"

No, she saw:"Learn to accept people - sweet-talk them into doing things they don't like." which does seem a fairly inconsistent position.

But that's okay, most humans are inconsistent, it's this preach water and drink wine thingie.

 

[SlutAddicted]

Kim's points are definitely the more rationale and fact based in this discussion. I won't bother to cite the various examples of opinion that have been asserted as fact, but they aren't coming from Kim.

But I would like to address points that were made earlier. Yes, fairy tales do affect how we see the world. Yes, high body count movies do affect the way we see the world.

The impact isn't straight line or literal but it is there.

I known many people who have had challenges with relationships because they expected the idealized version of their partner. Many of the fairy tales I have watched with my kids left me with the rather surprisingly realization that some of the heroes and heroines are kind of douchy. Same goes for shows my daughter watches - they are ostensibly trying to project positive female role models, but I see young women who get away with being far more self-involved and selfish than the boys in those programs.

I like a good action flick as much as the next guy. The problem I see is not with the body count but with the simplistic portrayal of good and evil. As one former CIA operative I heard say recently "everybody thinks they are the good guy." Toxic and damaging foreign and immigration policy gets driven by this right/wrong narrative. Sure if all the bad guys wore black hats and self identify, ya go ahead and kill them. But take away that artificial certainty and it is a fine line between hero and war criminal. The way that simplistic thinking permeates popular opinion has facilitated a lot of bad decisions. Simplistic scape-goating doesn't lead to resolution, it leads to more violence and unrest.

Yes it comes down to parenting and leadership and personal diligence in seeking information and truth. Banning porn won't work any better than banning alcohol or pot (which is to say not at all). And those who would seek to ban porn are usually those that wish to impose their own view of sexuality which may be no less destructive. All these things are part of the world we live in. We have to deal with them and the best way to do so is to recognize that they do affect our perceptions.

I talk to me kids about these idiotic and simplistic portrayals. And I don't pretend that I can completely neutralize them.

 

[SlutAddicted]

But to re-iterate a point I made earlier there is also the view that maybe porn isn't entirely bad. Or at least if we are going to say it is "wrong" then we should decide what is "right".

I respect the fact that perhaps Kim and many other women don't want a guy to cum on their face. But surely there is a difference between some guy you just started dating and the man you have been married to for 15 years. If this is a man who has always treated you with love and respect and now you are trying to spice up your love life a bit......is letting him cum on your face really so bad?

I know plenty of marriages where the unrealistic expectations of a rigidly conservative philosophy or one that is obsessed with regarding all men as misogynist caricatures are just as damaging as unrealistic pornographic images.

It is obviously more complex at younger years but as a guy I do feel as though we are sometimes exposed to one of two extremes. Either porn is real life and it is ok to treat women like shit. Or all porn is bad and your desires are unnatural.

 

[Primalex]

If this is a man who has always treated you with love and respect and now you are trying to spice up your love life a bit......is letting him cum on your face really so bad?

What is there to be gained?

Physically it does not matter for the guy where the ejaculation lands, psychologically it is a 3 second fun project (worst case a slippery slope of degradation).

The opposing "Uh, just wipe it off afterwards" and "Uh, just cum somewhere else" positions are rather on the same level - there is no big benefit where some very minor inconvenience results in a huge gain of fun for both.


Plenty of bi-guys will tell you that you should try to suck a cock of a guy and that you are missing out - I don't care. I'm not going to do it. And any kind of logical reasoning will not change my attitude towards it and there is no level of emotional blackmailing (because that is what we are actually talking about here) that will make me do it - the only thing you would achieve is that I will start to despise the person who constantly nags me about it.

 

[SlutAddicted]

What is there to be gained?

Physically it does not matter for the guy where the ejaculation lands, psychologically it is a 3 second fun project (worst case a slippery slope of degradation).

The opposing "Uh, just wipe it off afterwards" and "Uh, just cum somewhere else" positions are rather on the same level - there is no big benefit where some very minor inconvenience results in a huge gain of fun for both.


Plenty of bi-guys will tell you that you should try to suck a cock of a guy and that you are missing out - I don't care. I'm not going to do it. And any kind of logical reasoning will not change my attitude towards it and there is no level of emotional blackmailing (because that is what we are actually talking about here) that will make me do it - the only thing you would achieve is that I will start to despise the person who constantly nags me about it.

