Advertisement
Does anyone have experience with unconsummated relationships?
not so much as the stage before consumated ones, but as a status quo or as the intended and prefered type.
thanks for your thoughts..
not so much as the stage before consumated ones, but as a status quo or as the intended and prefered type.
thanks for your thoughts..
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 11:02 AMUnconsummated in what way? Penetrative sex only? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 11:05 AMWell, now this could get interesting.
*Starts popping the popcorn* -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 12:09 PM**scooches in next to Noel**
-
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 11:43 AMIn a weird way, yes. I'm in the situation of sharing a house with my ex-wife and wife. The wife and I are expecting our first child in Feb 2010. In the time since the marriage to my ex ended (March 08 which is also the last time we had sex)and the wife moved in a little over a year ago we have lived in an essentially Poly relationship.
Selina and I love my ex very much. She gets hugs & cuddles. It is understood that there will never be sexual activity between the ex and myself. So in a way since the Poly relationship began, I've had an unconsumated relationship. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 12:36 PMHugs and cuddles with no sexual activity sounds exactly like a friendship, rather than a relationship. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 12:39 PMRather than a romantic relationship, sure.
That's what I'd call it in my life. I VALUE friendship and don't need to call it something it ain't. It's worthwhile all by itself.
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 1:17 PM"Hugs and cuddles with no sexual activity sounds exactly like a friendship, rather than a relationship."
But why wouldn't it make it a relationship? Taken literally, polyamory is about multi/many loves, which seems like this may be in this case. Sure, it may not be how you would approach it, and yet it seems like (to me) a poly relationship.
An extreme example (bordering on hyperbole), if a partner lost or did not have genitals, is that still not a loving relationship and could only be a friendship? I don't believe sex is a pre-requisite for that status. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 1:29 PMTo me a friendship *is* a relationship. I have beat my head against the "relationship with someone who's not my friend" wall enough. The level of physical intimacy varies from person to person though.
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 1:41 PMYou know, I have a dear and precious friend that yeah, I've cuddled up to while watching movies and even kissed. We're friends, not lovers. We're both poly, but I wouldn't call it a poly relationship.
While I recognize that poly isn't necessarily about sex, it's not about "Not-sex" either.
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 2:51 PMYou two are not in love with each other, hence the difference that is illustrated above and not an unconsummated relationship. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 2:53 PMWhat's the difference between love and in love? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 3:39 PMSee my response below about love.
I love the smell of campfire, but I'm not in romantic love with it.
No way in hell I'm having sex with the campfire either! -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 4:28 PMSo love v. in love is strictly sexual? -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 4:50 PMUm, no. I guess I'm uncertain what you're asking now. Do you want me to define what love is? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 4:58 PMI'm mostly just being a pain in the ass because you told me what I thought. Passive-aggressive and I'm sorry.
But I think the love/in-love dichotomy is mostly used to justify unkind behavior towards people. In my opinion love is love, and the trappings we put around it are just humans overthinking things that don't need it. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 5:01 PMDo you feel that love is binary: either it exists or it doesn't? What about various shades/depths of love? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 5:19 PMYeah, I think it exists or it doesn't. I don't think it's an emotion, so I don't think shades of feeling apply.
Anyone who has been up for the seventh time in one night with a vomiting child knows that love really is more an action and attitude than an emotion.
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 6:41 PM"I think the love/in-love dichotomy is mostly used to justify unkind behavior towards people."
It has been my experience seeing this as well. "In love/love" is often used as a way of dividing people one fucks into two different categories: those who are not, and those who are emotionally disposable (respectively). Naturally, no one HERE would be such a callous bastard, but that's what I've seen those OTHER assholes do out there, repeatedly.
Probably doesn't help that "love" as a word gets overloaded: it's used to describe all sorts of thing, such as toast, campfires, Pop-Tarts, and (inexplicably) remakes by Tim Burton. We seem to have eschewed vocabulary for the sake of confusion. Shit deal, I'd say.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 1:47 PM"...yet it seems like (to me) a poly relationship."
Indulge me, please:
Explain the difference, to you, between "a poly relationship" and "friends."
In other words, what is the functional/observable difference? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 2:42 PMDifferent states and definitions of love, that is the difference for me. I don't love every one, and that includes my friends, at least not to the degree of my girlfriends.
It's about depth of loving emotion for me.
Let me add to this, if it includes sex but doesn't include love, is that polyamory? To me, no, sounds like polyfuckery, friends with benefits, or something else. I do fuck my friends and it is still friendship, not necessarily a "relationship". So why does sex have to muck up what is or isn't a "real" relationship? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 6:35 PM"Different states and definitions of love, that is the difference for me. I don't love every one, and that includes my friends, at least not to the degree of my girlfriends. "
So, it's a rating scale? And a friend who might be loved gets queue-jumped by the new girlfriend who sports a different kind of love?
