Politics and Porn

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[tryn2Bgood]

The point is self-descriptive. She, for whatever reason, doesn't want to do that with her husband. You can question and/or disagree with this hypothetical reasoning to your hearts content but that's ultimately the answer to your question. There's no deep philosophical meaning to be discerned here.

Honestly now, if you really can't comprehend that then you must have even worse relationship skills than I do. My user title is only 1/4 a joke after all.

No, I understand how someone would want to be the sweet, compassionate lover with her husband, but be treated like a whore by someone else. I understand going to that 'someone else' to fill that need. I understand not wanting to change the dynamics of a certain relationship. No means no. I get all that. But in this hypothetical relationship, husband A wants wife B to let him cum on her face (for whatever reason). Husband A knows that wife B lets her other lovers cum on her face. Wife B denies letting her husband cum on her face (for whatever reason). To me, that's fucked up. For her to deny him that desire when it is obviously not something she is against in general. If I were this hypothetical husband, my ass would move on to someone with more consideration for my feelings. (Again, we are talking about a hypothetical couple here and not anyone specific.) This is my opinion. If you can't comprehend that, well...don't bother trying.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Primalex]

If variety is what you seek, then okay. But if the husband knows his wife is letting other men cum on her face, then he already knows what degrading acts she is willing to perform, so what would be the point of denying that to her husband?

Because she wakes up to her husband the next morning, not the other guy.

For her to deny him that desire when it is obviously not something she is against in general.

No, it's vice versa, in general she is against it but certain individuals are able to trigger off something that changes this. But whether the husband triggers off something that does create resistance to let it happen or whether the lover triggers off something that does eliminate an existing resistance actually does not matter. It's the way it is.

To me, that's fucked up.

Not going to argue about that one. Humans, eh.

 

[tryn2Bgood]

If every one is still on about post

360 then read it again. No one is cumming on the face there. The boyfriend isn't getting something the boyfriend doesn't.

Umm...yes, 360 then read it again. In this hypothetical the boyfriends ARE getting something the husband is not.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[tryn2Bgood]

Because she wakes up to her husband the next morning, not the other guy.

Okay. Point taken. But she is still waking up to a husband that can mentally picture his wife with cum on her face (that's not even his cum)

 

[tryn2Bgood]

No one is coming on her face.

You quoted a real person and their situation. THAT is not the hypothetical

 

[Blue]

This has got to be one of the strangest philosophic debates ever.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[tryn2Bgood]

I asked if it were about post 360, tbh, I am with Con, I was hoping to help you out of the quagmire here.

My mistake...post 360 led to the hypothetical where the wife IS letting others cum on her face, but not her husband. Others have pointed out good reasons for this, so I concede that such a scenario is possible. But my OPINION of it is still the same.

 

[Primalex]

Okay. Point taken. But she is still waking up to a husband that can mentally picture his wife with cum on her face (that's not even his cum)

Right and there is a fair chance that this is not due to the wife - it is not very likely that the wife approached the husband and went:"Oh boy, that guy drenched me in cum, the way you always wanted."

So how did the husband find out? Either because he didn't realize that ignorance can be a bliss and they made some kind of "Yeah, well, fine, fuck him, but I expect you to tell me everything about it" agreement and the wife was too dumb or honest or both; maybe because he read some cuckolding stories he enjoyed and realized to late that story-emotions don't necessarily reflect real-life-emotions or he threw some kind of jealous fit afterwards and she gave up and told him everything.

Fucking other people is no guarantee for a happy ending.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[KimGordon67]

Jesus wept!

I'm going to respond more fully later but if just wait to clear up one thing. I've broken NO marriage vows. The only real promise we made to each other was to love each other - I may have been the only one who said for ever? And I'm still good with that, even if we get divorced tomorrow. We may have an unconventional approach but we have a lot of fun and support and love in our relationship after 16 years. I know he feels tha same because he said almost exactly that two days ago.

 

[policywank]

Choice is a key part of this discussion.

My husband has been very accepting of the fact that I have other lovers. That is his choice. He could insist on monogamy with me or seek someone else. I make sure he is informed so that he can make the choice that suits him.

What I will do sexually with him or any other man is my choice. When making that choice I also choose to take into account how wonderfully accepting and indulgent he has been. At the margin I give him the benefit of the doubt, not because I owe it to him or as payback but because relationships are give and take.

But also because what I see as degrading or unacceptable is contextual - my view is a function of the act, the person, the circumstance, etc.. My husband is a wonderful and respectful man whom I trust. So yes I do let him cum on face. Other men rarely. And anything like scat play or water sports....nope nobody, ever.

Meanwhile I have other lovers in part due to what they provide. I like rough sex at times. That just isn't a fit for my husband and we don't pretend otherwise. So that is exclusive to certain lovers which is, again, contextual.

In each case I make the decision as I see fit. It is not incumbent upon me to make any specific allowance or accommodation. But I do take it upon myself to be as open-minded as possible especially in the context of my relationship with my husband. And I believe that involves not accepting other people's assumptions - from the pope to porn purveyors - about what is or isn't acceptable.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Netzach]

Just bemused by the version of this we'd be listening to if she wanted, nay NEEDED to see her husband's face drenched in another guy's spunk to really feel sexually fulfilled.

And I know everyone's going to say "it'd be the same"

but we all know that's not really how you all feel about it.

I, too, take a "whatever the fuck you want and I want to hear about it" stance with poly. Happily my spouse literally seems to have been born without the jealousy/bullshit gene for some reason. More than I've ever met in anyone, self included, so go figure.

If you're not structured like that and you still see your partner as some kind of possession all the time and you're not the kind of person who doesn't really feel like they own something unless they can share it with other people, then you're not going to believe people who feel that way are real and exist, I guess, but they do. So...

 

[SlutAddicted]

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.

You are quite right that I was coming at this from the perspective of knowing that your husband wasn't thrilled about this situation in the first instance. And I look at my own experience coming to grips with my wife's non-exclusivity. His feelings (or mine) certainly do not oblige you to make a choice that you don't want to make. The fact that he accepts you having a boyfriend on the side emphatically has nothing to do with whether he should be permitted to cum on your face.

But as PW just stated, relationships are give and take. In this context your husband has made a rather large "give". The "give" isn't the fact that he "let" you be with another man because you aren't his possession and he has no right to stop you. The "give" is that he decided to stay and continue in the relationship in spite of a circumstance that he would rather not exist. From your past comments I gather that you want to stay with him or at least that you are not entirely indifferent. The fact that he may be more settled with the situation now does not change the fact that he made a rather large and notable compromise to be with you.

Now suppose I took a boys weekend away in Vegas and left my wife with the kids and a pile of chores. I come home to an orderly house with the yard work done, the house cleaned, the laundry folded, the chequebook balanced, kids quietly doing their homework and a warm meal on the table.

But I hate doing dishes. Do I owe it to her to do the dishes? No. We didn't make that deal ahead of time. I didn't force her to take care of everything while I was away. She is fine with the fact that she spent her weekend working while I was playing. These things are not linked and she can't oblige me to link them. She knows I hate doing dishes.

What if she loathed yard work even more so than I hate doing dishes? What if she sacrificed some other social event that was important to her because I was away? What if she just really does not want to do the dishes this one time? Should I take those things into account? Should I weigh my dislike of doing dishes against her sacrifice? I am not compelled or obliged to. I didn't agree that they be linked. It is not for any other person to say what I should or shouldn't choose.

All the same, it would be pretty self-serving to dismiss doing the dishes solely on the basis that I don't like doing them and refuse to consider any other context.

 

[Netzach]

You don't get to make that call, because it's not your body. Kim gets to decide just how significant that act is to her, even if her answer is way different to yours.

Side note: in my experience of polyamory, approaching it as transactional ("you can fuck Bob if I get to come on your face") doesn't seem to work very well. IME, if somebody is the type of person who feels insecure about the thought of their partner having sex with somebody else, such tradeoffs don't actually cancel out that insecurity.

I definitely feel that way about it: unfettered mutual freedom is something I've built into my relationship from date number one because this kind of tortured negotiation has never made sense to me, it's why I don't even call what I do "poly" - it's like this is how this works, yes or no?

 

[Netzach]

You are quite right that I was coming at this from the perspective of knowing that your husband wasn't thrilled about this situation in the first instance. And I look at my own experience coming to grips with my wife's non-exclusivity. His feelings (or mine) certainly do not oblige you to make a choice that you don't want to make. The fact that he accepts you having a boyfriend on the side emphatically has nothing to do with whether he should be permitted to cum on your face.

But as PW just stated, relationships are give and take. In this context your husband has made a rather large "give". The "give" isn't the fact that he "let" you be with another man because you aren't his possession and he has no right to stop you. The "give" is that he decided to stay and continue in the relationship in spite of a circumstance that he would rather not exist. From your past comments I gather that you want to stay with him or at least that you are not entirely indifferent. The fact that he may be more settled with the situation now does not change the fact that he made a rather large and notable compromise to be with you.

Now suppose I took a boys weekend away in Vegas and left my wife with the kids and a pile of chores. I come home to an orderly house with the yard work done, the house cleaned, the laundry folded, the chequebook balanced, kids quietly doing their homework and a warm meal on the table.

But I hate doing dishes. Do I owe it to her to do the dishes? No. We didn't make that deal ahead of time. I didn't force her to take care of everything while I was away. She is fine with the fact that she spent her weekend working while I was playing. These things are not linked and she can't oblige me to link them. She knows I hate doing dishes.

What if she loathed yard work even more so than I hate doing dishes? What if she sacrificed some other social event that was important to her because I was away? What if she just really does not want to do the dishes this one time? Should I take those things into account? Should I weigh my dislike of doing dishes against her sacrifice? I am not compelled or obliged to. I didn't agree that they be linked. It is not for any other person to say what I should or shouldn't choose.

All the same, it would be pretty self-serving to dismiss doing the dishes solely on the basis that I don't like doing them and refuse to consider any other context.

