Polyandry (With Some IR Swinging Tossed In... Maybe)

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Hedonist Ninja, Dec 2, 2013.

  1. Hedonist Ninja

    Hedonist Ninja Well-Known Member Gold Member

    I have no amazing insight nor witty comments to share. Only some links to media stories on the subject.

    Open Marriages: When Husband and Wife Have Lovers and Date Other People

    There is an interesting video clip in that news story... I downloaded it in beautiful MP4 format but since this site does not know 2014 will soon be here it won't let me upload a MP4 file. Shame on the site, I know!

    I did convert the file into an outdated AVI (hello 1998 to 2005!) for those who cannot see the news video, like some outside the USA. The quality is okay and the focus is on the content.

    Yes... You can see one of the lovers in that group mixing is a black dude! Keeping on the theme of the site...

    The story says this is 'not swinging' but a different was of adult group relationships. I agree since polyandry and polyandrous relationships are more then just consensual group sex. That noted, how many would adopt the term interchangeability or at least the attitude?

    While this will never be main stream, I mention it since to some level it could be more open in some areas. Who knows, maybe the fetish some have of seeing the wife get fucked by a stud is not going to be limited to hotel meets in the future... Could that make up the norm for the suburban house in the coming years. I think not by a long stretch.
    More fun is what the dude in the video has- two chicks for his dick! :bounce: He is living the life in that regard and a hat tip goes to him in that aspect of his life.

    I question having another person assist to raise the kid. I can't but wonder the wisdom of having another adult act as a parent/authority to the baby regardless of what fun that third wheel adult might bring into the bedroom.

    Whatever the combinations of lovers and families and sex seekers, the future will always have news shows around to pimp out sexuality curiosities in the name of seeking ratings! It is not shock pandering... it is 'journalism'!

    Of course reality TV is involved...

    Just a counter point: Just because you and your 20 pals all do something, that DOES NOT mean it is the future in general for social norms nor that a great number of others will too adopt it. An obvious example is a bunch of drug addicts proclaiming "the future is gonna be where everyone is getting high and is an addict man!" based on their habits. Swinging is fun and is easy enough to get into and more people know of it... Yet that is still not nor ever will be mainstream. People get lost in a closed group view that is at times too insular and is not connected to what most others think or feel.

    Gals and guys get confused thanks to the internet which can now let you connect with other like minded people directly and fast and the fact the net can dump endless content of porn into your lap (more then should be absorbed) as being a bellwether of all of life to follow. Just because you can find the other tranny sissy within your 100 mile radius in Iowa (for odd example) on social media or that you can get 2000 hours of wife gangbang footage from an app does NOT mean that society in general is going morph to match up to what you see on the screen of your tech device.

    That said: BRING ON THE BABES! Orgies and fucking two or three chicks at once is the shit! Awwww yeah!

    A standard set? Who shall say...

    cocktail party game.png nig02741.jpg tumblr_mulp4e6Mu51srb2awo1_500.jpg tumblr_mus8pv13tr1slsccro1_1280.jpg tumblr_mus8pv13tr1slsccro2_1280.jpg tumblr_mus8pv13tr1slsccro3_1280.jpg tumblr_muwwmesa9D1rfcxy6o1_250.gif tumblr_mvc0tsBS6Q1sjbct6o1_1280.jpg tumblr_mvl8eohDTH1rlpg9ao1_500.jpg tumblr_mwxhrvmzKf1stod96o1_500.gif

    Play hard (and wet) but always play safe...
  2. MacNfries

    MacNfries Well-Known Member Sweet & Cordial Gold Member

    Practically anything goes, these days, in couple relationships & marriages. I mean, now, even gays/lesbians can legally get married. Society is coming around, and adjusting ... no reason why polymorous relationships can't work. Look at the Mormans ... been doing it for centuries. I personally know of a MFF relationship that's been going on for over 5 years now ... the wife is bisexual, and her GF is lesbian ... all 3 live and sleep together, and the wife has had a baby as well. The key to unique relationships, these days, is to accept them or ignore them ... to criticize them is simply the wrong approach.
    Wouldn't it be neat to travel a 100 or so years into the future and see how society has rearranged/accepted "family relationships"? I'm pretty open to accepting most anything, so I don't think I'd be totally surprised. Mac
  3. Porkypig