Your or my logic on how someone should feel about cum on the face is no more valid than someone else's logic about why you should suck a dick. It is irrelevant.

My point isn't to accept cum on her face but to be open-minded with a loved one rather than defaulting to a stereotype. If it is a solid relationship there is no reason he shouldn't be able to ask her and expect her to give it a considered response in the context of their actual circumstance and not some societal stereotype. If she has thought about and decided no way, then that is the end of it.....she doesn't owe him a justification and there is nothing to be gained by forcing the issue or at least nothing worth the cost of making her feel degraded.

My question "is letting him cum on your face really so bad?" is intended as a legitimate question among adults. It isn't intended as a "hey baby why won't you do this?" passive aggressive coercion. Note the lead in where I described the man as a 15 year husband who has always treated her with love and respect......presumably someone not looking to degrade and who would readily accept "no" if that is the answer.

 

[policywank]

Your or my logic on how someone should feel about cum on the face is no more valid than someone else's logic about why you should suck a dick. It is irrelevant.

My point isn't to accept cum on her face but to be open-minded with a loved one rather than defaulting to a stereotype. If it is a solid relationship there is no reason he shouldn't be able to ask her and expect her to give it a considered response in the context of their actual circumstance and not some societal stereotype. If she has thought about and decided no way, then that is the end of it.....she doesn't owe him a justification and there is nothing to be gained by forcing the issue or at least nothing worth the cost of making her feel degraded.

My question "is letting him cum on your face really so bad?" is intended as a legitimate question among adults. It isn't intended as a "hey baby why won't you do this?" passive aggressive coercion. Note the lead in where I described the man as a 15 year husband who has always treated her with love and respect......presumably someone not looking to degrade and who would readily accept "no" if that is the answer.

I think that open and honest communication between adults should start with everything up for discussion. Ideally neither party is obliged to demonstrate benefit or absence of harm in order to put a subject on the table and both partners are willing to approach each topic with an open mind.

To some degree that does mean being willing to be questioned on how you feel about any topic and why. It is a fine and often blurred line between exploring your own perspective and helping your partner understand a point of view (positive communication) and being compelled to justify your position (which undermines communication).

It is incumbent upon both partners to set aside as many preconceptions as possible and not to try to use the occasion to convince the other to do something they don't want to do. I see no reason why a man shouldn't be able to tell his wife that he wants to cum on her face and seek to understand why she might see it as degrading....as long as he respects her absolute right to say no.

Discussing sexual topics with your kids is a different matter. They are not as mature or developed. There is reason to be more cautious. But in my experience putting topics off limits doesn't achieve anything, nor does defaulting to "because I said so" or "you aren't old enough to understand." A guy wanting to cum on your face is frequently a show of dominance and possibly degradation. Moreover, no guy worth being with would ever insist on anything sexual. Porn is a gross distortion of human sexuality, don't demonize it but don't take it as a guide to anything. Think for yourself and see the situation for what it is.

 

[KimGordon67]

well, again, you prove full well that you only see trigger words in my post, while the entire message just can't fit int your 2-bit brain.

I won't even answer your "points" because you invented yourself the problems that weren't even in my post.
You just saw the phrase "A girlfriend will let you" and instantly thought "Aha! Women abuse! Degradation of proud women! Acts against her will! Forcing her to do something! I need to address this misogyny!"
How more brainless can you become? maybe I should start ripping 3-word phrases out of your posts and start perverting them, then proving that you want to burn innocent people and kill Jews?

Actually, no, I was reading your inconsistent statements in the light of other posts you've made, e.g. where you suggested that if the 'stuck in a vanilla marriage' guy was 'patient' enough, eventually he would convince his wife that throat fucking and simulated rape was a 'good' thing. Regardless of the fact that ALL the evidence he provided seemed to suggest that just wasn't something she was into, and was unlikely to ever be into - and that's actually not unreasonable. A great deal of what you say suggests that you see gendered sexual relations as some sort of 'competition' where the guys need to find various ways to convince the girls to do what they want, rather than a mutually constructed experience in which you find out together what you both enjoy.

