Infidelity and BDSM

[damyanti]

I have a tendency to care about stuff and I think WAY too much, so before I offend someone with my mind ramblings or rant or get accused for "generalizing" or get my head chopped of for giving inflammatory thread tittles, my apologies in advance.


This is going to be just a bunch of rambling, I am still trying to wrap my mind on where I stand...so please feel free to add your own thoughts and experiences unconstricted with what I say.

I have this trait...and its taxing on myself, so I can only imagine how much I irritate others with it...where I am able to see (and do) practical matter of things, but I refuse to give up my ideals. I am very dutiful (I wish I could get rid of that particular trait) and loyal, so when it comes to others I follow reason and do whats best for them. But when it comes to myself, I tend to be more "illogical". Some label that immature, childish, young, naive...I disagree, but they are free to think what they will.

The freedom to be themselves my people have paid in blood, and while that period today seems like it happened a thousand years ago and most have moved on to things more mundane, cynical and reasonable,...I seem to be still stuck on the notion where "I would rather go hungry than not speak up against wrongs being committed". I have an irrational need for "freedom" and "right". Hence my views on marriage...

I think it is highly unlikely I will ever get married, not because I am a "loose liberal infidel" (as I let most believe) who doesn't believe in it, but because I believe in it too much.

I think there is too much of it (marriage), I think people do it too easily, too laconically, for the wrong reasons and they often don't mean it....after all there is always divorce.

Yes, divorce is a necessary evil, but short of serious mental and physical abuse (and ironically, its those who rarely leave) I don't believe in it. Perhaps this has to do with me placing the value on marriage as a spiritual commitment, and not as a social institution/convention; but how can you be a religious person and believe in divorce? I don't understand how you can stand in front of God, or people, give your word, make a commitment...then one day take it back, just because its no longer convenient, because you have found something better, because you have to go and find yourself? (And I question that regardless of what religion and deity you subscribe to, even atheists believe in something.)

Which brings us to the matter of infidelity...

Recently, in a very strict conservative newspapers, there was a flood of harsh and insulting comments to and about a woman who chose to stay with the husband she caught cheating. My reaction to that was...how dare they, its none of their business (whatever happened to, "object now or forever hold your peace")....to me marriage commitment, to share good and bad, is something that happens strictly between two people (even in polyamorous relationships; and regardless of their sex). Is the notion of "two against the world" so stupid and idealistic?

Seeing all the vanilla people getting divorced "just" because he cheated and finding it silly, ever since I was 9, my firm view on that was:...as long as he doesn't fall in love with whats above the neck, sometimes sex is just sex, isn't it? What would be the deal breaker...is him lying, or even not telling me about it. Honesty and loyalty, I value above all else.

But recently, while still holding that belief, I began to question - is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?

Why would you marry someone with whom you are not honest, someone to whom you cant trust?

How do you deal with infidelity (in more conventional relationships),...especially when there is an added element of bdsm involved?

What do you consider infidelity in bdsm? Is there such a thing?

Or does the dominant get to do what they want? What about sub?

What about domming and subbing others, is that considered infidelity?

What is considered infidelity in polyamorous relationships?

[badlyguidedlittlemis]

Your views are on the extreme side of most, and you are entitled to those of course. I personally disagree with you.

Marriage to me is not something you should stay in just because you've vowed in front of people and god. I'm not religious, but have had my fair share of it over time and think that if either partner feel that they can no longer stay in the marriage they have every right to leave, not to just put up and shut up.

There is indeed to much marriage and people today don't always think of it seriously enough but that is their choice, as is divorce and that is what free societies are out.
I don't see divorce as the evil you do, people change over time, as do the relationships they have with people during their lives. In fact, when my parents divorced it was (in retrospect) a good thing for my mother and our family, my parents' relationship was bad and now in the 13th year of her second marriage is happy, as are her children.

Seeing all the vanilla people getting divorced "just" because he cheated and finding it silly, ever since I was 9, my firm view on that was:...as long as he doesn't fall in love with whats above the neck, sometimes sex is just sex, isn't it? What would be the deal breaker...is him lying, or even not telling me about it. Honesty and loyalty, I value above all else.

I completely disagree, vanilla or d/s, cheating (as defined by the couples relationship) is cheating. As you say, honesty and loyalty you value above all else so why is it that as long as there is no love toward the 'bit on the side' it's okay. In my opinion, the cheating party has been dishonest and has not been loyal!

But recently, while still holding that belief, I began to question - is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?

No, and it applies t women also.