You might be asking her to do the dishes, you might be asking the equivalent of "honey stick this fork in your eyeball, for me, please?" - TO HER. I don't know, and frankly it's none of my goddamn business.

 

[policywank]

And also from our conversations this raises the point of how diverse our reasoning and attitudes of those of us discussing poly are, how it's approached, philosophised and practised. Even where to the outside it might look like the same or similar situations.

Indeed. There is such a wide range of views and practices. Those that do not understand a poly perspective tend to project their own values and lump us all together as homogeneous.

It is interesting how we each think of our hard limit. Implicit in people's views is likely to be their own perspective on where spunk on her face ranks relative to say scat play or Netzach's example of spunk on his face. The point being of course that it is her choice and not for anyone else to judge.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Netzach]

You are quite right that I was coming at this from the perspective of knowing that your husband wasn't thrilled about this situation in the first instance. And I look at my own experience coming to grips with my wife's non-exclusivity. His feelings (or mine) certainly do not oblige you to make a choice that you don't want to make. The fact that he accepts you having a boyfriend on the side emphatically has nothing to do with whether he should be permitted to cum on your face.

But as PW just stated, relationships are give and take. In this context your husband has made a rather large "give". The "give" isn't the fact that he "let" you be with another man because you aren't his possession and he has no right to stop you. The "give" is that he decided to stay and continue in the relationship in spite of a circumstance that he would rather not exist. From your past comments I gather that you want to stay with him or at least that you are not entirely indifferent. The fact that he may be more settled with the situation now does not change the fact that he made a rather large and notable compromise to be with you.

Now suppose I took a boys weekend away in Vegas and left my wife with the kids and a pile of chores. I come home to an orderly house with the yard work done, the house cleaned, the laundry folded, the chequebook balanced, kids quietly doing their homework and a warm meal on the table.

But I hate doing dishes. Do I owe it to her to do the dishes? No. We didn't make that deal ahead of time. I didn't force her to take care of everything while I was away. She is fine with the fact that she spent her weekend working while I was playing. These things are not linked and she can't oblige me to link them. She knows I hate doing dishes.

What if she loathed yard work even more so than I hate doing dishes? What if she sacrificed some other social event that was important to her because I was away? What if she just really does not want to do the dishes this one time? Should I take those things into account? Should I weigh my dislike of doing dishes against her sacrifice? I am not compelled or obliged to. I didn't agree that they be linked. It is not for any other person to say what I should or shouldn't choose.

All the same, it would be pretty self-serving to dismiss doing the dishes solely on the basis that I don't like doing them and refuse to consider any other context.

Hold up, your stance seems to be "well he made a compromise" I take it that was to stick with her, in spite of her kink needs being met elsewhere, because he doesn't swing that way.

Nobody get to that point without THEM having "made a compromise" usually for years.

So I have no idea what went on, but if that's what went on, I don't think anyone owes anyone anything. It's a problem finding a solution instead of an impasse, and I would think that's acceptable or if not, then end the rel.

What a craptastic reason to do a sex act anyway. I can't even pretend to understand this POV. Certain things work with certain people and don't work for shit with other people, and that's the a huge part of the reason you might be with more than one person as a sex partner.

 

[SlutAddicted]

You might be asking her to do the dishes, you might be asking the equivalent of "honey stick this fork in your eyeball, for me, please?" - TO HER. I don't know, and frankly it's none of my goddamn business.

And if asking her to do the dishes was the equivalent of asking her to stick a fork in her eyeball I would take that into account. I wouldn't just say I hate doing dishes and that is the only reference point.

 

[SlutAddicted]

But why is it either /. or?

Options could include getting in a cleaning company or gardener while you are away so she can have an easier not a harder weekend than normal!

Help / suggest play dates for your kids on one of the days so she has a clear day. It might even be feasible for your kids to overnight with a grandparent if you have close extended family, so you can both have a get away.

Situations are rarely so black or white that there is only one option. If dishes were such an issue if your kids are over eight or so they could do them if they are able. Maybe for topping up pocket money.

If dishes were the problem instead of making it a your or her problem why not get more proactive and look for more successful solutions for this problem?

The obvious might not be the obvious for your individual situation. Or you might be a round peg with a round hole after all and need to roll up
Your sleeves!

I don't think my husband and I spend quite so much time worrying about 'equality' we know things aren't the same for either of us, and that out loads are in comparable and we would each carry the load of the other could we. I want him to have all he can, and he wants the best for me. Who does an extra chore or gets more magic beans or whatever would not arise, apart from each of us holds something back for the other where appropriate.

I don't know, but I do know that giving up Obvious solutions often works better for us, and brings relief. Doing what works for us, which might be quite different to what might seem to suit most other people for whatever reasons, and remaining open has worked, and when it doesn't we laugh 'silly us, what WERE we thinking! '. And try something else

I am pretty sure you know I was using a simplistic metaphor. Obviously her doing the dishes or me doing the dishes aren't the only choices. The point I was getting at wasn't what choice we make but making a choice based upon all factors that are important to both of us, not just my dislike of doing dishes.