HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lorreen@meiko.com (Lorreen Pelletier)
Subject: Re: Pete the Ignorant
Organization: Meiko Scientific Corp.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:29:27 GMT

pjbulfor@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Pete "the Frog" Bulford) writes:

: >> [intro to Pete's life starting as a poly-person...]
: >
: >[Some advice for Pete]
: 
: <Sigh>  This poly-stuff is much more complicated in action
: than in words.

You've said a mouthful there, Pete.  One thing I think is great about this
group, is that no-one here is likely to bullshit about some utopian ideals
and claim that there aren't difficulties to overcome in living a poly
lifestyle, after all, what kind of lifestyle _doesn't_ contain difficulties
of some sort?

I wish you luck, and, much like the previous poster, advise "be careful". 
I've always had the luck to be primary, with someone who was my primary
(usually mono or nearly mono, by the way), and be secondary, to those who have
been my secondaries.  I sense that being secondary to one's primary, might
be a little more difficult, emotionally--but only you can really be the
judge of that.  In my own life, I admit, I've bowed out of such
relationships--if I meet someone who seems about to place me in "primary"
position, when I know that for me they will be secondary, I tend to excuse
myself from those relationships (as sensitively as possible), because I'm
terribly afraid of hurting someone (I've also got a sense in these
situations that I'm dealing with "mono" people who would not be open to a
poly relationship, and I'm unwilling to force my lifestyle on others).

Since you are fully aware of your girlfriend's poly inclinations, and are
happy to get involved, your situation seems pretty distinct from the
scenarios I've experienced, so as long as you keep in touch with your own
feelings, and keep communicating with your partner, I think you could have
a pretty good relationship going.

I noticed that one response to your concerns suggests trying out a
"threesome".  I've been involved on a couple of occasions with a three-way
sex thing, but never in the context of a three-way poly relationship, i.e.
there have been a couple of casual encounters with, for example, a
boyfriend and one of his male friends--but never between me and two
"friends" distinctively of my choosing.  In poly relationships I find it
more comfortable to meet new friends independently, and keep relationships
separate, but not hidden.  I think different things work for different
people, so choose to do what you are most comfortable with.  Also, as you
said, her "other" is out of town for a while, so this wasn't a real option
for you anyway.

Okay, enough running off at the mouth.  Keep the progress reports coming.

--Lorreen


 




Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: lorreen@meiko.com (Lorreen Pelletier)
Subject: Re: Pete the Ignorant
Organization: Meiko Scientific Corp.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:03:27 GMT

pjbulfor@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Pete "the Frog" Bulford) writes:
: >: >> [intro to Pete's life starting as a poly-person...]
: >: >[Some advice for Pete]
: >[more advice for Pete]
: >[ three-way poly relationship vs. independent relationships...]
: >
: Three-way seems to be the way that this is going although perhaps
: I shall look into the independance of said relationships.

: [Pete meets the other man]

: My relationship with her is developing with only a small bit
: of uncertainty.  Overall, I would say that things are going 
: rather well aside from the fact that I have still not 
: developed a primary relationship of my own yet... <sigh>...

Okay, Pete.  You've got me a little worried about you.  Please don't
continue this relationship if you're doing it because it's the next best
thing to a "primary" relationship of your own.  It's very, very important
that you accept this relationship on its own terms, because *it* is
something you want.

And, good luck finding that "special" someone.  I hope T's encouraging you:->

--Lorreen

Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: lorreen@meiko.com (Lorreen Pelletier)
Subject: Handling Holidays
Organization: Meiko Scientific Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:03:40 GMT

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but I discovered this
newsgroup after the big holiday season.  For future reference I'd be
interested in knowing how people handle the "who to see, when" situation
which arises at holidays.  See, among the people I'm involved with, there
are two people whom I'm very fond of, and making decisions around the
holidays has been tough.  I'm interested in knowing how others deal with this.

BTW, I've lucked out for Valentine's Day, 'cause one of my lovers will be
travelling out of the country--otherwise, I don't know what I would do!

If this hasn't already been discussed, please post.  If it's been
discussed to death, and you still want to share info, please e-mail.  Thanks.

--Lorreen
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Adult women seducing male children
Date: 22 Jan 93 19:00:05 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1jmp9pINNmik@smurf.sub.org> urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
>In alt.polyamory, article <gfLD4Ty00Uh_I_JGYn@andrew.cmu.edu>,
>  ad1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Gerard Deckert) writes:
>> 
>> [ Consensuality and informed decisions vs. age-based restrictions ]
>>  Children should not be hidden from the world -
>> they should be prepared for it.
>>     Does this make sense to anyone else?  I'd like to hear some feedback
>> on this...
>> 
>Of course it does -- the only problem is how to defend against people who
>take advantage of an _un_informed consent, or who intimidate their victim
>into "consenting"...