 

[KimGordon67]

Your or my logic on how someone should feel about cum on the face is no more valid than someone else's logic about why you should suck a dick. It is irrelevant.

My point isn't to accept cum on her face but to be open-minded with a loved one rather than defaulting to a stereotype. If it is a solid relationship there is no reason he shouldn't be able to ask her and expect her to give it a considered response in the context of their actual circumstance and not some societal stereotype. If she has thought about and decided no way, then that is the end of it.....she doesn't owe him a justification and there is nothing to be gained by forcing the issue or at least nothing worth the cost of making her feel degraded.

My question "is letting him cum on your face really so bad?" is intended as a legitimate question among adults. It isn't intended as a "hey baby why won't you do this?" passive aggressive coercion. Note the lead in where I described the man as a 15 year husband who has always treated her with love and respect......presumably someone not looking to degrade and who would readily accept "no" if that is the answer.

The problem here is separating out the 'social stereotypes' from 'what we enjoy'. I love my husband to bits and have done for over 15 years - but he's never going to cum on my face. I do all sorts of relatively extreme stuff with my BF, a lot of involving him dominating me - but he's never going to cum on my face. That's probably because I read that particular act as degrading, and that's probably because of how it's depicting in porn, and degradation is a hard no for me. That doesn't mean my feelings about that act aren't 'real' - all our feelings about most things are 'real', in spite of being influenced by social/cultural conditioning. I tend to think that even base physical sensations are, to some extent, socially conditioned.

I think that, inasmuch as we should expect women to consider why they DON'T want their long-term partners cumming on their face, we should also consider why it's such a thing for guys now. When I was young, no one ever suggested this (and I've got a pretty representative sample of sexual partners to draw on) - I can only assume the popularity of cumming-on-the-face is a result of porn, and that it exists in porn in part because of the visibility of the act. That's not to say that the people who enjoy it are 'wrong' - possibly porn introduced some of us to a fun thing that we never would have discovered otherwise - but its hardly an act that really has any intrinsic pleasure for either party. As a comparison, blowjobs clearly do have an intrinsic pleasure for at least the receiver - I can only assume having a mouth wrapped around one's dick just feels freaking good at a very base physical level. The pleasure derived from cumming on someone's face seems qualitatively different, and I assume the pleasure that comes from that is pretty culturally contextual.

 

[SlutAddicted]

The problem here is separating out the 'social stereotypes' from 'what we enjoy'. I love my husband to bits and have done for over 15 years - but he's never going to cum on my face. I do all sorts of relatively extreme stuff with my BF, a lot of involving him dominating me - but he's never going to cum on my face. That's probably because I read that particular act as degrading, and that's probably because of how it's depicting in porn, and degradation is a hard no for me. That doesn't mean my feelings about that act aren't 'real' - all our feelings about most things are 'real', in spite of being influenced by social/cultural conditioning. I tend to think that even base physical sensations are, to some extent, socially conditioned.

I think that, inasmuch as we should expect women to consider why they DON'T want their long-term partners cumming on their face, we should also consider why it's such a thing for guys now. When I was young, no one ever suggested this (and I've got a pretty representative sample of sexual partners to draw on) - I can only assume the popularity of cumming-on-the-face is a result of porn, and that it exists in porn in part because of the visibility of the act. That's not to say that the people who enjoy it are 'wrong' - possibly porn introduced some of us to a fun thing that we never would have discovered otherwise - but its hardly an act that really has any intrinsic pleasure for either party. As a comparison, blowjobs clearly do have an intrinsic pleasure for at least the receiver - I can only assume having a mouth wrapped around one's dick just feels freaking good at a very base physical level. The pleasure derived from cumming on someone's face seems qualitatively different, and I assume the pleasure that comes from that is pretty culturally contextual.

For us it isn't an indispensable or key dynamic either physically or psychologically. If it was a hard no we would never do it again. And if it was a point of contention I would look seriously at why it is such a thing for guys. But at the same time we would have a discussion around the fact that that being willing to accept the fact that she has sex with other guys is, from a man's point of view, rather more permissive than letting me cum on her face. My wife has accepted the premise that, ya her fucking another guy last night maybe gives me just a bit of leeway.....no not free reign to be degrading but maybe some room for indulgence of an incredibly loyal and devoted partner.

