# Gaming and orgies don't mix



## der_kluge (Apr 18, 2005)

Something happened in our group last night, a discussion rather, but it pertains to these threads regardign female gamers currently.

Now, this is second hand, but I'll do my best.

Apparently one of our players, we'll call him Bob, since coincidentally, that is his name, got an email from someone through meetup to join their group. He's quite happy with our group, but we'd taken a bit of a hiatus since the DM was out of town, so he figured one game wouldn't hurt.

So, he goes to this other group which is apparently just a couple - a man and a wife. I think there was another guy who plays with them, but he might have been absent. So, he describes the couple as decent enough people, and they hand him an NPC to play - a female barbarian who's really tall.

Well, that might not sound weird, but the female in our group routinely plays fighters or barbarians who are really tall. It's just a weird quirk with her. So, he finds it amusing, until they mention that "Shannon" (the female in our group) used to play it. "That's odd" Bob thinks. Then they mentioned Shannon's boyfriend "Dave", and that's just too much of a coincidence, since that's the GM of our group, and Shannon's boyfriend.

But Bob doesn't say anything, instead happily plays the game.

Now, during the course of this game, the female - the wife of the GM, keeps touching Bob's feet under the table. Bob doesn't think anything more about it, since he just figures she's stretching out her feet, but it continues to the point where it's no longer a coincidence. She's literally playing "footsie" with him under the table!

At some point in the evening, after the "Dave" comment, Bob mentions that he knows Shannon and Dave, and plays with them. They asked him if they know "Kerry", another guy in our group. He said yea, and they asked him if he'd seen him lately. "Yea, like last week", at this point they get really mad apparently.

I guess what happened was that Dave and Shannon and Kerry all used to play with this couple, but got kind of weirded out. Apparently, the wife had er, um... fellated Kerry, and Kerry had some odd suspicions that the _husband_ might kind of enjoy a threesome with Kerry and his wife. Kerry wasn't into that, so left. I think Dave and Shannon had other reasons.

Needless to say, Bob was kind of weirded out by the entire experience, and has decided that he won't be going back to game there.

Kerry and Dave commented that they thought the husband kind of tolerated her fooling around, and they had a real open relationship. They didn't know if it worked both ways or not, though, that is, they didn't know if the husband was allowed to fool around or not, or if it was just the wife that did that.

Needless to say, very odd.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Apr 18, 2005)

Seen that happen - left it alone but had a player who was an ass but very chrismatic, he ended up getting a female player/GF of another player to do somethings, killed the game and caused a lot of hatred.

Oh, I have some stories of other stuff...Soap opera game table, as the dice roll!


----------



## Mystery Man (Apr 18, 2005)

Sounds like a great beginning for one of those reader mail sections in Hustler.


----------



## Joker (Apr 18, 2005)

This sounds like a soap, as in I have no idea who did what to who and where with what.

You know.

Like...n stuff.


----------



## Vraille Darkfang (Apr 18, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> So, he describes the couple as decent enough people, and they hand him an NPC to play - a female barbarian who's really tall.




To help you better sleep at night.  Just imagine all the "encounters" that female barbarian has gone through while in the possession of this couple.  

Better yet, think of all the "encounters" that female barbarian's CHARACTER SHEET has gone through.  Those might not have been Mountain Dew stains on the paper.

I hope you showered with anti-bacterial soap,


----------



## Rel (Apr 18, 2005)

Mystery Man said:
			
		

> Sounds like a great beginning for one of those reader mail sections in Hustler.




"Dear Dragon Magazine,

I never thought something like this would happen to me, but..."


----------



## Empress (Apr 18, 2005)

This has to do with female gamers because we're all willing to sleep with the tall barbarian in the group? Or what? Are you trying to scare people away from women gamers or pique their interest in playing with one (hoping for footsies and fellating)?

I'm not sure how to take this post, really.


----------



## Vraille Darkfang (Apr 18, 2005)

Empress said:
			
		

> This has to do with female gamers because we're all willing to sleep with the tall barbarian in the group? Or what? Are you trying to scare people away from women gamers or pique their interest in playing with one (hoping for footsies and fellating)?
> 
> I'm not sure how to take this post, really.




As somebody who has played in games where the DM (male) & 2 of the players (female) where actively engaged in an "alternate" lifestyle (I think it's still legal in Utah)....

There can be some strange things going on (or down), or in the dungeon.  Still get shivers about that whole (Well, what if my halfling rogue offers to sleep with the goblins?  Then will they let us go?).  The gaming session ended there (but next week I found out the halfling rogue got "bonus" XP for a "solo" session about her "diplomatic discussions" with the tribal elders & his harem slaves).

Nice people.  Just used RPG's for, ummm 'stimulation'.  No problem with that.  Just prefer we weren't around for "interrogate the succubus.


----------



## diaglo (Apr 18, 2005)

Empress said:
			
		

> ...or pique their interest in playing with one (hoping for footsies and fellating)?





definitely blows the mind. 

if not a few other things.


----------



## Monty Haul (Apr 18, 2005)

> the wife had er, um... fellated Kerry



Hum!!


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Apr 18, 2005)

I'm not too surprised.  Haven't really had this bad of a thing happen, but I've heard of some stuff.

My worst problem with things like this was a couple years ago my gf (at the time) begged me to start up my D&D group again as we had been lacking the players to play (we had 6 people, but 4 of them kept cancelling every week so we couldn't play reliably).

So, in an effort to start the group up again for her (and slightly amazed that she actually asked ME to start up the group again, she played, but I always got the sense she ONLY played because I liked it), I asked a guy from work named Craig to join our group as I heard he played D&D.

He joined our group about a month before my gf broke up with me.  We were trying to stay friends so we continued gaming on a weekly basis.  After about a month, I found out they were secretly dating behind my back.  The fallout from that managed to destroy my group and it took months before I felt like playing again.

On the other hand, I believe we have lost 4 or 5 women from role playing groups for sexual or sexual related issues.  This is the primary reason that in my game, we currently have no women.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Apr 18, 2005)

So die_kluge, when do you start in the new group, and where will you post the (sure to be non-grandma friendly) story hour?


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 18, 2005)

Empress said:
			
		

> This has to do with female gamers because we're all willing to sleep with the tall barbarian in the group? Or what? Are you trying to scare people away from women gamers or pique their interest in playing with one (hoping for footsies and fellating)?
> 
> I'm not sure how to take this post, really.





It has to do with female gamers only in the sense that sometimes sexual issues can come up in the game, and this was a very clear example of that. Obviously, I suppose a guy could hit on another guy, but I would think that would be more rare. It's just an interesting story. Nothing more.


----------



## kenobi65 (Apr 18, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> It has to do with female gamers only in the sense that sometimes sexual issues can come up in the game, and this was a very clear example of that. Obviously, I suppose a guy could hit on another guy, but I would think that would be more rare.




Huh.  Acc. to Ottergame, having a woman in his group might actually slow such down: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=128488


----------



## Belen (Apr 18, 2005)

So the real question was why did Kerry fool around with a married woman in the first place.