    This is true, but we already have laws that deal with it.  It's
called rape.


>I don't have a perfect solution, of course, but there should be a way
>to forestall legal trouble. Maybe by having yourself declared legally
>responsible for the purpose of having a sexual relationship with somebody.
>This might even work -- for instance, in Germany officially you can't drive a
>car or conduct your own business until you're 18, but exceptions are
>possible. So why not doing the same WRT interpersonal relationships?

    Ugh.  This is so open to governmental abuse that I shudder to
think about it.  Imagine the case where a 14 year old boy goes to
court to get governmental permission to have sex with his 18 year
old female lover.  Now imagine the same boy going to the same
court to get permission to have sex with his 18 year old male lover.
Which is going to be granted, do you think?
    In my opinion, the last thing we need in this country is
more government presence in our bedrooms, regardless of how old
we are.

			-Phil

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: moh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Kateri/Mary Anne)
Subject: Re: Adult women seducing male children
Reply-To: moh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:34:30 GMT

In article <gfLD4Ty00Uh_I_JGYn@andrew.cmu.edu> ad1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Gerard Deckert) writes:
>kestrel@shakala.com (Kelley James) writes:

You asked for feedback...I agree completely with the below:

>    To sum things up, I am on principle opposed to any sort of age-based
>restriction (and to arbitrary restrictions in general, but that's a
>story for another time).  The important restrictions involve
>consensuality - an absolute must in _any_ situation, romantic or
>otherwise.  Instead of having laws protecting children from themselves,
>or protecting children from adults, or even protecting adults from
>children, emphasis must be placed on teaching children (and certain
>adults!) about sex and its implications.  They should be taught to
>respect and admire their own bodies, so they learn to act responsibly,
>and learn what consent is all about, and how to know when it is
>appropriate - so they are capable of judging for themselves how they
>wish to act, and with whom.  The point is, despite what parents hope
>for, children will have to (and want to ) make decisions about sex - the
>best thing a parent can do is help the child to be ready to make an
>intelligent decision.  Children should not be hidden from the world -
>they should be prepared for it.

Which book is this from, anyway?

>Today's random quote:
>"The more you love, the more you can love - and the more intensely you
>love.  Nor is there any limit on how many you can love.  If a person had
>time enough, he could love all of that majority that are decent and
>just."
>
>					-Lazarus Long

-- 
We may affirm absolutely that nothing great in the world has ever been
accomplished without passion.

					 - George Hegel
From: mal@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Lewis Tanzos)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Adult women seducing male children
Date: 25 Jan 93 02:00:00 GMT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida

philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>     Ugh.  This is so open to governmental abuse that I shudder to
> think about it.  Imagine the case where a 14 year old boy goes to
> court to get governmental permission to have sex with his 18 year
> old female lover.  Now imagine the same boy going to the same
> court to get permission to have sex with his 18 year old male lover.
> Which is going to be granted, do you think?

Why do they have to declare a lover?  Why not just "I'm aware enough
that I feel I can give consent"?
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: bbooth@x400gate.bnr.ca (Brad Booth)
Subject: Re: question to those involved in polyamorous relationships
Originator: bbooth@bcrks6
Reply-To: bbooth@x400gate.bnr.ca (Brad Booth)
Organization: BNR, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:31:57 GMT


wsonnen@alnitak.usc.edu (Wayne Sonnen) writes:
> Given the situation where two people are fully open-minded
> and educated to the various techniques, varities, games, toys, etc. of 
> lovemaking/sex would you, after a period of time, become bored with
> your monomogous partner?

If my partner and I were to become monogamous, would we become bored
with each other?  No.  There are periods where we are relatively
monogamous, but neither the relationship or the sex becomes boring.
The excitement of a new relationship may make the older relationship
seem less exciting.  But there's a stability in the old relationship
that the new one cannot compete with.


Comments by,

    __o     Brad Booth              | "If somebody feels really good
  _`\<,_    Bell-Northern Research  |  about who they are, they don't
 (*)/ (*)   Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |  feel threatened by what other
----------  bbooth@x400gate.bnr.ca  |  people are." - Dr. M. Rubenstein
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: kencham@milli.cs.umn.edu (Deepak Kenchammana-Hosekote)
Subject: Who is JPWoodhouse?
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:43:01 GMT

Pray, WHO IS Joe P. Woodehouse?

Rauh,

\deepak
--
This message is being generated by Kenchammana-Hosekotan SXXIIIR2. 
Please report bugs to kencham@cs.umn.edu.
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Adult women seducing male children
Date: 21 Jan 1993 19:16:24 +0100
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1

In alt.polyamory, article <gfLD4Ty00Uh_I_JGYn@andrew.cmu.edu>,
  ad1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Gerard Deckert) writes:
> 
> [ Consensuality and informed decisions vs. age-based restrictions ]
>  Children should not be hidden from the world -
> they should be prepared for it.
>     Does this make sense to anyone else?  I'd like to hear some feedback
> on this...
> 
Of course it does -- the only problem is how to defend against people who
take advantage of an _un_informed consent, or who intimidate their victim
into "consenting"...