 

[KimGordon67]

For us it isn't an indispensable or key dynamic either physically or psychologically. If it was a hard no we would never do it again. And if it was a point of contention I would look seriously at why it is such a thing for guys. But at the same time we would have a discussion around the fact that that being willing to accept the fact that she has sex with other guys is, from a man's point of view, rather more permissive than letting me cum on her face. My wife has accepted the premise that, ya her fucking another guy last night maybe gives me just a bit of leeway.

Interesting ... I'd never see it like that. It's just something I don't like, and the sex I have with any given individual needs to be comprised of things we both like for it to work properly. I don't think that the fact I have sex with someone else means I owe my husband anything other than the honesty I've always given him ... and I don't think he sees it as transactional either.

 

[SlutAddicted]

Interesting ... I'd never see it like that. It's just something I don't like, and the sex I have with any given individual needs to be comprised of things we both like for it to work properly. I don't think that the fact I have sex with someone else means I owe my husband anything other than the honesty I've always given him ... and I don't think he sees it as transactional either.

Transactional no. I agree with that. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a man who accepts his wife having sex with another man......I would say he deserves the benefit of the doubt as to why he likes this or that and a very high level of indulgence.

Obviously I don't know your situation. But if you put yourself in the shoes of hubby, your perspective that "I'm just being honest about wanting to have sex with someone else" isn't less innocuous than his perspective that "I am just being honest about wanting to cum on your face." We can debate why each person wants what they want but neither is inherently more innocuous, honest or acceptable.

You and I can agree on the merits of a third-party lover but it is unrealistic to assume that his existence doesn't undermine the husband's sense of self. Is some level of equalization fair and reasonable.....I don't know......that would seem to come from a negative place that I don't like because it disrespects your agency. But from a man's point of view consider the scenario.....you drive away to meet other at a cheap motel where he spanks you and fucks your brains out while calling you dirty names.....but when you come home hubby can't cum on you because that is where the line is?

No, that doesn't add up. Maybe what you do when you are away is a figment of imagination. But you are not too precious to have cum on your face from the guy who accepts all of this. Taking a load on your face is not more degrading or emotionally traumatizing than knowing your wife is away for the weekend with some guy who provides what you can't.

 

[KimGordon67]

Transactional no. I agree with that. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a man who accepts his wife having sex with another man......I would say he deserves the benefit of the doubt as to why he likes this or that and a very high level of indulgence.

Obviously I don't know your situation. But if you put yourself in the shoes of hubby, your perspective that "I'm just being honest about wanting to have sex with someone else" isn't less innocuous than his perspective that "I am just being honest about wanting to cum on your face." We can debate why each person wants what they want but neither is inherently more innocuous, honest or acceptable.

You and I can agree on the merits of a third-party lover but it is unrealistic to assume that his existence doesn't undermine the husband's sense of self. Is some level of equalization fair and reasonable.....I don't know......that would seem to come from a negative place that I don't like because it disrespects your agency. But from a man's point of view consider the scenario.....you drive away to meet other at a cheap motel where he spanks you and fucks your brains out while calling you dirty names.....but when you come home hubby can't cum on you because that is where the line is?

No, that doesn't add up. Maybe what you do when you are away is a figment of imagination. But you are not too precious to have cum on your face from the guy who accepts all of this. Taking a load on your face is not more degrading or emotionally traumatizing than knowing your wife is away for the weekend with some guy who provides what you can't.

Yeah ... we're coming at that situation from slightly different perspectives. Maybe that's how it works for you and your wife, but it's not how it works for us.

 

[Nezhul]

Your problem, Kim, is that when I'm talking about consent and consideration, of exploring new fantasies. I'm talking about the fact that when you get to know someone, you will be more inclined to try new things that you didn't previously considered. I'm talking about that it often brings us a lot of joy to bring joy to our close ones, no matter the gender.
I'm talking about a woman wanting to indulge her man, wanting to let him cum on her face, in our example. And I even specifically say that not everyone would eventually do that - and that's all right. But that flied over your empty head.

