Open letter to my lovely friend Cerina
Dear Cerina --
I hoped to find a wi-fi place to go with my laptop and write you a halfway decent reply to your lovely and knowing response to my all-too-casual piece yesterday re the complicated issue of poly relationships.
Alas, I'm here at my Florida place without broadband access -- only a crummy BlackBerry that doesn't let me do justice to the aspects you raised. And we had a bunch of stuff to do at the house all day and then dinner guests -- but I'm determined at least to respond to you tonight.
(I'm making it an open letter because you commented bravely and openly here last night...and my little blog has never been "friends-only" -- which I sometimes struggle to keep in mind, and doubtless other correspondents do, as well. Anyway, there seemed a lot of interest in the topic, so being public seemed better. )
Cerina, one key thing you wisely raised in the context of multiple partners was LOVE -- otherwise, it's not polyamory but mere "swinging." You note your own "secondary" involvements -- subordinated to your love for "Master" -- were "...serious and about more than just sex. In actuality, I've never had penetration or whatever the lesbian version of sex would be with any of my secondary relationships."
I take it that you don't preclude these seemingly Platonic relationships from becoming sexual -- since you "personally find trying to have sex without a loving relationship to be more complicated."
You responded to my observation that some "secondary" (your very apt word) ties were calculatingly "non-serious" (ergo non-threatening to the sig-other). Despite expressing that observation, sweetie, I DO share your disinclination for "... that sort of intimacy without...feelings for the other person."
Right!
But, evidently, some of my notions are mere fantasies, stretched into fragmentary theories -- like that silly thing about me becoming a girl's intimate slave/pet , sharing her with a master, or being the mistress of a slave with such a devoted pet. As you wrote at the end, I ..."assum[ed] a lot of things in this post. Not all of them are accurate." Ah, but one can dream!
Your concluding "Btw" ("...tell us who you are fantasizing about") is quite easy to answer -- in idle moments, I've thought of ALL of you sweet responders (except "Bob"...) in salacious scenarios of various kinds, including being your devoted slave, Cerina!.
I hoped to find a wi-fi place to go with my laptop and write you a halfway decent reply to your lovely and knowing response to my all-too-casual piece yesterday re the complicated issue of poly relationships.
Alas, I'm here at my Florida place without broadband access -- only a crummy BlackBerry that doesn't let me do justice to the aspects you raised. And we had a bunch of stuff to do at the house all day and then dinner guests -- but I'm determined at least to respond to you tonight.
(I'm making it an open letter because you commented bravely and openly here last night...and my little blog has never been "friends-only" -- which I sometimes struggle to keep in mind, and doubtless other correspondents do, as well. Anyway, there seemed a lot of interest in the topic, so being public seemed better. )
Cerina, one key thing you wisely raised in the context of multiple partners was LOVE -- otherwise, it's not polyamory but mere "swinging." You note your own "secondary" involvements -- subordinated to your love for "Master" -- were "...serious and about more than just sex. In actuality, I've never had penetration or whatever the lesbian version of sex would be with any of my secondary relationships."
I take it that you don't preclude these seemingly Platonic relationships from becoming sexual -- since you "personally find trying to have sex without a loving relationship to be more complicated."
You responded to my observation that some "secondary" (your very apt word) ties were calculatingly "non-serious" (ergo non-threatening to the sig-other). Despite expressing that observation, sweetie, I DO share your disinclination for "... that sort of intimacy without...feelings for the other person."
Right!
But, evidently, some of my notions are mere fantasies, stretched into fragmentary theories -- like that silly thing about me becoming a girl's intimate slave/pet , sharing her with a master, or being the mistress of a slave with such a devoted pet. As you wrote at the end, I ..."assum[ed] a lot of things in this post. Not all of them are accurate." Ah, but one can dream!
Your concluding "Btw" ("...tell us who you are fantasizing about") is quite easy to answer -- in idle moments, I've thought of ALL of you sweet responders (except "Bob"...) in salacious scenarios of various kinds, including being your devoted slave, Cerina!.