How do you deal with infidelity (in more conventional relationships),...especially when there is an added element of bdsm involved?

The same way you would deal with it without the bdsm, I don't see a bdsm relationship any differently to a vanilla one. I may be the submissive in my relationship and my role defined by me and my dominant but our core relationship, the love, the trust and what keeps us loving one another is no different to my parents, who are not d/s

What do you consider infidelity in bdsm? Is there such a thing?

Those things are defined in each relationship, in mine it is boradly: We can both play (floggers, canes etc etc) with other people but sexual contact is forbidden. This is something we both agreed on.

Or does the dominant get to do what they want? What about sub?

No, he can not do anything which I've said no to, as I can't do anything he has said no to. Just because he is dominant does not mean he can veto my feelings.

You seem like your religious morals and society are clashing, as is often the case. Let the world do what it wants and don't think about it.
I've given up trying to understand society, as long as I don't disappoint myself, or my partner and we are happy in our lives I am happy and content.

[shyslut]

I first met my husband when i was in a bad situation and only 19. We knew when we first laid eyes on each other that we like the other. We started dating 2 days after that. 3 weeks after I moved in with him. 1 yr after meeting we were engaged but because of various reasons didnt marry till we had been together 7 years. Now here we are being together 9 years almost 10. Alot has happened and changed.

One thing is hubby did cheat on me. It was almost enough to completely sever our relationship like that "snip". I tottaly shut down I was very depressed and paranoid and suspicious of "everyone". I quit eating and taking care of myself. I doubted myself my entire life and my entire history. but in the end hubby talked the talk and walked the walk. He quit drinking "it happened while he was drunk" He went to counseling "also said some childhood issues played in" He agreed to all kinds of extra rules like never being alone with another female. For the 1st year this even included his mom. We had no sex for a long time and I had a really disordered relationship with it. He was really patient and in the end we came through it. Our sex life is wonderful. I trust and love him even more. He values and cherishes me for all the things I was and now the power of my ability to forgive as well.

Now to the part where things change. I felt the need to have more sexual experiences. I felt the need to be submissive and to experience bdsm. Hubby tried but absolutely could not dom me. Was very uncomfortable.

We talked and came to an agreement that marriage is a spiritual bond that does not have to be based on sex etc and does not have to be our be all end all. We agreed that its a impossible pressure and unrealistic to make another person soley responsible for the others wellbeing in any arena. To this end we agreed he gets more guy time and more alone time and that I was to be allowed to look for a dom. Because of our agreements Anal and vaginal intercourse is cheating. Oral is not. Touching with hands is not. Going against any conditon that we set including time limits etc IS even without sexual activity.

If hubby all the sudden started domming another person after refusing me that would be cheating. However him subbing for someone after appropriate discussion would not. This is a change from early in our relationship. Even looking at the opposite sex was call to accuse cheating lol

"What is considered infidelity in polyamorous relationships?" Again depends on all the agreements and ground rules and communication.

[MacGuffin]

I have this trait...but I refuse to give up my ideals
This can be termed having the courage of your convictions. In my view this is a great quality to have. Magaret Thatcher was "accused" of this and rose to become my country's first woman prime minister and one of the greatest ever. It was said she was the only one in the cabinet with balls. .

I am very dutiful (I wish I could get rid of that particular trait) and loyal,
Sounds like qualities every person and submissive should have to me.

But when it comes to myself, I tend to be more "illogical".
This comes from the caring for others quality. You can do crazy things yourself and can handle it if it goes pear shaped, but would not want others to make the mistakes. Most parents "suffer" from this when guiding their children to adulthood. "Don't do as I do, do as I say" is the maxim.

I would rather go hungry than not speak up against wrongs being committed.
As I have said in other posts "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing". Why is it irrational to to have a "need for freedom and right". Is that not what the founding fathers of your country fought for.

I think it is highly unlikely I will ever get married
You just need to find a likeminded partner.

for the wrong reasons and they often don't mean it..after all there is always divorce.
One could say the same about Ds partners and collars. People get together for the wrong reasons.

Yes, divorce is a necessary evil
Not if time appropriate time was spent ensuring the partners are matched. If and when storms come it is the strength of the relationship that will help them both negotiate the rocks and weather the storm.

Perhaps this has to do with me placing the value on marriage as a spiritual commitment, and not as a social institution/convention
This dilemma can be easily avoided in the vows the partners make. If you say til death do us part before God then it is spiritual. The problem is many want a church wedding for the tradition or romance of the ceremony without giving thought to the contract they are making with God as witness.