Example: when I just meet a girl, I will not ever let her tie me up and strap-on my ass. When I knew her for 2 years, and I trust her - I will do that, and enjoy indulging her. Even though I don't personally get a kick out it. I get a kick out of having kinky sex with her and indulging her. But right away? No.
Example 2: When a girl just meets a guy, it's totally fine to not want to let him cum on her face. It will feel weird and degrading and other stuff. But when she knows him for years and trusts him, chances are she will be totally OK with it. Maybe not, well, then they jut move along to something else, but I'm pretty sure that with a right man 95% of women will have absolutely no problem, and will not feel degraded or abused by the fact.

Doors get opened as the relationship progresses and trust is established. I'm talking about WANTING to let those things happen, not BEING MADE to endure them. I'm talking about building the relationships so that your partner loves you so that it doesn't matter where on their body you will cum. Not about coercing someone or bullying them into that.

And all you see are the scenarios of aggressive coercion of someone into something they hate to do.
If you have problems in your head, Kim, if you have the insecurities that make you see white and look for black - it's your fucking problem, and I told you that already. Just scram. Go back to your world full of rape, aggression, abuse and coercion, of emotional degradation and fear of ulterior motives.
Leave the world of love and wanting to please and indulge untained by your insecurity, please.
Or better yet - stay and have an open mind, for once.

And it's not gender-specific at all, although you seem to be triggered only by posts where I say that a man can make a woman want to let him do something. Because obviously, the other way around is totally fine and natural. It's about being partners and exploring your sexuality. Any partner of any gender can make his other half of any gender feel at ease with a whole lot of things, especially non-threatening ones. I'm not talking about metal hooks through their flesh, for fuck sake.
It's just that most people fail to establish the needed amount of trust and love for that. I know like fifteen family pairs closely, and I can say that only three of them trully love each other deeply. Others range all the way to just being roommates with benefits.

 

[SlutAddicted]

Yeah ... we're coming at that situation from slightly different perspectives. Maybe that's how it works for you and your wife, but it's not how it works for us.

Perhaps. And I am trying to be respectful of all points of view. I understand having a polyamorous wife. And I understand having a wife who doesn't want to do this or that. But at some point it isn't solely a matter of whether you like cum in your face.....but whether that is more offensive to you than it is too your husband having his wife bang another guy.

With respect, I don't know you. The limited chats we have had suggest that your husband has been nobly struggling with this. And he is accepting it well. And you are an intelligent partner. I don't get "cum in your face" as the line in the sand for a husband who has willingly disregarded every relationship norm along with you.

 

[Blue]

Transactional no. I agree with that. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a man who accepts his wife having sex with another man......I would say he deserves the benefit of the doubt as to why he likes this or that and a very high level of indulgence.

Obviously I don't know your situation. But if you put yourself in the shoes of hubby, your perspective that "I'm just being honest about wanting to have sex with someone else" isn't less innocuous than his perspective that "I am just being honest about wanting to cum on your face." We can debate why each person wants what they want but neither is inherently more innocuous, honest or acceptable.

You and I can agree on the merits of a third-party lover but it is unrealistic to assume that his existence doesn't undermine the husband's sense of self. Is some level of equalization fair and reasonable.....I don't know......that would seem to come from a negative place that I don't like because it disrespects your agency. But from a man's point of view consider the scenario.....you drive away to meet other at a cheap motel where he spanks you and fucks your brains out while calling you dirty names.....but when you come home hubby can't cum on you because that is where the line is?

No, that doesn't add up. Maybe what you do when you are away is a figment of imagination. But you are not too precious to have cum on your face from the guy who accepts all of this. Taking a load on your face is not more degrading or emotionally traumatizing than knowing your wife is away for the weekend with some guy who provides what you can't.

Perhaps. And I am trying to be respectful of all points of view. I understand having a polyamorous wife. And I understand having a wife who doesn't want to do this or that. But at some point it isn't solely a matter of whether you like cum in your face.....but whether that is more offensive to you than it is too your husband having his wife bang another guy.

With respect, I don't know you. The limited chats we have had suggest that your husband has been nobly struggling with this. And he is accepting it well. And you are an intelligent partner. I don't get "cum in your face" as the line in the sand for a husband who has willingly disregarded every relationship norm along with you.