I don't have a perfect solution, of course, but there should be a way
to forestall legal trouble. Maybe by having yourself declared legally
responsible for the purpose of having a sexual relationship with somebody.
This might even work -- for instance, in Germany officially you can't drive a
car or conduct your own business until you're 18, but exceptions are
possible. So why not doing the same WRT interpersonal relationships?

-- 
Carpe Diem - Make your lives extraordinary
-- 
Matthias Urlichs  --  urlichs@smurf.sub.org -- urlichs@smurf.ira.uka.de   /(o\
Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany  --  +49-721-9612521     \o)/
From: cascio@garnet.berkeley.edu (Jamais Cascio)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: PolySongs
Date: 23 Jan 1993 23:49:39 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

And, of course, we can't forget the classic "Two for One"
from "Cabaret"!

("deedleet'dee, two ladies,
  deedleet'dee, two ladies,
  deedleet'dee, and there is just one man...

  deedleet'dee, I like it,
  deedleet'dee, we like it,
  deedleet'dee, it's two for one!")


Jamais A. Cascio             \\  "I'd rather be a smartass than a dumbass"
cascio@garnet.berkeley.edu    \\                       -me
                               \\    "Too bad you never had a choice"
                                \\                      -my wife
**************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: moh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Kateri/Mary Anne)
Subject: Re: question to those involved in polyamorous relationships
Reply-To: moh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:32:33 GMT

In article <1k272hINNn22@alnitak.usc.edu> wsonnen@alnitak.usc.edu (Wayne Sonnen) writes:

>Given the situation where two people are fully open-minded
>and educated to the various techniques, varities, games, toys, etc. of 
>lovemaking/sex would you, after a period of time, become bored with
>your monomogous partner?

Nope.  Even without the various toys.

>Would your becomming "bored" have anything to do with your physical 
>attraction for this other person?

Not for me at any rate.  Polyamory isn't about loving anybody *less*
than you did to start out with....it's about loving somebody else
*too*.  Love shared is love multiplied; pain shared is pain decreased.

>Sincere thanks for you time and comments,
>Wayne

 - Mary Anne


-- 
We may affirm absolutely that nothing great in the world has ever been
accomplished without passion.

					 - George Hegel
From: lorreen@meiko.com (Lorreen Pelletier)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: question to those involved in polyamorous relationships
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:37:27 GMT
Organization: Meiko Scientific Corp.

wsonnen@alnitak.usc.edu (Wayne Sonnen) writes:
: I would like to know from you people your views/feelings on the
: following:
: 
: Given the situation where two people are fully open-minded
: and educated to the various techniques, varities, games, toys, etc. of 
: lovemaking/sex would you, after a period of time, become bored with
: your monomogous partner?
: 
: Would your becomming "bored" have anything to do with your physical 
: attraction for this other person?
: 

Sex, per se, has very little to do with my choice to be polyamorous--it's
more "people variety" or "companionship variety" rather than "sexual
variety" that appeals to me in multiple, concurrent relationships.  In the
past I've been in monogamous relationships, both by choice, and by
default.  I've never been bored in those monogamous relationships, and
I haven't adopted polyamory in reaction to those relationships.

Actually, I've always seen myself as an essentially polyamorous person.  I
find I'm very happy, and very comfortable when I'm involved (usually in
varying levels of intensity) with more than one person.

I'd also like to add that "physical attraction" isn't what usually
motivates me to see new people--usually it's a kind of "kindred spirit"
chemistry, or very often, an intellectual attraction.  You can attract me
more with good conversation, than with good looks or a sexy body any day!

--Lorreen
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: pjbulfor@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Pete "the Frog" Bulford)
Subject: Re: Pete the Ignorant
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:29:02 GMT

lorreen@meiko.com (Lorreen Pelletier) writes:
>pjbulfor@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Pete "the Frog" Bulford) writes:
>: >: >> [intro to Pete's life starting as a poly-person...]
>: >: >[Some advice for Pete]
>: >[more advice for Pete]
>: >[ three-way poly relationship vs. independent relationships...]
>: >
>: Three-way seems to be the way that this is going although perhaps
>: I shall look into the independance of said relationships.
>
>: [Pete meets the other man]
>
>: My relationship with her is developing with only a small bit
>: of uncertainty.  Overall, I would say that things are going 
>: rather well aside from the fact that I have still not 
>: developed a primary relationship of my own yet... <sigh>...
>
>Okay, Pete.  You've got me a little worried about you.  Please don't
>continue this relationship if you're doing it because it's the next best
>thing to a "primary" relationship of your own.  It's very, very important
>that you accept this relationship on its own terms, because *it* is
>something you want.
>
EEeekkk!  Egads no!  I most certainly aren't just 'holding-on-to
-this-relationship-because-its-the-next-best-thing'!  Very bad.
Blech.  I assure you that I am currently awaiting a 'primary'
relationship to occur in my life and value this relationship
*because* it is only a 'secondary-type' relationship.