I don't understand how you can stand in front of God, or people, give your word, make a commitment...then one day take it back, just because its no longer convenient, because you have found something better
I suggest you read about Sir Thomas More or see the oscar winning movie/play A Man For All Seasons. This explores the concept that divorce is breaking a solemn promise to God.

Which brings us to the matter of infidelity...
The problem here is not being honest in the partnership agreement. If I tell my partner upfront, hey I got a wandering willy and she nonetheless takes me warts and all then there is no problem. It's the deception that is the problem more than the infidelity. Most woman in my view don't worry too much about a guy being unfaithful (ignoring STD's of course) it is the possibility of a rival and being dumped. If a guy goes to a whorehouse no big deal but if he has a mistress then it is.

I began to question - is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?
Let's go back to our animal instincts. The male has the desire to plough the field and scatter his seed to procreate and preserve the species. The female is concerned with rearing the young and needs the male to provide the food and protect against danger. I am not an anthropologist but that's the bullshit excuse I give when I get caught out, it's wasn't me it was the animal inside me. - haha just joking,

How do you deal with infidelity,...especially when there is an added element of bdsm involved?
For me in both ol and rl relationships it's not a problem because I discuss and sort it out upfront with my partner. I take the view WYSIWYG - what you see is what you get - and then it's up to the gal to accept me for what I am or reject me.

Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. -- Albert Einstein

[MacGuffin]

badlyguidedlittlemis - Marriage to me is not something you should stay in just because you've vowed in front of people and god.
Agreed it need not be a til death do us part kinda thing but you are, in my opinion, not giving due weight to a solemn commitment. If you take the same argument to other contracts we will have breach of contract willy nilly, which of course happens and courts impose penalties to discourage it. Divorce should be an option of the last resort not a quick fix.

damyanti - Or does the dominant get to do what they want? What about sub?
I think it would depend on the limits and agreement (contract). Limits need not only be for sexual activities.

badlyguidedlittlemis - No, he can not do anything which I've said no to, as I can't do anything he has said no to. Just because he is dominant does not mean he can veto my feelings.
Ds is not an equal rights arrangement. The submissive has (within the mutually agreed limits and agreement) ceded authority to the Dom. By what authority does the sub tell the Dom what he/she can and cannot do. True he cannot veto your feelings but he can veto your actions. That is what power and authority means. If you do not like it then you don't hand over authority and we return to the basic question of what submission means.

badlyguidedlittlemis - I completely disagree, vanilla or d/s, cheating (as defined by the couples relationship) is cheating.
As I said in my other post, this depends on the agreement.

badlyguidedlittlemis - but our core relationship, the love, the trust and what keeps us loving one another is no different to my parents, who are not d/s
I get your point but it's not quite valid. BDSM is consensual, you did not choose your parents and did not agree to be spanked by them.

badlyguidedlittlemis - This is something we both agreed on.
Precisely - the upfront agreement between the partners.

badlyguidedlittlemis - Let the world do what it wants and don't think about it.
What a nice thought but we have to live in the world and must take into consideration the freedoms and restrictions it imposes.

[damyanti]

Thank you all for commenting, its great to see different people share their view of marriage.


I especially loved your comment MacGuffin...all of that is, except this part, (the rationale of which has been my incentive to pose the question in the first place).

I began to question - is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?
Let's go back to our animal instincts. The male has the desire to plough the field and scatter his seed to procreate and preserve the species. The female is concerned with rearing the young and needs the male to provide the food and protect against danger. I am not an anthropologist but that's the bullshit excuse I give when I get caught out, it's wasn't me it was the animal inside me. - haha just joking,
[/I]

Permission to puke, sir, . Btw, whatever happened to that superior dominant (self)control, .

[MacGuffin]

especially loved your comment MacGuffin...all of that is, except this part, (the rationale of which has been my incentive to pose the question in the first place)..................Permission to puke, sir,

Which part made you puke. The fact that gender, instinct and procreation may be a factor in male promiscuity or the part where I added "just joking" as a suffix.

The topic of promiscuity is of course subject to debate but it is not so pukeable as you may think and does have the support of of many in the scientific community. http://www.newscientist.com/channel/...ine-news_rss20

I stand by my defence. It's not my fault darling the problem is in my jeans.

whatever happened to that superior dominant (self)control
Not sure domination is about self control. Take note of the tagline to my nick, "Do What Thou Wilt". That was the motto of the notorious Hellfire Club. I do not consider myself to be a bdsm Dom. The usa style bdsm largely born out of the gay leather community is not where I am coming from, I prefer far older models and codes.