You do know that implying Kim should forfeit her sexual consent because she does something which her husband may or may not have an unknown level of potential disagreement with but apparently agreed to, is a horrifically twisted and disdainful mentality? Right? I'm all for tradeoffs but your idea of a trade apparently involves doing away with the idea of negotiation and allowing the ability for one party to override the other's interests at a whim.

What you are saying is directly equivocal to me saying that because you might prepare food that your partner dislikes the taste of then she should get to punch you in the face.

 

[KimGordon67]

Perhaps. And I am trying to be respectful of all points of view. I understand having a polyamorous wife. And I understand having a wife who doesn't want to do this or that. But at some point it isn't solely a matter of whether you like cum in your face.....but whether that is more offensive to you than it is too your husband having his wife bang another guy.

With respect, I don't know you. The limited chats we have had suggest that your husband has been nobly struggling with this. And he is accepting it well. And you are an intelligent partner. I don't get "cum in your face" as the line in the sand for a husband who has willingly disregarded every relationship norm along with you.

He was 'struggling' ... I think we've moved past that into us being in a place where this is what our marriage is now, and if it hadn't shifted like that, we quite possibly would have finished. That does mean it's an 'accept this or I go' scenario at all - it's more a realisation that people change, and that monogamy is a social norm that we can choose to ignore. (In fact, he was as close to walking away as I was over the last couple of years. We've done a few things to see if we can remain together, because we love each other - trying a bit of sexual flexibility is one of those things.)

No one is 'banging me in a cheap motel room'. I'm having another relationship with another person that involves a significant emotional connection and sex. He doesn't cum on my face. NO ONE cums on my face. I don't need to explain why I don't want that - I just don't. The fact that I'm having sex with someone else doesn't alter my relationship with my husband at all, including give him licence to do things I'm not OK with. (I probably love him more than I did before, because it's evidence of what an amazing person he is that he'd be OK about trying something that was quite difficult for him to see how it worked out, but that's about it.)

 

[KimGordon67]

You do know that implying Kim should forfeit her sexual consent because she does something which her husband may or may not have an unknown level of potential disagreement with but apparently agreed to, is a horrifically twisted and disdainful mentality? Right? I'm all for tradeoffs but your idea of a trade apparently involves doing away with the idea of negotiation and allowing the ability for one party to override the other's interests at a whim.

What you are saying is directly equivocal to me saying that because you might prepare food that your partner dislikes the taste of then he should get to punch you in the face.

Actually, in SA's defence, he does know from previous exchanges that my husband wasn't really thrilled with the whole situation in the first instance. But I think you're right that in that him consenting to this situation (a notion I sort of struggle with, but let's go with it for now) doesn't mean I then have to provide consent to something I don't like. If it was part of the initial negotiation, maybe ... but it wasn't. (In fact, he did try to impose a couple of arbitrary conditions at the outset, but we just both ended up laughing about them.)

I think it somehow comes down to the notion of people 'allowing' their partners to do things (and that sort of relates to Nezhul's narrative of people 'letting' their boyfriends do things). My husband hasn't 'allowed' me to have another relationship - I can do whatever the fuck I want. However, he was perfectly within his rights to say 'If you have a relationship with someone else, I'm doing to leave you', and my decision about the other relationship would need to take that variable into account. He didn't say that - although it was clearly a risk until we worked through things. Similarly ... I actually can't work out what the 'similarly' is in relation to him cumming on my face. I guess he can do whatever the fuck he wants too, but if he wants to cum on my face, he does sort of need my express permission to do so (unless he's actually a ninja, but even then, I think I'd notice). So I guess the scenario, yes, he could cum on my face, but he'd get a sound clout across the head and I probably wouldn't touch his cock for a long time. I suppose that's a variable he takes into account when he makes that decision ... luckily for me, he doesn't seem to think it's worth the probably outcome.
But my extra-marital relationship and his cumming on my face are not related things. Unless we have a discussion that makes them so.