    Porkypig Well-Known Member Gold Member

    For a pretty liberal guy, I have been sort of resistant to the tide of acceptance of gay marriage. Part of my reluctance is the idea that you have to draw lines somewhere. We have speed limits. We say it is OK to make a killing in the stock market, but not if you do it with inside information, etc. So, the question is, if gay marriage is acceptable (and understand, I'm not saying it should not be) where DO we draw the line? At one time, blacks could not marry whites in some states. We (correctly) moved the line. I think a lot of pro-gay marriage people would say we should not allow polygamy or polyandry. So, what makes one ok and not the other? My point is I think laws and policies have to be logical and completely thought-out. We get into some really sticky areas when you think about transvestites or transsexuals. If I guy has a cock but thinks, in his heart, he is really a woman, which restroom should he go into? Should he have to go into a men's room where he might get assaulted, or should he be allowed to go into a womens' restroom where other women might freak out because he was physiologically still a man? Don't trash me for being for or against anything. I'm just saying a lot of times people look at things very simplistically and don't think of all of the ramifications.
    Hedonist Ninja likes this.
  4. Hedonist Ninja

    Hedonist Ninja Well-Known Member Gold Member

    I like what you wrote and I agree that at times no one thinks about the long term implications.

    As with this multiple marriage/polyamorous jazz and how it could effect the kids, I think there is much short sighted thinking. Who knows the fall out in even a decade's time from raising a kid in that way.

    As a libertarian I personally have always objected to the notion of gay marriage, and even some aspects of the current marital process, on the grounds the state has ZERO license to approve and sanction union of couples.

    It used to be a man and a woman would want to marry and they'd go to their religious leader and get that to happen. In the case of IR marriage, that was the start of the whole marriage license since only those whom the state said could be wed were then legally allowed to do so. The state did not like IR couples for a long time, yet how the hell was that even the state's call? That is why I object.

    With gay marriage, the modern debate is really a hustle to get federal dollars from the coffer the tax payers filled. Gay marriage was not eligible to have the partner/spouse etc get the oh so sweet federal benefits package. It was a money grab operation to get the state to 'approve' this new standard of marriage so more people could cash a big check.

    No one ever questioned love nor liberty of adults to have sexual freedom. Even with heterosexual marriage, why does the state care? Marriage couples pay taxes differently then single people and then those cohabiting, that is why. Why should the state have any input on the status of relationships of men and women or couples? It is just a greedy money hustle based on human paring...

    Now the polyandry set is getting on board. I don't judge the act, I am a swinger myself, but do question the logic of the group family notion. Did not the hippies try that shit with communes in the 60s and fail hard? Yes...

    So why will it work now? Same with that whole transgender (AKA cross dresser nonsense) legal matters. Some guy wants to grow his hair long and get tit implants and then harass women by using their bathroom. Yikes! Human beings can handle themselves and are mostly good at setting limits at what behavior is okay or not when it comes to privacy and boundaries. Why does the law need to jump in and say it is 100% okay for some nut to harass women just because he claims to be special since he likes to cross dress? I don't care who you are or think you are gender wise, anti social behavior is not okay. The state said an abusive person has more "rights" then women do when it comes to just wanting to use the toilet? Again, the state jumps in for no reason and only makes matters goofy.

    Yikes, Fox News:

    Back to polyandry: The Mormons are getting psyched that they are the next in line to get legal status in their sort of marriage. It seems this whole affair is more about lobbying and winning a game of state sanctioning of a 'lifestyle' then it is about love, sexual fun, or most key RAISING A FAMILY IN A HEALTHY WAY.

    With the success of gay marriage lobbying even the pedophiles and the NAMBLA set and making a decades long play to get their 'alternate lifestyle' legalized and accepted. Many have openly said they have a 30-40 year plan to work the system in the same way the gays did to get their 'rights' and such.