[damyanti]

especially loved your comment MacGuffin...all of that is, except this part, (the rationale of which has been my incentive to pose the question in the first place)..................Permission to puke, sir,

Which part made you puke. The fact that gender, instinct and procreation may be a factor in male promiscuity or the part where I added "just joking" as a suffix.

The topic of promiscuity is of course subject to debate but it is not so pukeable as you may think and does have the support of of many in the scientific community. http://www.newscientist.com/channel/...ine-news_rss20

I stand by my defence. It's not my fault darling the problem is in my jeans.

whatever happened to that superior dominant (self)control
Not sure domination is about self control. Take note of the tagline to my nick, "Do What Thou Wilt". That was the motto of the notorious Hellfire Club. I do not consider myself to be a bdsm Dom. The usa style bdsm largely born out of the gay leather community is not where I am coming from, I prefer far older models and codes.

The part where men plead "primitive procreation urge" as an excuse for cheating. Frankly, as a man, don't you find that insulting...it suggests that only women have evolved from the "cave days"?

Here is an extract from the article I mentioned, hubby telling his story:

"This time two years ago, my wife and I were staying in a hotel in Rome together. I was there on business, and Stephanie asked her mother to look after the children so that she could fly out to join me.

I remember sitting on the balcony of our hotel after dinner, thinking I had everything a man could wish for - a beautiful wife, two gorgeous sons, a lovely house and a well-paid and challenging career.

If someone had told me then that I was about to risk it all for the sake of an affair, I'd never have believed them.

I'm not trying to make excuses for myself. There are none. The bottom line is I met a woman I found attractive, and I slept with her. I could go on about how overwhelming my feelings were at the time, and how I couldn't help myself succumbing to them. But I'd be deceiving myself.

Any husband, or wife, who cheats on their spouse at some point takes a conscious decision to do so. If you don't want to risk destroying your marriage, you walk away from temptation. I know now I should have done that the moment I first realised I was falling for Kate, my work colleague.

I will always be sorry I didn't. Instead, I deluded myself that I was in love, behaving more like a reckless teenager than a middle-aged father of two."

[MacGuffin]

damyanti - The part where men plead "primitive procreation urge" as an excuse for cheating. Frankly, as a man, don't you find that insulting...it suggests that only women have evolved from the "cave days"?

Slow down slow down. We may have a cross wire here. I stated that men may have a biological impulse to be more promiscuous than women. You may dispute that but there are many who hold that view. It seems like you may be twisting that comment to make it seem like I said it was a justifiable excuse.

Our caveman instict tells us to kill somebody who threatens us but out developed society tells us it's wrong. Most of us don't hit out when we are annoyed but many do because they are following their instincts. I find it strange that we are putting men on the moon but war (sic Iraq) still seems to be the prefered method of conflict resolution. Women have not developed any faster from the cave age than men. The primal insticts is for the welfare of the young still and for that they need the male to be around and not off with another female. Surely I am not saying anything revolutionary by suggesting that primeval instincts still play a part in how we behave. Why do american females spend trillions on make up compared to men. Is that not the natural instinct to attact the male at work.

Yes of course you are perfectly correct that it is not an accpetable excuse. There are many cases in life where we have to overide our animal instincts else I would be clubbing you on the head and dragging you back to my cave now.

If you are suggesting that I think it is an excuse because of my "it wasn't me it was the animal inside me" comment then hey look at the words "haha just joking" and take a guess whether I believed it's a justifiable excuse or not.

PS - Just spotted my "I stand by my defence. It's not my fault darling the problem is in my jeans." comment. No I didn't mean that. That was an attempt at humor not to be taken seriously. I do maintain that man has primitive urges but yes his brain should override his cock.

[badlyguidedlittlemis]

badlyguidedlittlemis - No, he can not do anything which I've said no to, as I can't do anything he has said no to. Just because he is dominant does not mean he can veto my feelings.
Ds is not an equal rights arrangement. The submissive has (within the mutually agreed limits and agreement) ceded authority to the Dom. By what authority does the sub tell the Dom what he/she can and cannot do. True he cannot veto your feelings but he can veto your actions. That is what power and authority means. If you do not like it then you don't hand over authority and we return to the basic question of what submission means.

I was speaking of my own relationship, I have been encouraged by my dominant to express my opinion as to what my wishes were, or what my needs are. He does this because I have been stifled before and it caused negative behaviours which I'm trying to shift. I'm quite baffled by your response to this as this is how we work our dynamic and it is not an unhealthy thing for him to ask of me, in fact I think it's a good thing. He wouldn't veto my actions of something we had previously agreed on, such as playing with other people. He can stop me posting on a board, stop me going to the pub and all those things but he can't make me change an actions previously defined.