 

[KimGordon67]

Actually, in SA's defence, he does know from previous exchanges that my husband wasn't really thrilled with the whole situation in the first instance. But I think you're right that in that him consenting to this situation (a notion I sort of struggle with, but let's go with it for now) doesn't mean I then have to provide consent to something I don't like. If it was part of the initial negotiation, maybe ... but it wasn't. (In fact, he did try to impose a couple of arbitrary conditions at the outset, but we just both ended up laughing about them.)

I think it somehow comes down to the notion of people 'allowing' their partners to do things (and that sort of relates to Nezhul's narrative of people 'letting' their boyfriends do things). My husband hasn't 'allowed' me to have another relationship - I can do whatever the fuck I want. However, he was perfectly within his rights to say 'If you have a relationship with someone else, I'm doing to leave you', and my decision about the other relationship would need to take that variable into account. He didn't say that - although it was clearly a risk until we worked through things. Similarly ... I actually can't work out what the 'similarly' is in relation to him cumming on my face. I guess he can do whatever the fuck he wants too, but if he wants to cum on my face, he does sort of need my express permission to do so (unless he's actually a ninja, but even then, I think I'd notice). So I guess the scenario, yes, he could cum on my face, but he'd get a sound clout across the head and I probably wouldn't touch his cock for a long time. I suppose that's a variable he takes into account when he makes that decision ... luckily for me, he doesn't seem to think it's worth the probably outcome.
But my extra-marital relationship and his cumming on my face are not related things. Unless we have a discussion that makes them so.

PS - I guess he could have said 'if you have a relationship with someone else, I'm only staying with you if I get to cum on your face'. I'm not sure what I would have done in that situation.

 

[Nezhul]

I think it somehow comes down to the notion of people 'allowing' their partners to do things (and that sort of relates to Nezhul's narrative of people 'letting' their boyfriends do things). My husband hasn't 'allowed' me to have another relationship - I can do whatever the fuck I want. However, he was perfectly within his rights to say 'If you have a relationship with someone else, I'm doing to leave you', and my decision about the other relationship would need to take that variable into account. He didn't say that - although it was clearly a risk until we worked through things. Similarly ... I actually can't work out what the 'similarly' is in relation to him cumming on my face. I guess he can do whatever the fuck he wants too, but if he wants to cum on my face, he does sort of need my express permission to do so (unless he's actually a ninja, but even then, I think I'd notice). So I guess the scenario, yes, he could cum on my face, but he'd get a sound clout across the head and I probably wouldn't touch his cock for a long time. I suppose that's a variable he takes into account when he makes that decision ... luckily for me, he doesn't seem to think it's worth the probably outcome.
But my extra-marital relationship and his cumming on my face are not related things. Unless we have a discussion that makes them so.

OMG the hypocrisy of you.

And this person actually tries to present herself as someone who knows a fuck about proper relationships, being considerate and things like that.

"I married a man, then I started seeing another person because I'm free to do whatever the fuck I want, even if it means breaking our sacred vows and stuff. I don't care! I'm a free woman! It's not the same as cumming on my face, because I don't involve him! I don't need permission, but he does."

Well, yeah. Sorry to break your bubble, but you are just that kind of person who deserves to die alone with only twelve cats around you.
And to think you have the nerve to actually tell other people who come on this forum to seek advice on how to keep their relationship - to break up? Because you found their posts offensive? Such a hypocrisy is even more than I have, and that says something.

Someone here called you an intelligent partner? More like abusive, inconsiderate and uncaring partner who uses her husband for benefits - is how that looks to me. Oh yes, intelligent is probably apt too - smart enough to use his love for you against him.

THis really puts all of your other posts into perspective for me. Of how you hate guys approaching you, your views about relationships, your constant WAY over-the-top defence of women's rights even where none are broken. You are just a misandrist, that's all there is to it.,

 

[Nezhul]

You do know that implying Kim should forfeit her sexual consent because she does something which her husband may or may not have an unknown level of potential disagreement with but apparently agreed to, is a horrifically twisted and disdainful mentality? Right? I'm all for tradeoffs but your idea of a trade apparently involves doing away with the idea of negotiation and allowing the ability for one party to override the other's interests at a whim.

What you are saying is directly equivocal to me saying that because you might prepare food that your partner dislikes the taste of then she should get to punch you in the face.

