Crossing the Beams

There are people you might like to have sex with,

and people you might want to play with,

and people you might want to make love with.

 

But when all three come together in one person,

one moment,

one bed…

There, in that moment, is bliss.

How Many is Too Many?

Can there be too much of a good thing?  For those in various types of open relationship, this question is a hardy perennial. If one partner is good, and two partners better, why not six? 11? 38?  Is the sky really the limit?

The answer, it seems to me, depends on the answers to a series of questions:

1. What is the nature of the relationships?  A live-in partner will take a different amount of time and commitment than a friend with benefits.  A local partner will likely take more time and attention than a long-distance one.   On the other hand, long distance relationships sometimes require chunks of time for travel or when the other partner travels to you (yay, but the calendar…)

2. Are you their only partner?  Relationships that are (Intentionally or by happenstance) monogamous for one of the partners may take more time and attention from the other partner than if needs are being met in each case by a variety of people.  Also, if one partner has a crowded social schedule and the other’s is freer, that can make the relationship more complicated, depending on the needs and desires of the less-busy partner.

3. What do you like to do together? It’s a lot easier to make time for an evening of Netflix and whatever then to get away for weekends – and there are only so many weekends.

4. What are your other commitments like? If you have an unusually taxing job, or family to look after, or your band does a lot of gigs, that limits time available for relationships even though they are not themselves relationships. Remember also that – especially if you’re an introvert – you need to schedule time for yourself alone to rest and recover so you can be a better partner– and the more partners you have, the more time you may need to schedule without them.

5. Do you have the sort of relationships where you can see multiple partners at the same time?  Like “pack” or “kitchen table” poly?  If so, that eases the scheduling and reduces the calendar impact of multiple relationships.  Some folks can work that way; some can’t.

6. If these relationships include a sexual component, how much time do you prefer to have between dates? Are you okay with a “shift change” approach, or do you prefer to have time to relax, shower, self-care, and do other things between dates?

And this list is only a start. I’m sure there are more questions, so chime in, folks! But the number of relationships you can handle at any one time depends on the people, on the shape of the relationships, and the demands  of the rest of your life. One size cannot fit all… and all cannot always fit.

All the Nudes That’s Fit to Print

The New York Times published five pictures of topless women recently. The New York Times.

How could they do it? The women depicted all had had double mastectomies and chose not to have breast reconstruction. So they didn’t have nipples.

This is a powerful story for many reasons, but an unstated one is to point out the ridiculousness of the rules of many media outlets against showing human bodies in their natural form. The idea that you could show the topless pictures of women only because their breasts had been cut off is beyond bizarre.

A Personal Insight

…and not necessarily a comfortable one:

I am, by any reasonable standard, polysaturated. I have three local partners and four long distance relationships. My life is full of love and loving.

Yet I still meet people to whom I’m attracted, and want to begin wooing them. It feels like a need, even though all of my imaginable needs are well taken care of. When I try to figure out what I am actually desiring, the following comes back (and I recognize that it does not necessarily speak well of me):

I yearn for that moment when the other person realizes that they are in love with me.

The relationship could end right there; in a way, everything after that is dénouement. But I just want them to feel well cared for and completely supported and to know they have that in their life.

Yes, in some cases there is a sexual attraction, or at least a curiosity about what it would like to touch this person and bring them pleasure. But I can’t say that I often meet someone and want them in my life forever and ever; just to know they want to be is enough.

Weird. And I’m hoping that that’s not right. But I’ll keep thinking on it.

The Pursuit of Yappiness

Kitty Chambliss is a up-and-roaring voice in the polyamory community, doing coaching, presenting seminars, and (perhaps most prominently) putting out the Loving Without Boundaries series of interviews with longtime poly practitioners and thinkers.

We ran across each other at this year’s Woodhull Sexual Freedom Summit, and when we discovered we lived a few blocks apart, it was almost inevitable that we would take things to the next level.

Which was this podcast (whatever were you thinking?):   http://tinyurl.com/pourpoly

Sure, it’s an hour of your life.  Listening to me drone on. But there may be a laugh or two, and maybe, just maybe, a usable insight.

You Don’t Suck — Unless You Want To.

A Muslim group in Florida has recently started buying billboards that say “Hey, ISIS, you suck!” to emphasize the difference between regular Muslims and radical ones.

However much one may agree with that sentiment, it makes me uneasy. Not because of the religious part, but because of the growing use of “you suck” and “that sucks” as public, casual conversation.

“You suck” started as a anti-homosexual slur. It was used against men to imply that they gladly engaged in oral sex with other men, which was seen as unmanly and somehow wrong. After dropping the object of the phrase, the thing that was sucked, it came into more general circulation meaning something substandard.
I’ve never liked it, and I will not use it. But I hope that others who care about the meaning of words will avoid it also.