I'm still not clear on the bright line difference between your use of "relationship" where it qualifies as "polyamory without sex", and "friendship." I have a lot of friends, and I'm very affectionate with them, and I DEFINITELY know the difference between a friend and a partner. I have sex with my partners. If we weren't able to have sex, I'd WANT to have sex with them. Sex is a big thing. If I wasn't interested in them sexually (whether or not we could have sex), then we'd be "friends" or "roommates" or something.
But this usage of relationship is getting smeary-wide to cover friends and roommates as well, so I'm trying to figure out how you're using it.
"Let me add to this, if it includes sex but doesn't include love, is that polyamory?"
They call that "marriage."
Ha-ha, that's just a little joke. I'm actually quite fond of marriage, and recommend it. Like it so much I'm even doing it again!
My own personal answer to your question is sure, why not? It does me absolutely no harm at all to let people self-identify however they wish, and I wouldn't presume to define what level of emotional connection between THEM qualifies as "love" in my book.
"I do fuck my friends and it is still friendship, not necessarily a "relationship"."
Wait-a-sec. Let me get this straight -- you have friends you fuck without love and you don't think this qualifies as a "relationship"?
Are you using "relationship" (which is more of a generic term) interchangeably with (for example) "x-friend" (where "x" might be "boy," "girl," or otherwise a romantic partner)? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 4:45 PMTo the original poster, sorry if this thread got hijacked by our conversation.
I believe the issue and schism is based around people's definitions about certain terms: love, relationships, polyamory, and non-monogamy. We've been bandying around the words without understanding each others definitions are.
"So, it's a rating scale?"
Am I rating love? No. I do feel more in love with some people than others. I feel as it is shades of gray than a system of measurement.
"But this usage of relationship is getting smeary-wide to cover friends and roommates as well, so I'm trying to figure out how you're using it."
If you are associated with a person, you have a relationship with them. The depth of that relationship is subjective, as it may be a relative, lover, friend, work associate, or neighbor. It is a state of relations between others in your life.
"Wait-a-sec. Let me get this straight -- you have friends you fuck without love and you don't think this qualifies as a 'relationship'?"
At the heart of the thread, I believe we are talking about romantic or emotional relationships. I do have a relationship with my friends, it's called, "friendship."
Are you using "relationship" (which is more of a generic term) interchangeably with (for example) "x-friend" (where "x" might be "boy," "girl," or otherwise a romantic partner)?
And there in lies the confusion with much of this discussion. We've been using terms that are similar and are sometimes used interchangeably. It's all about context. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 7:25 PM"Am I rating love? No. I do feel more in love with some people than others. I feel as it is shades of gray than a system of measurement."
Okay, there's an order (love-for-one-person is-greater-than love-for-another-person) that can identified by "shades of gray". That's basically a number line, a scale, or a rating, isn't it? I mean, if you're sorting out people by an amount you declare love for them, you're still sorting them.
"If you are associated with a person, you have a relationship with them."
Right. I have a relationship with the cashier at the Stop-n-Rob. But honestly, when you responded to Noel with "But why wouldn't it make it a relationship?" were you REALLY trying to underscore the idea that there was no difference between such a relationship and the romantic sort of relationship that most people tend to think of as "love"? Did you think Noel was talking about that, too, or is it really necessary to specify that this SHOULD have all been about relationships-of-the-romantic-sort?
Although to be completely fair, she did say "Rather than a romantic relationship, sure. "
"At the heart of the thread, I believe we are talking about romantic or emotional relationships. I do have a relationship with my friends, it's called, "friendship." "
Okay, yes, then I'll not pay attention to the hair-splitting above about how realtionships can cover "everything".
So, yes, romantic or emotional relationships. Yes, precisely.
And relationships with friends, yep, called friendship.
Usually, the bright line has to do with sex or sexuality.
"We've been using terms that are similar and are sometimes used interchangeably. It's all about context. "
Thus my questions.
Think of "relationships" like a pancake. This particular pancake only uses one cup of batter.
So, if you pour it into a small space, the pancake's going to be thick and tasty. If you spread it out to cover the area of your entire living room, it's going to be very thin and the bites are gonna be pretty airy. If you spread it out to cover a cricket field, then you might as well not bother calling it a pancake anymore, as you can pretty much poke a finger between the pancake molecules.
Using the word "relationship" is a lot like that.
If you spread it out to include everybody you ever encounter in life ("Hey, my keys just had a relationship with his car's paint job!"), then it pretty much loses its meaning, because you have to keep that spread alive when you refer to it. You can't say "Me and this chick had a relationship" and have it be anything more meaningful, because the word's been spread out to define all kinds of wacky shit.
So.
What most of do, is that we restrict that particular definition of relationship (the emotional/romantic one) to some SUBSET of the big spread-out one. Maybe we capitalize it, or make finger-quotes. In the thread above, unless you offer a compelling argument otherwise, I think it's pretty obvious we're talking about a pancake we can actually taste, that has some sort of thickness, that DOESN'T include "my foot had a relationship with the soda machine."
thus my question: what is, by your take, the difference between a friend and a relationship.
I don't think this is particularly a tricky question, and I've already answered it for myself, but I think it would be massively useful if you could, as that would probably clear up a lot of any future confusion. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 7:26 PMerrata:
Change "What most of do, is that we restrict that particular definition" to "What most of us do, is that we restrict that particular definition"
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 9:16 PM"Okay, there's an order (love-for-one-person is-greater-than love-for-another-person) that can identified by 'shades of gray'. That's basically a number line, a scale, or a rating, isn't it? I mean, if you're sorting out people by an amount you declare love for them, you're still sorting them."
If you choose to do it that way, sure. I don't quantify it as you've stated above. I also don't see love as binary.
"thus my question: what is, by your take, the difference between a friend and a relationship."
A friend is a person. A relationship is a status you have with a person.
"I don't think this is particularly a tricky question, and I've already answered it for myself, but I think it would be massively useful if you could, as that would probably clear up a lot of any future confusion."
Not really certain where the confusion lies, as it seems pretty clear to me. I'm uncertain where this line of dialogue is heading, as it has very much strayed from the original thread and has become very derailed. It seems to me that we are in the area of setting up definitions, labels, and contextual meanings. I'm okay with rehashing this again, but I also don't understand the need to do so. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Thu, July 2, 2009 - 12:55 PM"If you choose to do it that way, sure."
Nope, I'm just paraphrasing you, in an attempt to understand what you're trying to say when you draw the differences above. You're saying you're not sorting or prioritizing, yet (if I understand you correctly) you are suggesting exactly that.
"I don't quantify it as you've stated above."
Explain how "shades of gray" is not quantification, please. I'm not understanding this usage.
"A friend is a person. A relationship is a status you have with a person. "
Wha-a-a-at?
Look, this is REALLY not complicated. Are you really not understanding my question about the difference between a relationship one calls "friend" and a relationship one calls "a RELATIONSHIP" (usually meaning sexual/emotional/partnery, etc.
"Not really certain where the confusion lies, as it seems pretty clear to me. "
Each individual time you use it, you are shifting it around. When it is convenient to claim "gee, EVERYBODY is a relationship" you do so, and when that becomes inconvenient, "well, that's not REALLY a relationship, that's just friends who fuck," so obviously, if you want to be understood better, I think it's only fair to ask for a little bit of consistency.
Thus my question: for you, personally, what is the difference between a relationship you call "friend" and a relationship you call ":a RELATIONSHIP" (usually meaning sexual/emotional/partnery/etc. connection.
"I'm uncertain where this line of dialogue is heading, as it has very much strayed from the original thread and has become very derailed."
On the contrary, I think a clear understanding of relationship.friend versus relationship.romantic/emotional/partnery is VERY germane to the conversation.
I think if someone wants to discuss it (and I'm definitely game) then it does not hurt at all to ask them to start off by explaining the difference between what they think of as a friend-relationship and what they think of as a RELATIONSHIP-relationship (to use goofy vernacular).
I think understanding that difference is important for anyone who's not sure if they have a lot of friends, or if they have a poly-relationship-where-no-one-fucks-anyone-else-but-that's-okay-because-we-enjoy-each-others-company-so-much.
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 11:05 AMEdward- Even though you said that you're attempting to understand him, I'm getting the impression that you're trying to teach him a lesson rather than understand his message.
All,
Is anyone really that confused with Flint's reference to "shades of gray" regarding love, or calling a we-cuddle-and-care-for-each-other-but-don't-have-sex a "relationship"? We might have different definitions and opinions but I think it's pretty easy to understand and respect where he's coming from.
I'm posting this because I value all of the knowledge and wisdom of the people in this tribe. People with insight I have grown to respect- Edward, Flint, Noel, etc. I'm feeling frustration, annoyance, and disappointment about how many of these threads get derailed by emotions concealed in passive aggression or someone's need to prove a point. I sometimes fear that anything I post will be taken out of context and more energy will be spent on my word choice than my message.
I'm wondering if y'all would be willing to just say, with compassion, if and why you're feeling annoyed after reading someone's post and then move back to the topic in question with a spirit of collaboration? Emotions can run high so you/me/he/she/they wont always be able to be so disciplined but I would like to see more of that intention displayed. If you're willing to help me stay in that place of compassion and collaboration, I'm willing to help you too.
If we do that, maybe more of our time can be focused on finding out how to love (action and/or emotion) in the most healthy and compassionate way we can.
I sincerely thank y'all for the wisdom and support you contribute.
Tony -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 3:01 PM"Even though you said that you're attempting to understand him, I'm getting the impression that you're trying to teach him a lesson rather than understand his message. "
I think the topic is a good one. I would like to discuss it. Been trying to.
I think flexifying the definition of "a poly relationship" all over hell and tarnation is ubiquitous, although helpful at times* for people who need that sort of thing, but in this specific thread case, I think making sure that no one's chasing gauges is a useful thing**. The topic is "unconsummated relationships." I think differentiating between this and "friends" -- in the case of this specific thread -- is a part of understanding the topic and how people are going to approach it.
Otherwise, you wind up with some definition that comes so close to "friends" as to be unrecognizably different, as Noel's pointing out, and I'm asking about.
I'm not upset or angry or trying-to-teach-anyone-a-lesson or anything like that. When I am upset or angry or anything like that, I am comfortable saying so. (although it's pretty rare, especially in an online environment)
* this is why I don't bother much with threads where people try to strap definitions of what "real poly" is -- it means nothing without a context anyway (and more often than not, people seem to get defensive about their context). In this specific instance, however, asking for the difference between an "unconsummated relationship" and a "friend" seems 100% on topic and very germane.
** chasing gauges refers to the act of shifting the target around so that no one can actually hit it. It's not always deliberate (and I'm not implying it is in this case).
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 3:03 PM"I sometimes fear that anything I post will be taken out of context and more energy will be spent on my word choice than my message. "
Please feel free to let me know if you ever think I'm doing that. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 6:46 PMThanks for your thoughtful response. I just PM'd you :-)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 10:37 AM"Let me add to this, if it includes sex but doesn't include love, is that polyamory? To me, no, sounds like polyfuckery, friends with benefits, or something else."
I'm the opposite, I totally consider relationships that I have that are friends with benefits or more about sex than love as part of my poly lifestyle. It's not the love that puts the poly in polyamory to me, it's the idea of more than one romantic/sexual partner. But that's just me, I consider polyfuckery, fwb, polyfidelity, polygamy, open marriage, and even swinging to all be sub-sets of polyamory, which to me is the perfect umbrella term for most types of open/multiple relationships. I dunno, maybe the umbrella term should be non-monogamy, but poly just sounds cooler. In the end, I just don't really care, I just can't get into arguing strict definitions of made-up terms that are so new that not only can people not agree on their definitions, most people don't even know these terms exist.
(Now would probably be a good time to make another batch of popcorn Noel) -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 10:49 AMYeah, it's gettin' on to popcorn time.
For what it's worth, I pretty much have a similar view to you.
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 12:04 PM"...to all be sub-sets of polyamory"
This makes the most sense to me, although I tend to think of all of it as human sexuality, and monogamy is just a more restrictive version. It has its rules about multiple partners, too.
Mmmm, popcorn.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 12:38 PM"not so much as the stage before consumated ones, but as a status quo or as the intended and preferred type"
Just not penetration or no sexual activity at all? I know this poly couple that would not have sexual intercourse with others outside their primary relationship, but would do everything but it. That was their agreement... oral sex was OK, penetration was not. I found that really weird, but to each their own. -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Tue, June 30, 2009 - 12:53 PMI know a few couples that are like that too, but they are more into the bdsm scene so when they play with others it's more of a top/bottom scenario.
-
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 1, 2009 - 4:07 PMI was about to respond rather crankily to this inquiry yesterday about an unconsummated relationship that I am currently in in which I wasn't sure if the deed was ever to be done - we have not done much more than make out and talk about how much we like each other and how we want to take it slow.
Then yesterday I had a conversation with this partner and we decided it's time to talk about sex and going all the way and now have a date for tomorrow night which we are both VERY excited about. So now I have nothing to contribute to this conversation but a grin.
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 7:41 AMYou need to give a lot more. Where is the angst? Why the post? -
-
Re: unconsummated relationships
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 6:30 AMmy man has a girlfriend that can't have sex. she's physically incapable at the moment to have sex. Maybe in time it will change, they certainly are working towards it but they have been together for 3 years or more (longer than I've been with him). Her inability to have sex is what prompted the poly idea for them in the first place.
They use to do a lot together when they lived in the same area. and I considered her his girlfriend the whole time (sometimes still do- only now she's not as involved in our lives as we would like her to be). So yes- i believe there are unconsummated relationships. And its ok to call it whatever you want. :) thats why we are poly- to create the relationships we want and that fit our personalities and needs.
I would never just go with what socieity believes is a relationship or who "they" say is a lover - me and my lovers decide that. :)
excellent question. I think we should value and give validation to the people we love as more than just a friend or buddy- but don't have penetrative sex with.
1 luv, trish
-