It's not really about what her husband likes or not, and if he's OK with her doing that or not, don't you think. For all we know, he's into cuckolding, and that's fine. That's totally cool.

The problem is in how she herself views the situation. The way she puts it, she'd do the same shit even if her husband was strongly against it. If he dislikes it - he's free to divorce.

It's like, you know, a submissive who is a masochist can take pleasure in being treated like shit. That's OK.
The person who's OK with treating his partner like shit regardless of what they like or not - in NOT OK. Even if this person happens to find a partner who lets them do that and takes it - this is still not OK.

Basically, what it boils down to is that Kim was lucky enough to find a husband who's letting her do her stunts. It would be perfectly fine if she did them with consideration to his feelings, but she considers only HER OWN feelings, and this makes her abusive, even if the other person enjoys/tolerates the abuse.

She's all bout how making someone let you cum on her face is wrong. If's wrong to make someone tolerate it if she doesn't like that. But somehow it's completely all right that her husband has to tolerate her seeing another person without him having any say in it. It doesn't matter what he thinks about it! She says it openly that it's not his thing to have a say in. If he wanted, he should just leave.
Yet the same logic doesn't apply to the person cumming on his girlfriend's face. I could say that too - if she's not OK, she can leave, what's the fuss? I'd be called a jerk instantly, and rightly so.

What you are saying is directly equivocal to me saying that because you might prepare food that your partner dislikes the taste of then she should get to punch you in the face.

Yes, that would be wrong.
But what this situation is about is slightly different.
It's the person that prepares a certain meal regardless if her partner likes it or not. It's not about "might not like it", which implies that at the moment of preparation the partner's tastes are an unpknown. It's about not caring either way even if the tastes are known. If she knew full-well that her partner hated it, she'd still prepare the same meal, because she likes it, and fuck the partner's opinion.
That - is not healthy.
Does a partner who prepares a meal when they know their partner hates it - deserve a punch in the face?

 

[tryn2Bgood]

I can see everyone's point of view on this.

I don't 'like' having a guy cum on my face, but it doesn't bother me either. If my partner, whom I love and trust, wanted to do that because he enjoyed it (for whatever reason) I would be happy to indulge him. I would'nt want it to become the norm because, like I said, I don't particularly 'like' it, but I want to satisfy as many of his desires as I am capable of and feel comfortable with. However, if that was one of my hard limits (for whatever reason) then the answer would always be "No".

The example given about a man who accepts his wife being with other men - well, that doesn't automatically give him the right to take certain liberties. If she allows the other men she is fucking to cum on her face, then that's a different story. She obviously doesn't mind it, therefore you (her husband) should have that right too. But she doesn't 'owe' it to her husband just because he lets her fuck other men. His acceptance of her being with other men also shouldn't hinge on 'what he can get out of the deal'. It's either something he is okay with or its not. Same as any other element in their relationship. The two items aren't linked. They are separate issues.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Nezhul]

Polyamory = stunts

So does that make homosexuality like circus tricks?

But kink and coming on faces is normal because 'we' do it?

Kim, i gave up.

Polyamory = fine
Homosecuality = fine.

Saying you don't care what your husband thinks about your polyamory = not fine.
Saying that he should either shut up and accept it or divorce (which is the choice she's laying out, basically) = not fine.

Say, if you discovered your fascination in caning somebody - do you just take the cane and go beat them up? and hey! They can divorce you if they don't like it! If they don't do anything then it's totally fine, just keep beating them up, no problem there. But yeah, hey, naturally if they want to flog you back with a flogger - they need to ask. You are a free woman after all, and you do whatever the fuck you want!

These are stunts. Not polyamory in itself.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Blue]

@Nehzul

Whether it's a healthy relationship style in your eyes or not, or even objectively and measurably, is irrelevant. I think Kim's point is that she can do whatever she wants with her relationships and not have somebody else's wishes forced on her for doing it, consequences aren't relevant. That's got nothing to do with her gender as you keep implying, anybody should be able to do that.

~ ~ ~

Also you seem to be painting Kim as somebody acting unilaterally with no consideration for her husband's wishes, which is clearly not the case.
I give up too, you're not worthy argument material.