>And, good luck finding that "special" someone.  I hope T's encouraging you:->
>
>--Lorreen

Thanks for the warmth.

Pete
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: friends and lovers
From: ebrooks@netlink.cts.com (Eben Rosenberger)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 08:32:49 PST
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

wa137@sdcc12.ucsd.edu (john e. clark) writes:

> In article <oRVmXB1w165w@netlink.cts.com> ebrooks@netlink.cts.com (Eben Rosen
> +davidr@world.std.com (David Rostcheck) writes:
> +> 
> +> Whups. I have sex with my friends. Is this a faux-paux? :)
> +> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=davidr@world.std.com=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> +I don't think so.  Where did Mr. Clark get *that* idea?  I've never slept 
> +with anyone BUT friends, and I hope it stays that way.
> 
> I know that satyre is a lost art, and I'm a chief looser, but have
> you ever got the distinct feeling when talking to people about
> sexual partners that they quickly make a distinction that their
> partners are 'more than friends'. Yet, when the
> romance/relationhip/involvement is over that their partners are
> worse than 'just friends', in fact often the vilest of enemies. So
> it is clear, that for a great number of people, the introduction of
> sex into a 'friendly' relationship is tantamount to creating a
> potential enemy.
> 
> But of course we on alt.polyamory suffer not from this malady.
> People who are 'mono' oriented are just cretin throw backs to
> monolithic man, and hence not likely to be come friends and hence
> lovers, potentially to be hated.
> -- 
> 
> John Clark
> jclark@ucsd.edu


Okay, I see your point.  A bit subtle for most, which is why I didn't 
catch it the first time around, as I wasn't looking for it.

For "a great number of people" indeed . . . like 98% of the population of 
this country?  I guess being Poly really does make one more resistant to 
the kinds ob bullshit that the mono folk have to put up with all the 
time.  IMHO, sleeping with one's friends is a way to *avoid* all the 
nastyness that may occurr over a breakup or cessasion of the sexual 
aspect of the relationship.  But, that's just me.  Or us, maybe.

--                    
INTERNET:  ebrooks@netlink.cts.com (Eben Rosenberger)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!ebrooks
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Friends
From: ebrooks@netlink.cts.com (Eben Rosenberger)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 11:29:23 PST
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

mbr2@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Curious Of All Natures) writes:

> In article <2i8NXB1w165w@netlink.cts.com> patrickm@netlink.cts.com (Patrick M
> 
> >People -
> >   I must confess to a bit of curiousity.... If one shouldn't sleep w/ 
> >one's friends, than whats left ??   Indiscriminate f@$$ing ??
> >   I have to be at least friends w/ the person in question, or there is 
> >no interest, none what so ever.  The thought of making love to a person I 
> >didn't even have the friendship bond w/ leaves me very cold indeed.  Why 
> >would I want to ?
> 
> I'm pretty sure the sentiment being expressed was, not-sleeping with
> those who are *only* friends, not actually in a Relationship with one.
> It's at least a sentiment that's natural to most folks I've encountered
> across all groups.
> 
> It's not an absolute division that feels inherent to me, but then I've
> got a long way to go to really grow into my own amorous concepts...

What's wrong with occasionally sleeping with someone who is "just a 
friend", i.e., one with whom you are not in a permanent amorous 
relationship?  In many ways, I find that sleeping with someone helps cut 
through the bullshit.  Fewer games get played, and the friendship becomes 
more solid.  Of course, if you actually aren't *attracted* to the friend, 
then things can get uncomfortable for a while.  But of the friends I've 
been attracted to and have slept with, they are all still friends--even 
though in most cases I'm not sleeping with them anymore.  In one case, 
it happened twice, and that was fine.  In another, we were occasional 
lovers for a few months, and then it just stopped happening, and that was 
fine, too.  I think the problems occur when one or the other of the 
friends in question makes the assumption that because they have had sex, 
they are obviously (gasp) "LOVERS!", and that doesn't have to happen at 
all.  If both people know that it's a "friends who fuck" kind of deal, 
then it all works out fine.

But, then again, I'm odd even for a polyamorist.

--                    
INTERNET:  ebrooks@netlink.cts.com (Eben Rosenberger)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!ebrooks
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory