The contrary...it is right. If anything, it is genetically encouraged. In the animal kingdom, monogomy is the exception, not the rule. (Note: married 15 years, never cheated.)
Are you seriously saying that if you were seeing someone, and introduced a third person to the relationship, that this would not be damaging to the relationship? I need to be clear, before I go on.
The bottom line is this. People have always been pretty promiscous. Some lament for a time when this was not so, but that would be historically inaccurate. Look at the Romans, for goodness sake. Do you know anything about Caligula? Look at the history of Royals , marriage, and sex. Even in Victorian Britain, which would be some people's heaven I feel, the reality underneath was that much sex was going on, and most of it not with your husband or wife! Always gone on. Always will. Except in some Islamic countries, but who wants to follow their model?
Then you're missing out, if that really is the case! Brothels should be fully legalised and subject to controls, checks, and tax, imo. They more or less are, in some parts of Europe, and America, but there is still this shock and horror thing about it. Oldest profession in the world + primal urge. You can't make that go away, so you may as well make it safe.
Well, yeah, there's that. Mostly, though, I think the world would be a much better place if girls were just sluttier.
No. I am saying that it already happened, and has not "damaged" anything. (In fact, I kind of hope it happens again...)
So, you did introduce a third person to the relationship you are in now, and wish this to happen again, is that right? And you do not think this has harmed things, in any fashion?
Actually, it was entirely my wife's idea...but otherwise, yes. I would have no objection to doing it again & it hasn't hurt anything.
Not me. I learned a very valuable lesson at a young age that stuck with me, and I never cut another mans grass, nor cheat on a woman.
Lots of people have open relationships, and their relationship isn't "damaged" or anything. Personally, I hate when you're at the point in the relationship where you don't know if you're monogamous or not, grr.
Well, for me, I think you are playing a dangerous game, which one day one of you, or both, are going to regret. I hope I am wrong.
Something lacking in it, if they need to bring in others, imo. Each to their own, but for me, it would indicate that something is lacking, whether they see it or not.
Oh, I have done that, my friend, I have done that. But the expression means different things, to different people.
For me, the pale moonlight(sic), represents the hours that one can spend, awake, alone. The 'devil' represents all your fears, failures, losses, and sadness. And the 'dance' is simply the embrace that the aforementioned 'devil' has you in.
That is a very good representation of your signature. I tend to agree with it. But to answer the other aspect of this thread. Anything, and I mean anything that happens behind closed doors between consenting adults is of no concern to anyone other than those behind the door. Whether it be two, three, four or more adults is of no consequence as long as they all consent to what ever is happening.
That is a very good representation of your signature. I tend to agree with it. But to answer the other aspect of this thread. Anything, and I mean anything that happens behind closed doors between consenting adults is of no concern to anyone other than those behind the door. Whether it be two, three, four or more adults is of no consequence as long as they all consent to what ever is happening.