I am however allowed to change my own actions to suit his changing needs if I want to.

badlyguidedlittlemis - but our core relationship, the love, the trust and what keeps us loving one another is no different to my parents, who are not d/s
I get your point but it's not quite valid. BDSM is consensual, you did not choose your parents and did not agree to be spanked by them.

I wasn't talking about my parent's spanking me, I was saying my parents' relationship with each other is non d/s where my relationship with my dominant is, and the core relationship is just as strong regardless of bdsm being involved or not..

[Ozme52]

God I hate these threads. They start as an inquiry, someone with actual questions and a desire for some input...

..and eventually we get to this vitriolic diatribe!!

[Euryleia]

Is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?

Probably. That's why I only get sexually and emotionally involved with women, although they too can have problems with being faithful.

Why would you marry someone with whom you are not honest, someone to whom you cant trust?

I assume that those who do so, have good reasons for their choices--it could be they need safety or security for their children, for one.

How do you deal with infidelity (in more conventional relationships),...especially when there is an added element of bdsm involved?

I make it very clear in any relationship that I'm in, that I don't share with anyone else. If they don't agree with that basic tenet, we go no futher. If during the course of the relationship, they are unfaithful, they will never touch me again. PERIOD

What do you consider infidelity in bdsm? Is there such a thing?

BDSM doesn't necessarily mean free-for-all orgies. I totally believe in committed partnerships and feel there is no need to bring anyone else into our play. Infidelity in BDSM is just like that of any other relationship--having a physical/emotional connection outside of the primary relationship. I think all parties need to communicate openly what their needs and desires are. With clarity and honesty, you can have faithful BDSM relationships that satisfy everyone.

Or does the dominant get to do what they want? What about sub?

Again, this would be up to the individual players. As the Dominant, I don't play with anyone else and I don't share my girl with anyone. I expect her to do the same.

What about domming and subbing others, is that considered infidelity?

If you both have communicated that part of your relationship is to involve others, then no. In my case, Domming or subbing others, because of the intense emotional connection, would be infidelity.

What is considered infidelity in polyamorous relationships?

Just because your partnership involves more people, does not mean that relations outside of the group are acceptable. Infidelity is the same thing--going outside of the primary group for physical or emotional connections. Again, communication is key. As a group you must decide what the boundaries are and the consequences for when someone strays.

As far as your other issue:

Marriage has, since its inception as an institution, had more to do with social control and transfer of goods than a sacred bond. It was designed as a way for men to be sure that the children produced by the union were theirs and for Father's to safely transfer their wealth to the next generation. God only got involved because the church wanted to protect those same ideals.

Does that mean that a genuine committment made by individuals is worthless? Not at all. Committments like marriage serve a number of needs, from a way to achieve social acceptance, to the financial benefits of the tax code, to mutual satisfaction. I believe that entering one is a serious decision and should never be taken lightly. When you give your word to love and cherish, you should keep it. However, circumstances can change(some people grow and evolve, some people devolve) and you should be free to reasses if what you agreed to do is still even possible. If your needs aren't being met, then you should end the relationship.

[damyanti]

Infidelity is the worst thing you could do in a committed relationship and I have zero tolerance for it. There is no reason why (while in a relationship) one should seek out another for anything on an intimate level. NO reason. Apparently it's NOT just sex. Every woman has a pussy. What makes that woman's crotch so much more interesting? Same with men. You're man ha a Dick. What makes that other dick so much more interesting?

I can agree with this point of view, I understand where you are coming from.

As for the rest, I am single, bambina.

I read a few things lately (I like to read), it got me thinking, and I wanted to hear different thoughts people here had on that topic...how they see marriage, what it means to them, and whats a bdsm take on infidelity. I wasn't looking for a permission to cheat, just to discuss things.

[Ragoczy]

God I hate these threads. They start as an inquiry, someone with actual questions and a desire for some input...

..and eventually we get to this vitriolic diatribe!!

But you see, Oz, that's her take on infidelity and what defines infidelity for her. That's valuable input for someone facing a situation where they're considering being unfaithful, because that "vitriol" may be exactly what that person's partner reacts with. And no amount of calm, reasoned arguments by us uninvolved folks will make a difference in that.

When the partner is reacting with that "vitriol", saying "but so-and-so on the website didn't think it would be cheating" is a less than effective argument.

[Ragoczy]

Is the "you" in your post referring to a specific person or is it generic-"someone"?

I think some people may be taking this as being directed at an individual, but I got the feeling it was more just your pattern of speech to use "you"?

[IAmCanadian]

What do you consider infidelity in bdsm? Is there such a thing?

I believe that infidelity in a BDSM relationship can be a greater tragedy than "normal".

While marriage is a weighty and meaningful institution, slavery and submission are even greater commitments. There is an entire process devoted to the dissolution of marriages, but submission to a master is something done outside the law, and inside the human heart.

I try to imagine how I would feel if the slave that I had treasured somehow went astray, falling into the arms of another. To me, it's unthinkable. In the ideal relationship I envision, I would be her life, and she mine- I would be her guiding star in all things, and she my greatest treasure. Like a guardsman standing through a hurricane, at the tomb of the Unknown Soldier, I would protect her. Like the most treasured of all properties, I would keepsafe her and raise her to a place of prominence in my heart.

Infidelity in such a case seems unfathomable. To have her taken away from me by the slick words and temptations of another would destroy me- and for me to invest so much in her and then move on to another would be the ultimate cruelty. Like throwing my precious treasure into the marsh at the side of the road. No master should be able to look himself in the mirror if he does such a thing.

It's certainly true that there's a lot of kink involved with BDSM and there may be other men or women involved in the course of exploring sexual ideas and desires. But the bond between master and slave that forms inside their respective hearts, that yin-yang covenent of mutual absolution and acceptance, is so solemn a pact that I think infidelity even more a sin in this case than in the case of a traditional marriage.

I should add before I go, though, that every relationship is different. Not every couple aspires to that sort of devotion, and the tragedy level of any given indiscretion fluctuates with the value of the relationship which it betrays.

- FS

[Ozme52]

But you see, Oz, that's her take on infidelity and what defines infidelity for her. That's valuable input for someone facing a situation where they're considering being unfaithful, because that "vitriol" may be exactly what that person's partner reacts with. And no amount of calm, reasoned arguments by us uninvolved folks will make a difference in that.

When the partner is reacting with that "vitriol", saying "but so-and-so on the website didn't think it would be cheating" is a less than effective argument.

Sorry brother but if you go back and read it again... she's calling out anyone who lives differently and is calling them... us...

down right sleezy, good-for-nothing, selfish, maniacal bunch of sh!ts.

[Ozme52]

Bambina,

Is the "you" in your post referring to a specific person or is it generic-"someone"?

I think some people may be taking this as being directed at an individual, but I got the feeling it was more just your pattern of speech to use "you"?

Bull!! Her intent is clear.

It's despicable, and I am not afraid to say that those who cheat are down right sleezy, good-for-nothing, selfish, maniacal bunch of sh!ts.

And let's be clear about her use of the language. She's not making any consideration for any form of infidelity. Permission granted or not, open relationship or not, poly or not. Hell, by her words, poly itself is infidelity.

Infidelity is the worst thing you could do in a committed relationship and I have zero tolerance for it. There is no reason why (while in a relationship) one should seek out another for anything on an intimate level. NO reason.

[hopperboo]

I think you had some very valid points. Great post.

I think there is too much of it (marriage), I think people do it too easily, too laconically, for the wrong reasons and they often don't mean it....after all there is always divorce.

I very much agree with you. People are becoming more and more flighty about marriage. It's not a life commitment anymore, it's a moment commitment, a moment until someone says something another doesn't like, someone isn't happy for 3 minutes, or things get difficult for a period of time.

Yes, divorce is a necessary evil, but short of serious mental and physical abuse (and ironically, its those who rarely leave) I don't believe in it.

I don't understand how you can stand in front of God, or people, give your word, make a commitment...then one day take it back

I agree. Though I believe infidelity for some is a reason for divorce. Some couples can overcome that, and others cannot.

I also don't understand how people can be so easy going with marriage vows. It's especially hard for me when it's a person (or couple) who is very religious (Christian wise) and they just throw it off as a "mistake." My cousin did this a year ago...she was/is very involved with her church, and makes comment when I say the word "Hell," however last summer she took marriage vows to God and all and she got a divorce five days later. To me that is a slap in the face not only to family, but of course to God as well. (And get this - her and her ex-husband kept all the gifts). She plays the part of victim very well.

Seeing all the vanilla people getting divorced "just" because he cheated and finding it silly, ever since I was 9, my firm view on that was:...as long as he doesn't fall in love with whats above the neck, sometimes sex is just sex, isn't it? What would be the deal breaker...is him lying, or even not telling me about it. Honesty and loyalty, I value above all else.