    I give the gays credit for making and working a plan. The book "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's" [ISBN-10: 0452264987] was the blueprint of how to how to use the media and public relations campaigning to "make" public opinion and corner lawmakers into accepting the demands of the gay lobbyists. It worked: hook line and sinker. The gay billionaires and hectomillionaires (Jon Stryker is just one) really do have to be given credit for their social engineering. Like that or not, money is what shapes laws and makes the public think something is okay or not when the money flows into the media outlets. They had a plan and worked to succeed at it.

    Now the pedophiles are using it. Stage one: Find or co-opt some high profile person to adopt your cause (even indirectly) or twist the matter to match your agenda. The Richard Dawkins remarks a few months back on sexual baby abuse in some cases "not being a big deal" and the firestorm of backlash and debate is just like the seeds of the so called gay liberation in the 70s with similar media spikes about the 'goodness' of homosexuality. It would be interesting, and scary, to see how far the pedophiles get in 15 years. After all, even in the early 1980s the gays called for same sex marriage by the year 2000. Many said they were nuts and had zero shot. It took a decade more then the predicted timeline, but it did occur.

    This is just tap dancing for state approval and many times the state controlled money in the name of freedom and 'rights'. Ah, sexual politics...

    The ABC news story also brought up that myth about the divorce rate being at 50%. That is total bullshit no matter how you swing the stats. I would not mind tapping that ass of the blonde marriage counselor however...:)

    All I can say is that any and all orgies I have been to were ones that NO ONE TOOK THEIR KIDS TO. I scratch my head at why some would not think twice about making a lover an authority figure and extra parent, so to speak, in the family unit. If you are a swinger on the IR set and like seeing a black man fuck your wife, would you also want the same black man (who is a just a willing boy toy for the wife) to take your kids to school or come with you guys on a family picnic? HELL NO! Don't people have any boundaries for their private sex lives and those actions with family and pals?

    I question the wisdom of reworking the family unit to suit adult sexual likes/wants. I think this issue should be looked at closely.

    Sex becomes less fun when it impacts the other aspects of your life in an out of control way. Not unlike the difference between enjoying a glass of wine now and again and devolving into a full on wino/alcoholic.
  5. MacNfries

    MacNfries Well-Known Member Sweet & Cordial Gold Member

    In the near future it's going to be interesting in our family when our teens (13 & 15) start making social decisions for themselves. My wife and I have discussed this ... what if our daughter does want to date black guys ... what if our son is gay ... etc. How will we, as parents, step in (or should we), or will we accept their decisions? My wife pretty much handles our daughter, who's itching to start 1-on-1 dating; that allowance comes next year. So far, she's pretty straight ... boys, boys, boys, but she's so active in so many school activities. You can bet your ass, however, whoever she's going to date, I'm going to "check 'em out" ... school, police, parents, etc.
    I'm just wondering, as a dad, if I'll be able handle allowing them to start making their own social decisions ... guess we'll see soon! :confused:
  6. Porkypig

    Porkypig Well-Known Member Gold Member

    Mac, I don't envy you. Not just the sexual stuff, interracial dating and gayness, but I can't imagine parenting in this day and age. Used to be parents had all the power and information. Now we need our kids to show us how to set up our DVR. But, back to the sex, you are a thinking guy and thinking is the key to making good decisions (sounds like a stupid statement but it's true, just look at our politicians who make decisions based on ideology!). I suspect most dads hope their kids will look something like them, even to the extent that they look more like themselves than their wives (unless they are seriously ugly and somehow scored a trophy wife). So, having a dark skinned grandson with nappy hair would be a disappointment. But, I think we also all want the best for our kids and if your daughter picks a quality black guy over a loser white guy, you will probably be OK with it. If one of my kids had turned out to be gay, I would have mainly wanted them to be happy and would have been disappointed mainly because of the probable lack of production of a biological baby. But, you are headed into a dark tunnel it will be some time before you see the light at the other end. Good luck.
    MacNfries likes this.