Happy Birthday, Preston Michael Spears Federline and other Certain Special Someones! - Page 11

ThurgreedMarshall · 09-15-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
This may sound harsh, but if a guy is so nervous before a threesome, even if it's his first, that he has to get shit-faced, he would deserve having his GF turn to him and saying, "you know, I'm not sure I want to have you involved in this at all."

I doubt he wanted to get shit-faced or even had to. I think he was probably a little nervous, had some stronger drinks and then lost control. That part of it really isn't where the criticism should lie.

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Finding calm (or nerve) in a bottle is not sexy.

Please. Lots of people are more fun with a few in 'em. Lots of people are bolder or less nervous after a couple. Getting totally drunk was stupid, but I think you're going overboard, especially when it comes to a one night stand.

TM

SlaveNoMore · 09-15-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

ironweed
I've told you to stay away from the vodka - you just can't handle it. I can't believe you fucked this up twice.

Three, if you count that incident at the petting zoo.

Hank Chinaski · 09-15-2005, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy

Plus, I wonder, if the situation were a potential MFM and it was the GF who said she didn't want the BF involved at all, would this particular POV have been posted?

Of course that would be different. Golf is putting something in a hole. MFM is about putting something on something else- more like horseshoes. Horseshoes is a much more commited game.

Penske_Account · 09-15-2005, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LessinSF
And, ask yourself whether you would employ any of them if you were in-house?

I doubt I would take the work you have to offer. No offence.

robustpuppy · 09-15-2005, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
3. You have a relationship that is serious at its core. You decide to open the sex part, but you do so (a) without fully exploring the range of feelings that result; and relatedly (b) without being fully committed to the idea that sex is just sex, akin to golf or any other physicial pursuit. That is a recipe for trouble.

I think your sex is just sex thing is a fallacy here. In the context of an intimate relationship ,it's not just sex. If you are going to open up the sex life but maintain the intimacy, you have to retain the sense that there is something unique about this person, including in the sexual context, that makes you want to be with him or her exclusively. If you are opening up the sex part by having threesomes, the idea should be to invite another person in for purposes of exciting both people in the relationship, not to push one of them out. You simply can't pretend it's purely physical in the context of a serious relationship, becaue it's interwoven with other intimacy. And, as I said above, I would hope that kind of intimacy would be strong enough to keep both people from verbally rejecting the other at critical moments.

ThurgreedMarshall · 09-15-2005, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
(It would be different if he were already heading toward getting shit-faced at a party, and was charmingly loose in a Sebbyish sort of way, and by the time he realized he was going to get a threesome, he was already in that stage where his judgment was off and he kept ordering more drinks because that's the first stupid thing drunk people do.)

If my description led you in a different direction, that's my fault. They had already been drinking before they even met the third girl. And they continued drinking together before it was a done deal. They didn't show up to a bar sober, see a girl, proposition her and then all wait to leave until he was done knocking back lots of stiff drinks.

TM

robustpuppy · 09-15-2005, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I doubt he wanted to get shit-faced or even had to. I think he was probably a little nervous, had some stronger drinks and then lost control. That part of it really isn't where the criticism should lie.

Please. Lots of people are more fun with a few in 'em. Lots of people are bolder or less nervous after a couple. Getting totally drunk was stupid, but I think you're going overboard, especially when it comes to a one night stand.

TM

Honey, we were into it until you peed in the vestibule.

Shape Shifter · 09-15-2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LessinSF
And, ask yourself whether you would employ any of them if you were in-house?

What did I ever do to you?

ThurgreedMarshall · 09-15-2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
Different to criticize later or different as a turn-off? I'd think it's a turn-off to be with someone that unfunctionally plastered, no matter how or why they got there.

I'm pretty sure that's why the third girl left.

TM

Penske_Account · 09-15-2005, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
I think being liquored up is no excuse for saying something that hurtful, even if it's to a woman who in theory accepts, as an intellectual matter, that her man may have sexual desires that don't involve her exclusively, and even if they both have acknowledged that fact by opening up their sex lives. It was a threesome, the whole idea was that they both participate, and I think what he said to her would make even the most secure person feel pretty profoundly rejected.

I think the very fact that he could bring himself to say that to his GF means it wasn't a "solid relationship."

Plus, I wonder, if the situation were a potential MFM and it was the GF who said she didn't want the BF involved at all, would this particular POV have been posted?

And my point is, if you are in a relationship that you care about, you had better examine the range of your feelings on the subject before you go and do something that potentially incendiary. If you do, communications of a nature similar to what occured (absent perhaps the drunken aspect) would probably be discussed and you could examine the potential feelings that might result, if on an occassion one partner or the other said, I'm not interested in the threesome tonight, I want all the cake for myself. If you don't have those discussioins in advance you run a tremendous risk (assuming you value the relationship).

Of coruse, if the relationship is not of consequence to start, who cares.

SlaveNoMore · 09-15-2005, 04:13 PM

Quote:

ThurgreedMarshall
So, a friend of mine has a gf (long distance) ...

She tells him that they're done. Finished. Kaput....

Other comments?

TM

Yeah, did he care???

nononono · 09-15-2005, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I'm pretty sure that's why the third girl left.

TM

Well, that and maybe that the GF took off.

09-15-2005, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Three, if you count that incident at the petting zoo.

I don't hold that one against him. Anyone could have run out of quarters for the kibble machine before the deal was sealed.

Hank Chinaski · 09-15-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
If my description led you in a different direction, that's my fault. They had already been drinking before they even met the third girl. And they continued drinking together before it was a done deal. They didn't show up to a bar sober, see a girl, proposition her and then all wait to leave until he was done knocking back lots of stiff drinks.

TM

There's no question what he said was stupid and guaranteed to end the chance. But maybe the chance was dead anyway.

Do you know what the fight was about?

If about him being drunk, or some dumb thing that happened before they got on the plane, he maybe could have saved the chance. But if the fight was about how he was behaving that night -"why are you paying more attention to new girl than me?"-
the fight might have been GF beginning to pull the plug on the idea anyway.

Penske_Account · 09-15-2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by robustpuppy
I think your sex is just sex thing is a fallacy here. In the context of an intimate relationship ,it's not just sex. If you are going to open up the sex life but maintain the intimacy, you have to retain the sense that there is something unique about this person, including in the sexual context, that makes you want to be with him or her exclusively. If you are opening up the sex part by having threesomes, the idea should be to invite another person in for purposes of exciting both people in the relationship, not to push one of them out. You simply can't pretend it's purely physical in the context of a serious relationship, becaue it's interwoven with other intimacy. And, as I said above, I would hope that kind of intimacy would be strong enough to keep both people from verbally rejecting the other at critical moments.

I think if you have good communications you can do anything you want. Is the sex between the couples part of a larger intimacy? Yes. I agree with that. I also agree thatl, on a limited basis, if you open things up, you may be able to limit the experiences to only those encompassing shared intimacy, where there is an equivalent of enjoyment and return. However, I also think you are better off trying to examine and define whether you can get to a place where the sex is just sex compartmentalized from the larger intimacy. You run less of a risk of problems. This assumes, really good knwoledge of yourself, the relationship and really good and open communications. Not things necessarily found in all relationships. Even committed ones.