But recently, while still holding that belief, I began to question - is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful

I expect to have a fully faithful husband. And I will not settle for anything less. If a rocky part in the marriage occurs I would hope it would be able to be fixed, and we would move on from there, but I would not ever stand for being cheated on. Ever.



Within BDSM, I think some couples are more free with their bodies and emotions in relationships. Personally I don't understand taking a marriage vow and then having sex/emotional relationship with others when marriage vows are to bind two together, not 4 or 5 or 6...but to each their own. It's not something I would want for my relationship or marriage.

[Ragoczy]

Sorry brother but if you go back and read it again... she's calling out anyone who lives differently and is calling them... us...

I read it fine, it's called a moral judgment. I believe that someone who's unfaithful -- and please note that I mean "unfaithful" by the standards of their relationship and not my own -- is far worse than "down right sleezy, good-for-nothing, selfish, maniacal bunch of sh!ts."

I have zero respect for someone who knowingly betrays the trust of their partner.

Now to the point I was trying to make that you responded to:

If someone reading this thread is facing a decision, then that post is a valuable one for them to read because their partner may have the same attitude. And when their partner finds out and is screaming at them that they're a sleazy, god-for-nothing, selfish, maniacal little shit, them saying "well, Ozme said ..." will not have a calming effect. So being exposed to that perspective may save someone some grief.

[Ragoczy]

Bull!! Her intent is clear.

And let's be clear about her use of the language. She's not making any consideration for any form of infidelity. Permission granted or not, open relationship or not, poly or not. Hell, by her words, poly itself is infidelity.

Well, it clearly wasn't clear, because I didn't necessarily take it that way. I leave some room for the possibility that, in forming her post, she used the word "you" generically and possibly neglected to articulate a "without prior agreement"-clause, maybe thinking it was understood in the context.

So I asked a question to clarify ... is that so unreasonable?

[IAmCanadian]

And let's be clear about her use of the language. She's not making any consideration for any form of infidelity. Permission granted or not, open relationship or not, poly or not.

I mean...this just isn't true. She obviously means "cheating without permission", a true act of betrayal. Infidelity with no reason behind it besides feeding sexual urges. Considerations are implicit if you just look at the intent.

You're way off base here. Not sure how else to say it. I am baffled by your response.

Sorry brother but if you go back and read it again... she's calling out anyone who lives differently.

This actually couldn't be any less true. It's like a contest was held to see who could misunderstand her statement the most, and you really needed the prize money. Let me quote from her post:

If you live in a Vanilla relationship and you long for one that deals with BDSM then you have some decisions to make.

Don't be dishonest and unfaithful to your spouse because of YOUR need for something different.

What part of the above makes you believe that she is condemning polyamorous relationships, open relationships, or just plain swinging? The only topic explicitly addressed by her post was dishonesty in a conventional marriage. Even when talking more generally, she uses phrases like dishonest and unfaithful. How could those words be a condemnation of polyamory or open relationships, wherein the secondary sex partners are agreed-upon and there is no deception?

Just a ridiculous overreaction.

- FS

[cadence]

I think it is highly unlikely I will ever get married, not because I am a "loose liberal infidel" (as I let most believe) who doesn't believe in it, but because I believe in it too much.

I have never been a fan of marriage, only because I believe it wrecks a relationship. I'm not saying that it does for every marriage, but the ones I have seen go sour all too quickly. I just don't see the point in it.

I don't understand how you can stand in front of God, or people, give your word, make a commitment...then one day take it back, just because its no longer convenient, because you have found something better, because you have to go and find yourself? (And I question that regardless of what religion and deity you subscribe to, even atheists believe in something.)

I don't think that people just one day decide that things are no longer convenient. I believe that most who do wander away from commitments do take the time to think carefully about thier situations. Maybe some don't, but I would believe it's a very small minority.
People change over time, so do thier ideals, thier convictions, and thier lives. Some decide to move in a different direction, others opt to stay and work through changes. It's all in what a person wants for themselves.

Which brings us to the matter of infidelity...

is it really too much to ask of men to be sexually, as well as emotionally, faithful?

I don't think it's always the men who are the culprits, I don't care about the sexual aspects, I only care about the emotional and ask that my partner be honest and forthcoming with me.

Why would you marry someone with whom you are not honest, someone to whom you cant trust?

Again, I don't think you marry someone with the full intentions of being dishonest and untrustworthy, as I said things can change.
If you go into a marriage with full intentions of destroying it, I would have to ask the same question.

How do you deal with infidelity (in more conventional relationships),...especially when there is an added element of bdsm involved?

What do you consider infidelity in bdsm? Is there such a thing?

Or does the dominant get to do what they want? What about sub?

What about domming and subbing others, is that considered infidelity?

What is considered infidelity in polyamorous relationships?

Infidelity is infidelity, how you handle that is your own business. I don't think that infidelity in BDSM relationships are any different in vanilla ones.
There is an obvious breakdown of trust and communication if it is prevalent.

If a Dominant or submissive wants to play with others, or be involved in multiple relationships than it should be discussed with all parties involved. It's not infidelity when everyone is on the same page.

[cadence]

Just a ridiculous overreaction.

- FS

Honestly I would have to side with Oz, and while he might have read more into it than others have, I still side with him for the general fact that everytime a thread mentions infidelity, there are always those who will voice thier opinions a little too voraciously.

I'm not saying that infidelity is not wrong, yes we all know it's wrong. I'm not disputing that.

While I appreciate that everyone has an opinion to share, the opinions tend to become a tad to focused and beligerent to others in general.

Sure maybe some people deserve the title of a few choice names, but that does not mean that everyone should be tagged and labled deviant and not worthy of being a human being.

[IAmCanadian]

Honestly I would have to side with Oz, and while he might have read more into it than others have, I still side with him for the general fact that everytime a thread mentions infidelity, there are always those who will voice thier opinions a little too voraciously.

There's a difference between arguing that the message was overly voracious and arguing that it says something about a certain lifestyle when it clearly doesn't.

If Oz wanted to argue that she was being unfair in emphatically denouncing the dishonest, deceptive brand of infidelity just because sometimes there are extenuating circumstances, why didn't he just make that argument?

Instead, he tried to say that she was speaking against polyamory, open relationships, and swinging. When she obviously wasn't.

- FS

[Ozme52]

Well, it clearly wasn't clear, because I didn't necessarily take it that way. I leave some room for the possibility that, in forming her post, she used the word "you" generically and possibly neglected to articulate a "without prior agreement"-clause, maybe thinking it was understood in the context.

So I asked a question to clarify ... is that so unreasonable?

If she hadn't been clear in her "No Reason" statement, if she hadn't been very clear that she doesn't mind calling all of us sh!ts, I wouldn't have responded as I had.

Perhaps you didn't take it as a directed statement because it wasn't directed at activities you partake in... this time.

[cadence]

There's a difference between arguing that the message was overly voracious and arguing that it says something about a certain lifestyle when it clearly doesn't.

If Oz wanted to argue that she was being unfair in emphatically denouncing the dishonest, deceptive brand of infidelity just because sometimes there are extenuating circumstances, why didn't he just make that argument?

Instead, he tried to say that she was speaking against polyamory, open relationships, and swinging. When she obviously wasn't.

- FS

Yes you are correct, I shouldn't have taken your quote and used it. I was more or less talking about the first statement he made.
That would make me guilty of jumping the gun, but hey I'm not super perfect.
I can't say whether or not bambina used her dislike of infidelity and asscociated it with poly or other relationships. Only she can clarify it.

[Ozme52]

There's a difference between arguing that the message was overly voracious and arguing that it says something about a certain lifestyle when it clearly doesn't.

If Oz wanted to argue that she was being unfair in emphatically denouncing the dishonest, deceptive brand of infidelity just because sometimes there are extenuating circumstances, why didn't he just make that argument?

Instead, he tried to say that she was speaking against polyamory, open relationships, and swinging. When she obviously wasn't.

- FS

I've only commented on her style... and argue against her defenders.

And my comment was about how infidelity discussions inevitably end up with such diatribes. I made no comments previously about any of the opinions stated that were clearly opinions held... those made without attacks.

[denuseri]

As the practicioners of my husbands faith would say " and it harm not others do as thou will.

Seriously if all of the parties in a relationship agree, and are happy, isnt that what its all about?

Isint it bad enough that as a group just be being into bdsm we are stereotyped and judged?

[Ozme52]

As the practicioners of my husbands faith would say " and it harm not others do as thou will.

Seriously if all of the parties in a relationship agree, and are happy, isnt that what its all about?

Isint it bad enough that as a group just be being into bdsm we are stereotyped and judged?

Tis true denuseri. It always amazes me how narrow minded bdsm-ers can be when talking about someone else's kink... or a limit that they have that isn't on someone else's limit list.