----------



## diaglo (Apr 18, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> So the real question was why did Kerry fool around with a married woman in the first place.




[Bill] I did not have sexual relations with that woman....[/Bill]


----------



## fusangite (Apr 18, 2005)

Yikes! Wow! That couple has come up with a whole new way to give our hobby a bad name. Unbelievable! 

But now that I think about it, I suppose running a gaming group is even more efficient than Lavalife or newspaper personal ads to find young men willing to accept sex in whatever form it is presented to them. So, maybe there is a method to these people's madness.


----------



## werk (Apr 18, 2005)

Out-of-game I've never had this happen (maybe I'll start going to those meet-ups It probably helps that I am married and my wife does not play.  Most married couples that I've played with, the wife is an NPC holder that eats XP and treasure. (no offense)  I've invited previous girlfriends to play and they are usually more concious of the budding relationship than the game, so their feelings/desires get passed into the game.  

In-game it always seems like the immature players bring this stuff up (sex).  Be it homophobic comments or innuendo.  Female players do tend, IME, to use the sex card more than guys when trying to gather info or bluff.  As a DM, I generally try to pursue this course of action, in detail,  until the player is uncomfortable, that usually prevents it from coming up again.  

I've also noticed that women play either a large fighter or barbar, or a (crappy) bard.  Why is that/is this true in other groups?


----------



## Vraille Darkfang (Apr 18, 2005)

New Wizards Ads:

The Scene: 

Hef at the Playboy Mansion in Robe & behind the DM Screen, surrounded by all his 18-22 year old girlfriends/employees on some deck furniture around the grotto at the mansion.

Each of the girls is wearing a bikini and has a pile of dice and a piece of paper in front of her.

Hef:  "So, as we left off last week, you were about to journey into Castle Spank: Dungeon of the Loosely Clad, Busty Succubi (props to John Kovalic, visit his website, buy his comic), and you had just captured the succubus head of the evil overlord's harem guards, Slutina.  What do you want to do?"

Miss June:  "I'm going to make the Slutina chick talk!  I'll bend her over my knee & spank her till she BEGS me to stop!  I have a +8 to Intimidate and the spanking should give me a +2 circumstance modifier.  Oh! I'm also using my +2 Holy Crop on Cloth Disintegration on her backside.  (rolls a pink d20).  Oh, I got an 18, that's a..... Umm... High Number!"

Miss August:  "Oh mister Dungeon Master, I've found a way to earn extra XP!"

    Shot of Bikini Top Flying Across the table

Hef:  "Thanks girls.  Yes, Miss June.  That is a high number, and the succubi totally crumbles as you spank here firmly.  She even agrees to help you on your quest.  For tonight's session, we have a guest who'll run Slutina for the night.  Please welcome E! Host & 2 time Playboy cover model: Brooke Burke!"

Camera pans to Brooke in Bikini bottom & t-shirt which says: Paladins lay hands here (with two strategically placed "hand" decals.

Brooke: Now what's this about spanking me?"

Camera fades out, phantom voice speaks out:  "Dungeons & Dragons!  Meet some extraordinary people!"

See, the best part is it ain't false advertising.  I have met some truly extra ordinary people through gaming.  No Playmates, but some truly unique people.


And for the girls, they could have a Playgirl version that runs on the Lifetime Movie Network.


----------



## Rel (Apr 18, 2005)

Fusangite, your cynicism is showing.


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 18, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> So the real question was why did Kerry fool around with a married woman in the first place.




You'd have to ask him that. I get the vibe that this guy will sleep with just about anything.  And they agreed that this "wife" was rather attractive, so she wasn't lacking in the looks department.


----------



## Patman21967 (Apr 18, 2005)

Empress said:
			
		

> This has to do with female gamers because we're all willing to sleep with the tall barbarian in the group? Or what? Are you trying to scare people away from women gamers or pique their interest in playing with one (hoping for footsies and fellating)?
> 
> I'm not sure how to take this post, really.





MMMMM this short civilzed guy loves me some Tall Amazon babes...hahahahaha


----------



## Amy Kou'ai (Apr 18, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> So, he goes to this other group which is apparently just a couple - a man and a wife.




Not to be picky, but this is one of those linguistic things that really bothers me -- not "husband and wife" or "man and woman" but "man and wife."

It's rather like saying, "The man went berserk and shot his neighbor's wife."  Why is the man the default "neighbor," with his wife as the "neighbor's wife"?  Isn't his wife also a neighbor?

Okay, I'm done with my ramble.  >.>


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 18, 2005)

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Not to be picky, but this is one of those linguistic things that really bothers me -- not "husband and wife" or "man and woman" but "man and wife."
> 
> It's rather like saying, "The man went berserk and shot his neighbor's wife."  Why is the man the default "neighbor," with his wife as the "neighbor's wife"?  Isn't his wife also a neighbor?
> 
> Okay, I'm done with my ramble.  >.>




Interesting. I've never considered that before.  I'll be more aware of that in the future. I think it's because I'm a man, and see things from the man's perspective - i.e., he is a man, and has a wife.  Women might just as easily write it as "she is a woman, and has a husband."  But thank you for pointing it out to me.


----------



## fusangite (Apr 18, 2005)

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Not to be picky, but this is one of those linguistic things that really bothers me -- not "husband and wife" or "man and woman" but "man and wife."
> 
> It's rather like saying, "The man went berserk and shot his neighbor's wife."  Why is the man the default "neighbor," with his wife as the "neighbor's wife"?  Isn't his wife also a neighbor?
> 
> Okay, I'm done with my ramble.  >.>



I generally agree with you and I find WOTC's solution the preferable one: don't start filling your sentences with "or"s; just switch the genders around from time to time when you write.


----------



## John Morrow (Apr 18, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> I generally agree with you and I find WOTC's solution the preferable one: don't start filling your sentences with "or"s; just switch the genders around from time to time when you write.




Personally, I prefer the genderless third person plural pronouns to be used as a singular genderless third person pronoun.  Using plural pronouns as ultra-polite singular pronouns has a long and distinguished tradition in the English language, from the "Royal 'We'" to using "they" to mean "him or her".  In fact, it's so common and traditional that modern English lost it's second person singular pronoun in common usage because people always used the more polite plural form in standard usage and we use the plural for both singular and plural (though I must admit some horror over the idea that "y'all may someday become the standard second person singular pronoun in some areas).  English already has a genderless set of third person pronouns that are in common use and readily understood by all native speakers -- the plural forms.  So why play games?


----------



## frankthedm (Apr 18, 2005)

Some groups of friends are like that, game or no game.

i say, do what you enjoy, but don't cry when someone laughs at your new life ending STD


----------



## gizmo33 (Apr 18, 2005)

Do you mean that's not DnD!?!  Man, I'm gonna kill my DM!


----------



## Munin (Apr 18, 2005)

> though I must admit some horror over the idea that "y'all may someday become



_Someday?_
Obviously you don't live in the South. But it's better than 'yous guys', at least to my ears.


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Apr 18, 2005)

Munin said:
			
		

> _Someday?_
> Obviously you don't live in the South. But it's better than 'yous guys', at least to my ears.




Amen, ya'll.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 18, 2005)

"Y'all" is preferable to "you" since it's clearly a plural form of you, which most other languages in the world tend to have. (The ones without often have "informal" or "slang" versions for clarity's sake as well.)

In any case, I've clearly been playing with the wrong groups over the years. All I've ever spontaneously been offered is a warm Mountain Dew.


----------



## John Morrow (Apr 18, 2005)

Munin said:
			
		

> _Someday?_
> Obviously you don't live in the South. But it's better than 'yous guys', at least to my ears.




No, I don't live in the South but, yes, I know there are place in the South where that's already happened.  If I remember correctly, you add something to "y'all" to make in plural again in those cases, right?  

Yes, it's better than "yous" and even "youn" but all of them are attempts to replace the co-opted plural.  If using "y'all" as a second person singular pronoun doesn't prove my point, I don't know what does.  Not don't get me started on spit infinitives and double-negatives.


----------



## freebfrost (Apr 18, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> Now, during the course of this game, the female - the wife of the GM, keeps touching Bob's feet under the table. Bob doesn't think anything more about it, since he just figures she's stretching out her feet, but it continues to the point where it's no longer a coincidence. She's literally playing "footsie" with him under the table!





When I heard a rumor that D&D 4.0 would have more "feats", I didn't think they meant this kind of footwork...

Where can I sign up to playtest this?!


----------



## gizmo33 (Apr 18, 2005)

freebfrost said:
			
		

> When I heard a rumor that D&D 4.0 would have more "feats", I didn't think they meant this kind of footwork...




It just goes to show you how the new editions have lost their sense of mystery.  In the old days, they didn't have to spell out the rules for having threesomes.  I'm surprised Diaglo hasn't waded in on this.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Apr 18, 2005)

Moved to off topic


----------



## Altalazar (Apr 18, 2005)

It sounds like gaming has finally gone mainstream - now we just need is D&D to be worked into an episode of "Desperate Housewives"


----------



## ConspiracyAngel (Apr 18, 2005)

*Female Gamers*

Ummm... yeah.  Let's see here, your friend joined a group that had issues.  I would think that your "friend" would be just respectful enough to simply bow out if he is uncomfortable, and not go posting their issues (no matter how soapy) all over the boards. 

I appreciate your attempt to post us all a good laugh, but I must agree with Emperess... really what does your story have to do with "Female Gamers"?

It seems to me that your friend is confusing the actions of one person, whom just so happens to be female (in this case) that has exercised poor judgement.  Also, without consulting or confirming his thoughts of what the GM (male) in the party really had in mind or intended, has passed unjust judgement upon another.  To make things worse, I hope that they unknown to all on this board, because you have just done the favor of announcing your friends awkward situation to the world.  You both should be embarassed for your, perhaps singularly rare, serious lack of judgement.


----------



## fusangite (Apr 18, 2005)

ConspiracyAngel,

Occasionally I have found the odd "anonymous" thing on the 'net that I strongly suspect has been written by a friend. But part of the code, at least where I'm from, is to act as though one has not seen it. So, I don't see quite the big social transgression here that you do.


----------



## wingsandsword (Apr 18, 2005)

Rel said:
			
		

> "Dear Dragon Magazine,
> 
> I never thought something like this would happen to me, but..."



For when Paizo _really_ gets desperate for more readership? 

But really, while I haven't experienced it myself, I've had friends who stumbled into this scenario.  Apparently some people do use gaming as a way of "hooking up" with others (sometimes in groups), which can come as something of an ambush to people who don't use it like that (the majority of gamers).

Of course, if they weren't gaming, they'd probably be using whatever social activity they were engaged in as a means of trying to find new partners, it probably happens all the time, we just mostly see it when it intersects with our hobby.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Apr 19, 2005)

Boop!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 19, 2005)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> So the real question was why did Kerry fool around with a married woman in the first place.



Why not? It's not his relationship that's being trashed, nor is he the one committing adultery by going outside his marital bed. He's not his brother's keeper.

Not that she's his sister-in-law, hopefully, because this is already a mess.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 19, 2005)

Too big a mess for rational people's comfort.....

Using a game to get a sex partner: bad idea.


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 19, 2005)

ConspiracyAngel said:
			
		

> Ummm... yeah.  Let's see here, your friend joined a group that had issues.  I would think that your "friend" would be just respectful enough to simply bow out if he is uncomfortable, and not go posting their issues (no matter how soapy) all over the boards.
> 
> I appreciate your attempt to post us all a good laugh, but I must agree with Emperess... really what does your story have to do with "Female Gamers"?
> 
> It seems to me that your friend is confusing the actions of one person, whom just so happens to be female (in this case) that has exercised poor judgement.  Also, without consulting or confirming his thoughts of what the GM (male) in the party really had in mind or intended, has passed unjust judgement upon another.  To make things worse, I hope that they unknown to all on this board, because you have just done the favor of announcing your friends awkward situation to the world.  You both should be embarassed for your, perhaps singularly rare, serious lack of judgement.





First off, get over yourself.

Second off, he does not intend to go back to that group.  Third, none of them read ENworld, so it's a non-issue, and even if it was, he wouldn't have shared the experience with the rest of his group.

Lastly, I already addressed the subject of this thread with Emperess. I suggest you go back and read that response.


----------



## Crothian (Apr 19, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> First off, get over yourself..




I second the motion......


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 19, 2005)

Maybe I've always had the joy of playing with people that have the same (or similar enough) moral standards, but I find this entire situation _totally weird._

But, then again, I'm not one to associate with any woman that would play footsie with my man.  I'm a wee bit protective.


----------



## Algolei (Apr 19, 2005)

So, what's this couple's address again?...


----------



## the Jester (Apr 19, 2005)

Okay, so first of all _I_ am the wife involved in this.

My husband and I don't always try to had you going for a second there, didn't I?


----------



## Algolei (Apr 19, 2005)

*slicks back his hai--*...awwww, Jester!


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 19, 2005)

Well, my best friend and her husband are swingers. Frankly I'm just as comfortable in a group of their alternate lifestyle friends as I am with friends of any of the other members of our D&D group. Often I am more comfortable with the alternate lifers because they have fewer hangups and tend to be very accepting of, and respectful towards, others. The parties can get pretty wild, too.  I'm very sure my best friend and her husband have not tried to "recruit" anyone from the group to their lifestyle. Though they did meet someone at one of their lifestyle parties who plays D&D, and he will be joining our group shortly. Swingers are no worse, in general, than any other group, including gamers.

Reminds me of a story. About twenty years ago, I had a regular Saturday night game at the house of another couple. One of the group members was Assistant Manager of the local Pizza Hut, so he would always show up shortly after midnight with fresh pizza which would keep us going until dawn. One night the husband of the couple was at the end of the table with his wife on his right and my buddy on his left. During a momentary break in the action, the husband got up to go make some tea. His wife got a funny look on her face and asked "How did you do that? Haven't I been playing footsie with you for the last half hour?" My buddy turned bright red, smiled sheepishly and said, "No, that was me." The whole group roared with laughter and we had to take a break before we could get back to playing again.

-Dave


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 19, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> Well, my best friend and her husband are swingers. Frankly I'm just as comfortable in a group of their alternate lifestyle friends as I am with friends of any of the other members of our D&D group. Often I am more comfortable with the alternate lifers because they have fewer hangups and tend to be very accepting of, and respectful towards, others. The parties can get pretty wild, too.  I'm very sure my best friend and her husband have not tried to "recruit" anyone from the group to their lifestyle. Though they did meet someone at one of their lifestyle parties who plays D&D, and he will be joining our group shortly. Swingers are no worse, in general, than any other group, including gamers.
> 
> Reminds me of a story. About twenty years ago, I had a regular Saturday night game at the house of another couple. One of the group members was Assistant Manager of the local Pizza Hut, so he would always show up shortly after midnight with fresh pizza which would keep us going until dawn. One night the husband of the couple was at the end of the table with his wife on his right and my buddy on his left. During a momentary break in the action, the husband got up to go make some tea. His wife got a funny look on her face and asked "How did you do that? Haven't I been playing footsie with you for the last half hour?" My buddy turned bright red, smiled sheepishly and said, "No, that was me." The whole group roared with laughter and we had to take a break before we could get back to playing again.
> 
> -Dave




Should I know anything before I share a room with you at Gen Con??


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 20, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> Should I know anything before I share a room with you at Gen Con??




He likes to play footsie?


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 20, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> Should I know anything before I share a room with you at Gen Con??



I just asked the same question of you, Curtis, in the thread about Googling your screen name! That's where Rel revealed that the "Die" in your screen name throws a gender question into the mix. LMAO, now we'll both be looking at each other funny when we meet. 

Actually, my friend and I DO play footsie at the game table, but she also hits me when I make rude jokes (her husband has the sense to sit out of reach). He and I share the same warped sense of humor and we don't even need to speak anymore. A couple of sessions ago, my friend was talking about how laid back one of the other gamers was, making him immune to our verbal jabs at him. She said, "You guys can't get a rise out of him. I bet we'd have to have his wife here for that. _She'd_ know how to get him going." My buddy and I immediately looked at each other and grinned. We never said a word, but we both knew we were thinking the same thing. As soon as she saw us smiling, his wife realized what she had said and where we would take it if we were going to bother to say anything. She immediately declared us both to be horrible and hit me.

And it didn't help at all when my buddy and I both protested that we hadn't even said anything. 

If you want, while we're at GenCon, remind me to tell you some stories. I have a couple that would make my own grandmother (much less Eric's) clutch at her chest and yell at me that I'm headed straight to hell.

-Dave


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 21, 2005)

Dave: you don't have to say anything at all and still get into trouble! All it took was her seeing you two look at one another and grin to do it....


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 21, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> I just asked the same question of you, Curtis, in the thread about Googling your screen name! That's where Rel revealed that the "Die" in your screen name throws a gender question into the mix. LMAO, now we'll both be looking at each other funny when we meet.




My only gender confusion involves my butchery of the German language. It's clear I'm going to need to change my handle to der_kluge just to get Rel to shut up!


----------



## Torm (Apr 21, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> Well, my best friend and her husband are swingers. <snip> Swingers are no worse, in general, than any other group, including gamers.



I try not to judge people based on preconceptions of groups or labels. That said, having known quite a few swingers, I'd say they _tend_ to have a good number of loyalty issues. Which is to say, they may be fine to hang around with, but I wouldn't entrust them with anything that requires responsibility to another person, and I sure hope they don't have kids.

Since the topic has come up, my wife and I are faithful polygynists - not swingers, but *we* have dated the occasional woman (3, actually, in 13 years) *together*, before, with the intent of her coming to live with us _as family_. And I'd have to say that while gaming is certainly a common interest that has led us to approach a woman before, we certainly wouldn't have done so at the gaming table itself!


----------



## reanjr (Apr 21, 2005)

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> It's rather like saying, "The man went berserk and shot his neighbor's wife."  Why is the man the default "neighbor," with his wife as the "neighbor's wife"?  Isn't his wife also a neighbor?
> 
> Okay, I'm done with my ramble.  >.>




Actually, there is a good reason for that wording.  By saying "neighbor's wife", you have succintly stated that the man lived next to a married couple and shot the woman.  By saying neighbor, you have left out that the victim was a married woman.  In addition, because of the way people put thoughts together, since the shooter is a man, the automatic gender assumption becomes male for any neuter nouns following.  On the other hand, if the shooter is a woman, the gender assumption becomes female.  Good writers understand this implicitly and let you know the facts before your mind has clouded the discussion with assumptions.

As to the man and wife thing, it's just tradition.  I'm pretty sure most people think nothing of it's possessiveness.


----------



## reanjr (Apr 21, 2005)

John Morrow said:
			
		

> Personally, I prefer the genderless third person plural pronouns to be used as a singular genderless third person pronoun.




I use it in speech but I cringe when I see it writing, so I avoid it.  I will use the genderless pronoun "one" but if it forces too many uses of "they", "their", and "them", I will reword.  In any kind of technical writing (of which d20 rules could be considered), I will usually pick genders for different aspects or categories.  For instance, in my house rules, I refer to the GM as "she" and the players as "he".  It gives a subtle reminder as to who you are speaking of consistently throughout the document.  It also disambiguates otherwise confusing sentences with little effort.


----------



## reanjr (Apr 21, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Since the topic has come up, my wife and I are faithful polygynists - not swingers, but *we* have dated the occasional woman (3, actually, in 13 years) *together*, before, with the intent of her coming to live with us _as family_. And I'd have to say that while gaming is certainly a common interest that has led us to approach a woman before, we certainly wouldn't have done so at the gaming table itself!




Somehow I find the original story somehow ordinary, but yours weird.


----------



## Torm (Apr 21, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> Somehow I find the original story somehow ordinary, but yours weird.



That's okay with me - I assure you that people finding things about my life weird is ... ordinary.


----------



## the Jester (Apr 21, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> disambiguates





New word, love it!


----------



## reanjr (Apr 21, 2005)

It SHOULD be a word.  And that's what matters to me.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Apr 21, 2005)

reanjr said:
			
		

> It SHOULD be a word.  And that's what matters to me.



 Oh, it *is* a word.  I use it all the time to disambiguate my abstruse exhortations.


----------



## Berandor (Apr 21, 2005)

> That's okay with me - I assure you that people finding things about my life weird is ... ordinary



Hey, you're Torm. The concerns of the chaotic masses are negligent. 

Berandor, Paladin (though I mus say calling myself "Chosen of Torm" suddenly has an eerie undercurrent )


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 21, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> My only gender confusion involves my butchery of the German language. It's clear I'm going to need to change my handle to der_kluge just to get Rel to shut up!





And he'd come up with something else to rib you about.....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 21, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> Hey, you're Torm. The concerns of the chaotic masses are negligent.
> 
> Berandor, Paladin (though I mus say calling myself "Chosen of Torm" suddenly has an eerie undercurrent )





Yup... makes me wanna do something about my quote in the ye olde sig.....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 21, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> I try not to judge people based on preconceptions of groups or labels. That said, having known quite a few swingers, I'd say they _tend_ to have a good number of loyalty issues. Which is to say, they may be fine to hang around with, but I wouldn't entrust them with anything that requires responsibility to another person, and I sure hope they don't have kids.
> 
> Since the topic has come up, my wife and I are faithful polygynists - not swingers, but *we* have dated the occasional woman (3, actually, in 13 years) *together*, before, with the intent of her coming to live with us _as family_. And I'd have to say that while gaming is certainly a common interest that has led us to approach a woman before, we certainly wouldn't have done so at the gaming table itself!





Brings a whole new meaning to "House of the Triad", doesn't it?   

Gaming brings in alot of different interests and cultural "tastes" that come in all flavors and whatnot....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 21, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> That's okay with me - I assure you that people finding things about my life weird is ... ordinary.





I guess so....you're definitely not _normal_ by any stretch of the imagination.....


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 22, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> I try not to judge people based on preconceptions of groups or labels. That said, having known quite a few swingers, I'd say they _tend_ to have a good number of loyalty issues. Which is to say, they may be fine to hang around with, but I wouldn't entrust them with anything that requires responsibility to another person, and I sure hope they don't have kids.



Hasn't been my experience AT ALL. Granted, I'm not a swinger myself, but I have spent quite a bit of time with several of these couples and they have all been great people and, where applicable, great parents. I find their honesty, openness and accepting attitudes has made them better parents than many of the more close-minded poeple whom I know who espouse "traditional" attitudes. As I said, my data population is too small to consider it universal, maybe I've just been lucky in being able to associate with great people, but even the swingers I spent casual time with all certainly seemed no worse (and mostly no different) than the general population.

I can certainly see the potential for problems. In addition to the openness and desire for it, adopting that particular lifestyle requires a very high level of communication and respect between a couple for it to work long-term, and I don't think very many couples function well-enough to where I would recommend they consider it. On the other hand, the swingers I've hung out with have all seemed to possess this level of respect and communication with each other, so I can easily believe my exerience is atypical.



			
				Torm said:
			
		

> Since the topic has come up, my wife and I are faithful polygynists - not swingers, but *we* have dated the occasional woman (3, actually, in 13 years) *together*, before, with the intent of her coming to live with us _as family_. And I'd have to say that while gaming is certainly a common interest that has led us to approach a woman before, we certainly wouldn't have done so at the gaming table itself!



Good for you. I hope everything works out for you. Accepting and acknowledging that you have preferences different from most people takes a lot of courage. It is even more difficult when you live in a society that is probably less accepting of your preferences than it is of homosexuality. That also means you and your wife and I have something in common. We're all looking for a nice girl to settle down with. 

-Dave


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 22, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> My only gender confusion involves my butchery of the German language. It's clear I'm going to need to change my handle to der_kluge just to get Rel to shut up!



Don't do that. It's better if you KNOW what he'll be on about. If you make him change, you never know what he'll dig up on you and blab all over the forums next time. 

-Dave


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 23, 2005)

Frankly, it takes guts for someone of a more "alternative" lifestyle, like Dave's swingers and Torm and his wife to come out and say that they do this or do that.... like approach women. I'm sure there's been backlashing from that.... Granted, I wouldn't smack someone for that when I've been "smacked around" due to skin color.....   After that, sexual preferences are not much different in being "different from the norm".... especially when you live around a bunch of close-minded rednecks like some of us do in this part of the country.... I'm not sure if SC has more rednecks than rural areas of NC or not.... but being in the "Bible belt" doesn't help either. I know friends who'd take great offense if they found out someone they knew lived this kind of lifestyle. Not that I do. It just ain't my cup o' tea but I'm not gonna say anything if someone else wants to pursue this kind of life.... same thing goes for gays... what they do in private is their own biz, not mine.


----------



## Torm (Apr 23, 2005)

What really strikes me as odd is that, in general, people seem to have less of a problem with "swingers" - who generally admit what they're doing isn't strictly speaking right, but, "hey, take it easy, baby"  - than they do with people who try to be responsible and have the strength of their convictions that they are doing what is right, but differ with them on dogma. I kinda get it, but it is still weird.


----------



## Mark Chance (Apr 23, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> What really strikes me as odd is that, in general, people seem to have less of a problem with "swingers" - who generally admit what they're doing isn't strictly speaking right, but, "hey, take it easy, baby"  - than they do with people who try to be responsible and have the strength of their convictions that they are doing what is right, but differ with them on dogma. I kinda get it, but it is still weird.




Didn't you get the memo? If you love, honor, and respect your spouse in a "traditional" (gotta put that word in quotes since it's a bad word) manner, then you're close-minded and quite probably, worst of all, judgmental (the root of all modern deadly sins). Before too long, such "traditional" behavior has people running around using "he" and "men" as generic terms in their writing (As in, "If a person is reasonsable, he believes in the unalienable rights of all men.")


----------



## Torm (Apr 23, 2005)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> Didn't you get the memo? If you love, honor, and respect your spouse in a "traditional" (gotta put that word in quotes since it's a bad word) manner, then you're close-minded and quite probably, worst of all, judgmental (the root of all modern deadly sins). Before too long, such "traditional" behavior has people running around using "he" and "men" as generic terms in their writing (As in, "If a person is reasonsable, he believes in the unalienable rights of all men.")



Not that I have any problem with the "traditional" (but non-abusive) man/woman relationship - not at all! But while all of what you said DOES apply to me, you might not want to be so quick to lump me in with tradition - scroll back to my two posts previous to the one you responded to. Then again, I guess I AM traditional - a tradition that reaches back in _some_ ways to before 1 CE, actually.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 23, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Not that I have any problem with the "traditional" (but non-abusive) man/woman relationship - not at all! But while all of what you said DOES apply to me, you might not want to be so quick to lump me in with tradition - scroll back to my two posts previous to the one you responded to. Then again, I guess I AM traditional - a tradition that reaches back in _some_ ways to before 1 CE, actually.




It all depends on who's POV about what is "tradition"....


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 23, 2005)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> Didn't you get the memo? If you love, honor, and respect your spouse in a "traditional" (gotta put that word in quotes since it's a bad word) manner, then you're close-minded and quite probably, worst of all, judgmental (the root of all modern deadly sins). Before too long, such "traditional" behavior has people running around using "he" and "men" as generic terms in their writing (As in, "If a person is reasonsable, he believes in the unalienable rights of all men.")



While I can appreciate the dry sense of humor (well-done, Mark ), I stand behind my conviction that the proportion of people who are close-minded and judgemental is much higher, IME, among traditional-minded people than among those who espouse alternative life-styles. I am not saying that such attitudes are a majority among traditionals (I'm a traditional myself), just that they occur more often. If my previous posts gave a different impression, I apologize for being unclear.

-Dave


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 23, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> While I can appreciate the dry sense of humor (well-done, Mark ), I stand behind my conviction that the proportion of people who are close-minded and judgemental is much higher, IME, among traditional-minded people than among those who espouse alternative life-styles. I am not saying that such attitudes are a majority among traditionals (I'm a traditional myself), just that they occur more often. If my previous posts gave a different impression, I apologize for being unclear.
> 
> -Dave





Dave: I don't practice any sort of "alternative lifestyle". In fact, I had to tell a certain poster here "no" on something along his alternative lifestyle that we'd discussed in private email. But that doesn't mean that I'm "close-minded". I have a friend who'd fall into THAT category.... Just because I don't believe it's right, doesn't mean I'm gonna hold that judgment against them. There's nothing wrong with being different. Nothing at all.


----------



## Acquana (Apr 23, 2005)

*Er ... wait ... What year is this?*



			
				Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> I'm not too surprised.  Haven't really had this bad of a thing happen, but I've heard of some stuff.
> 
> On the other hand, I believe we have lost 4 or 5 women from role playing groups for sexual or sexual related issues.  This is the primary reason that in my game, we currently have no women.







			
				die_kluge said:
			
		

> First off, get over yourself.
> 
> Second off, he does not intend to go back to that group.  Third, none of them read ENworld, so it's a non-issue, and even if it was, he wouldn't have shared the experience with the rest of his group.
> 
> Lastly, I already addressed the subject of this thread with Emperess. I suggest you go back and read that response.




[Initiating Attack Womb Sequence] So wait ... lemme get this straight ... It's the mere fact that women game that causes this to happen?  Not anything particularly dealing with the moral makeup or personal issues of said groups?  Just the ovaries?  Uh ... huh.

In your defense, I suppose where the aspect of sex is involved (hetero or no), human instinct takes over ... but um ... that's _everywhere_.  Work, school, gaming, whatever.  Isn't it a bit archaic to blame females in general for this?  Would this even be a problem if the guys just ... I dunno ... refused?  Or said that the table wasn't the place?

I'm familiar with how often couples are made or broken in LARPS, in the one I played in briefly there were what were known as SOLAR Sluts.  Chicks who only seemed to go the games to get some.  But ain't it funny how the responsibility always lies with the chick?  Wasn't there some other partnet involved ...?



			
				die_kluge said:
			
		

> It has to do with female gamers only in the sense that sometimes sexual issues can come up in the game, and this was a very clear example of that. Obviously, I suppose a guy could hit on another guy, but I would think that would be more rare. It's just an interesting story. Nothing more.




Yeah ... and there were a good chunk of gay guys at those LARPS too.  Too bad I never heard of any SOLAR Man-whores.  

If I could actually audibly roll my eyes you'd hear it over the internet. [/Attack Womb Power Down]


----------



## Amy Kou'ai (Apr 23, 2005)

> In addition, because of the way people put thoughts together, since the shooter is a man, the automatic gender assumption becomes male for any neuter nouns following.




I have to admit that I think that "automatic gender assumption" is learned, not innate.  (Although it's really really hard to unlearn.)


----------



## Amy Kou'ai (Apr 23, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Since the topic has come up, my wife and I are faithful polygynists - not swingers, but *we* have dated the occasional woman (3, actually, in 13 years) *together*, before, with the intent of her coming to live with us _as family_.




Probably totally unrelated to the thread, but I'm on Torm's side of the fence, too.  >.>  Though I usually just call it "polyamory," as I'm somewhat "eh" about the idea of traditional marriage as it's nowadays constructed.  Not that I've ever been able to actually put this into practice, but.

There, that wasn't ordinary, was it?


----------



## fusangite (Apr 23, 2005)

I have to agree with those who have observed that this is not about people's sex or gender; it is about their social behaviour. Negative social dynamics can be created in games when people place another social agenda, be it sex or something else ahead of the group's collective enjoyment of the game. If some of the people I'm gaming with are part of some relationship pyramid scheme, I'm indifferent. If they use the game to recruit people for their scheme, I'm going to be as annoyed as if they use the game to demonstrate Amway. 

That stated, of all social behaviours, sexual behaviours are more likely to unbalance or damage a social dynamic than are many others.


----------



## Torm (Apr 24, 2005)

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> Though I usually just call it "polyamory," as I'm somewhat "eh" about the idea of traditional marriage as it's nowadays constructed.



I say "faithful polygyny" because I like to clarify that we aren't swingers, which seems to be what some of the people I've seen call themselves "polyamorous" _really_ are, and poly_gyn_ clarifies my sexual preference and my wife's and what we're looking for in a simple, unobtrusive way - 2F 1M triangle, no 'V's. But, yep, it is a form of polyamory. 

And I think it may be more normal than people generally think - it is just that the Internet has allowed more and more people who _aren't_ involved in those relationships to hear about such things, since many of us are more comfortable talking about it with a degree of anonymity for safety from the sort of people who attack anything different from themselves.


----------



## fusangite (Apr 24, 2005)

Surely you don't argue that the only reason to disapprove of a particular set of sexual mores is bigotry; obviously there are certain sexual behaviours that, to a greater or lesser extent, actually merit disapproval. Maybe those of us who dislike relationship pyramid schemes dislike them _because_ of our knowledge thereof, not in spite of it.

And regardless, as I just said, two posts back, even if I had zero problem with the intrinsic nature of the sexual dynamic the couple running the game were trying to bring about, their behaviour was still completely inappropriate. (As I just said two posts back at the bottom of page 4.)


----------



## Acquana (Apr 24, 2005)

For once I'm with fusangite here.  Maybe there are some people who would be antsy with open relationships not because of a lack of understanding ... but a little too much understanding.  Honestly I think it's a mistake to become too involved with that sort of thing because well ... I have before.  A couple of really good friends of mine have an open marriage, mostly because the man likes women lots and lots and his wife was raised by fiction more than reality and thinks that love between she and her friends should be a bit more encompassing than most are comfortable with.  

Although I wasn't involved long, I can comfortably say that the third one just feels like a third wheel ... The drama it caused really wasn't worth what it did to the group dynamic.  Thankfully things got better, within a few months I had a new boyfriend and all was well, but I always had the feeling the wife never really let it go.  

The important bit is seperating one's pleasures.  Really, I'm sure Torm waits until he actually knows people well enough before making any moves ... But sadly from the story that started the thread it looks like not everyone does.


----------



## Torm (Apr 24, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Surely you don't argue that the only reason to disapprove of a particular set of sexual mores is bigotry; obviously there are certain sexual behaviours that, to a greater or lesser extent, actually merit disapproval.



I concur - and I believe, personally, that any relationships that would provide an unhealthy or unsafe environment for any children created by or raised in them should be frowned on. Also, any that create an environment for spread of disease (beyond a reasonable point - even straight monogamy does this to a limited degree.)

BUT - the number of relationships that are like this is far less than current society seems determined to enforce against. Stable gay couples have been shown to be perfectly capable of raising healthy children, for example. People frown on all gays, and yet, the REAL problem with them isn't that they are gay, it is the large number of _people who happen to be gay_ who are also irresponsibly promiscuous. (Which in turn could be blamed in part on the fact that society doesn't _allow_ them the same levels of commitment - but I digress.)

People want to make it about all these _other_ things, when really I believe what it should come down to is commitment to take the steps necessary to make sure that their behavior doesn't create undue difficulties for anyone else - especially children.


----------



## Michael Morris (Apr 24, 2005)

:whew - long thread:

Didn't Marylin Manson once say that every day he played D&D extended his time as a virgin by one day?

I guess he had the wrong group


----------



## fusangite (Apr 24, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Stable gay couples have been shown to be perfectly capable of raising healthy children, for example.



No dispute there. I'm a big fan of gay marraige. In part because I think it's wrong for our society to constantly tell gay men that for them sexuality=promiscuity.







			
				Acquana said:
			
		

> For once I'm with fusangite here.



I'm so embarassed. I didn't notice we usually disagreed. 

As for your experience there, this is one of the reasons I call polyamory a pyramid scheme. Like any good pyramid scheme, there is a huge power imbalance between the recruiter and the recruit. A new recruit to polyamory has just one partner: the recruiter who, in turn, has one or more additional relationships within the structure. The only way for the people on the bottom level of the pyramid to equalize the power dynamic in their relationship is to recruit new people to scheme so that they also have multiple partners. Having watched polyamorous friends for more than a decade, I have found the structure operates essentially identically to a pyramid scheme: people on the bottom either feel miserable, recruit new members or quit the scheme.


----------



## Amy Kou'ai (Apr 24, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Having watched polyamorous friends for more than a decade, I have found the structure operates essentially identically to a pyramid scheme: people on the bottom either feel miserable, recruit new members or quit the scheme.




I feel I should mention that "polyamory" isn't necessarily synonymous with "open relationship" or, in fact, even a necessarily sexual relationship.  It just deconstructs the common notion, "You can only love and be faithful to one person at a time," and in fact I would say that if a third person in the relationship is miserable and feels somehow lesser, _and this was a misrepresentation of what was essentially emotionally offered beforehand_, you aren't really living up to the ideal -- which, at least for me, usually involves living together as a mutually affectionate and honest family.

But then, my experience of polyamorous people has been substantially more positive.  So.


----------



## Torm (Apr 25, 2005)

Amy Kou'ai said:
			
		

> But then, my experience of polyamorous people has been substantially more positive.  So.



Me, too. But I can see what he is saying - and my wife and I _did_ lose a relationship with a woman we went out with briefly because she was convinced that she would never have a relationship with either of us that was on par with what my wife and I have with each other. Not because of some "pyramid scheme-like" desire on our part for it to be that way, but simply because we had known each other longer and had more history together. Mystra nor I felt that way, but I can understand why she did. 

And as far as I know, "polyamory" doesn't just _not necessarily_ mean "open relationship", but, rather, it is NEVER supposed to mean that. Of course, as I mentioned before, what _some_ people who call themselves "polyamorous" actually DO may not hold to that - but I don't consider them to BE polyamorous, so much as swingers looking for some sort of legitimacy. And thus my other terminology - trying to clear up being confused with those people.


----------



## BOZ (Apr 25, 2005)

Mystery Man said:
			
		

> Sounds like a great beginning for one of those reader mail sections in Hustler.




"Dear Hustler,

You're not going to believe this, and this was something I never expected to happen while playing Dungeons & Dragons, but..."


----------



## BOZ (Apr 25, 2005)

the Jester said:
			
		

> Okay, so first of all _I_ am the wife involved in this.
> 
> My husband and I don't always try to had you going for a second there, didn't I?




you learn something new every day...


----------



## BOZ (Apr 25, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> I say "faithful polygyny" because I like to clarify that we aren't swingers, which seems to be what some of the people I've seen call themselves "polyamorous" _really_ are, and poly_gyn_ clarifies my sexual preference and my wife's and what we're looking for in a simple, unobtrusive way - 2F 1M triangle, no 'V's. But, yep, it is a form of polyamory.




hey, what is this, the personals?


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> hey, what is this, the personals?





Yup. I guess Torm's up to having to post personal ads on Enworld to find someone.....


----------



## Torm (Apr 25, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Yup. I guess Torm's up to having to post personal ads on Enworld to find someone.....



Actually, I think we've gotten to a point where looking is all but out, and the right woman would have to metaphorically slap us in the faces. Its been since '99 since we last dated anyone. I just had to express irritation with the behavior described in the initial post, but, since some might take that as a condemnation of ANY alternate lifestyle, explain that it wasn't such, and why. And the conversation has gone from there. I'm not advertising.

Its funny, the way people react to such things, though - almost every woman my wife has ever told she was bi thought they were being hit on. As though the very mention of it constituted an invitation or something. I don't think there is a "gay agenda", but I do almost think that some "straight" people WISH there was - and they want IN!


----------



## megamania (Apr 25, 2005)

After reading the first message that started this all I can think is how happy and smart I am that before joining ANY group, I get to know them first.

That said-  I had an experience at a con once.  We were playing toon.  The DM set up the game.  I had played this adventure before but figured with a game like toon, it could never be the same twice.  Two other players arrived.  An older guy that had the brains of a grapefruit sitting in the sun and a decent looking girl in a tight outfit.  Married and a good guy (yeah right) I only checked her out for a moment then got serious about being as unserious as possible.

The game became a battle of wits between her and myself.  The other guy had no clue and was lost.  The DM was simply enjoying the game.  It was the last slot of the weekend.

She started batting her eyes and smiling at me which made me think- whore. (I still wore my wedding ring proudly then).  Finally the game ended and she gave me one last good game look then proceeded to sit on the GM's lap and give him a hug and a kiss.

She was there just to tease.  The old guy was too simple to understand it.  I was honorable enough not to bite (much) and I'm not sure what the GM's game was.

Weird.

Still-  it's fun to think about sometimes.  It just proves how "open" some couples are.


----------



## megamania (Apr 25, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Its funny, the way people react to such things, though - almost every woman my wife has ever told she was bi thought they were being hit on. As though the very mention of it constituted an invitation or something. I don't think there is a "gay agenda", but I do almost think that some "straight" people WISH there was - and they want IN!




You may have a point there.


----------



## Rel (Apr 25, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> She started batting her eyes and smiling at me which made me think- whore.




I think that perhaps "tease" or "homewrecker" might be more applicable terms but I can understand defaulting to "whore" in a pinch.


----------



## megamania (Apr 25, 2005)

Either way-  it was a game to her.  I'm still not certain if she did it for her own amusement, the boyfriend DM's amusement or to get him riled.

Oh course-  I have seen worse outside of the gaming arena.  But that is another story and not for Granma to listen to


----------



## The_Universe (Apr 25, 2005)

This is officially the weirdest thread, ever. 

That is all.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 25, 2005)

The_Universe said:
			
		

> This is officially the weirdest thread, ever.



Oh, I've seen weirder.  Mostly at Nutkinland, granted, so maybe they don't count.


----------



## The_Universe (Apr 25, 2005)

I meant here. 

I've seen threads at (for instance) the Penny-Arcade forums that would have killed Eric's Grandmother instantly. The worst offender was a thread in which a (supposed) 13 year old girl was asking the unwashed masses for specific acts that would best accompany the loss of her...innocence. It was absolutely bizarre. As weird as this place can get, it's largely above the cesspool that is much of the rest of the 'net.


----------



## Rel (Apr 25, 2005)

I'd like to think that my "I dreamed I gamed with Anna-Nicole Smith" thread at least approached this one in weirdness.

Now that I think about it, Torm had a big hand in that one too...hmm...


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 25, 2005)

Rel said:
			
		

> I'd like to think that my "I dreamed I gamed with Anna-Nicole Smith" thread at least approached this one in weirdness.



Indeed.  I'd give the edge to that one, although unfortunately, most of the really disturbing imagery ("Henry" VIII and his gaming ho's, masturbating on the gaming table, etc.) seemed to come from me somehow.    


			
				Rel said:
			
		

> Now that I think about it, Torm had a big hand in that one too...hmm...



Uh, yeah!  It's all his fault!


----------



## Torm (Apr 25, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Uh, yeah!  It's all his fault!



It isn't MY fault! There was this blue suit with horns, and somebody said something about a "weirdness magnet", and now I can't get out...


----------



## Torm (Apr 25, 2005)

The_Universe said:
			
		

> I meant here.
> 
> I've seen threads at (for instance) the Penny-Arcade forums that would have killed Eric's Grandmother instantly.



And the discussion we've been having would seem pretty normal, even tame, on the Poly-Under-30 mailing list. Well, except for all the stuff about roleplaying - they'd think we were complete _nerds_ for that part of it.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Actually, I think we've gotten to a point where looking is all but out, and the right woman would have to metaphorically slap us in the faces. Its been since '99 since we last dated anyone. I just had to express irritation with the behavior described in the initial post, but, since some might take that as a condemnation of ANY alternate lifestyle, explain that it wasn't such, and why. And the conversation has gone from there. I'm not advertising.




Hence the  at the end of my post....   

I have a friend in the same sort sitch. Although he's single and looking for a woman....  :\ But the way he goes about it makes me just wanna slap the 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 outta him!!   

But I guess it's kinda hard finding someone who's willing to support your different lifestyle. It takes that special type of person who also does the same thing as you do.... 




> Its funny, the way people react to such things, though - almost every woman my wife has ever told she was bi thought they were being hit on. As though the very mention of it constituted an invitation or something. I don't think there is a "gay agenda", but I do almost think that some "straight" people WISH there was - and they want IN!




It didn't really phaze me that much.... I'm just not the type who's into women.... I rarely have had a guy.... never mind going "the other way".....   I would usually get "gay agenda" from guys who come up and say they're gay. Especially the "flaming" ones who just totally disgust people. I don't mind those who aren't so "flamboyant" with their lifestyle. 

They want to "experiment" with how it'd be to BE gay.... and then are totally shocked when they find out...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

Rel said:
			
		

> I think that perhaps "tease" or "homewrecker" might be more applicable terms but I can understand defaulting to "whore" in a pinch.




I could see that conclusion as well in this case.... Especially to a married guy...  :\  I can understand if he was single....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

The_Universe said:
			
		

> This is officially the weirdest thread, ever.
> 
> That is all.




I'll say! It's been an "eye opener" for sure!   

Considering that the only other board I usually post to is the WOTC boards and Wizo Sith woulda shut this thing down from the get go!   They get touchy when people talk something different than just gaming or movies or stupid stuff.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Indeed.  I'd give the edge to that one, although unfortunately, most of the really disturbing imagery ("Henry" VIII and his gaming ho's, masturbating on the gaming table, etc.) seemed to come from me somehow.
> 
> Uh, yeah!  It's all his fault!




Yup. Both Henry and Torm are a coupla whores!!! Sounds like something the two loonies would do.....   

They need to get out more!














Um. Maybe not! The girls would be scared and the sheep take vows of chastity!


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> It isn't MY fault! There was this blue suit with horns, and somebody said something about a "weirdness magnet", and now I can't get out...




Sounds like some of dem Duke Blue Devil fans. Crazed bunch they are!   

And who posts of his lifestyle in this thread? Hmmm..... Sure ain't Santa Claus! But then he probably posts in the XXX forums!   

Or that one abt the girl and losing her "innocence" in the most bizarre manner possible....   




I'd prefer the "normal" way, m'self!


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 25, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> And the discussion we've been having would seem pretty normal, even tame, on the Poly-Under-30 mailing list. Well, except for all the stuff about roleplaying - they'd think we were complete _nerds_ for that part of it.





You're not a nerd. You're just a freak of nature!   I mean, c'mon... passing yourself off as a deity and all......


----------



## BOZ (Apr 25, 2005)

The_Universe said:
			
		

> This is officially the weirdest thread, ever.
> 
> That is all.




hardly.  and that does go for here.    just wish i could think of one, but i'm sure they existed...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> hardly.  and that does go for here.    just wish i could think of one, but i'm sure they existed...




Maybe you should go onto the last 2 pages of "Mojo1701's" thread.... and the stuff I've heard about Trek actress Robin Curtis.....   Certainly an eye-opener for sure.... Probably more so than reading about polygynists and polyamorous (or whatever that term was...   )..... It's about as shocking as hearing about a customer who's a bit slow in the brain and a seemingly quiet sort, saying naughty stuff about what he'd like to do with this one blonde girl at work...   Stuff not meant for Grandma.


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 26, 2005)

fusangite said:
			
		

> Surely you don't argue that the only reason to disapprove of a particular set of sexual mores is bigotry



 Not at all (and stop calling me Shirley! ).



			
				fusangite said:
			
		

> obviously there are certain sexual behaviours that, to a greater or lesser extent, actually merit disapproval. Maybe those of us who dislike relationship pyramid schemes dislike them _because_ of our knowledge thereof, not in spite of it.



Of course. Yet you disapprove without (from what I can tell) condemning those who choose to engage in those life-styles (in a general sense; individuals are a different, more personal, matter). I would not lump you in twith the "closed-minded, non-accepting" individuals which I believe make up a larger minority of the general population than of the alternate-lifestyle population.



			
				Acquana said:
			
		

> For once I'm with fusangite here. Maybe there are some people who would be antsy with open relationships not because of a lack of understanding ... but a little too much understanding. Honestly I think it's a mistake to become too involved with that sort of thing because well ... I have before.



Again, a perfectly reasonable opinion. It explains why you don't agree with such lifestyles without judging or condemning those who practice them. Your opinion seems very open-minded and accepting of others who may choose those life-styles.

Since people aren't directly quoting me, I'm not sure if what I've posted is causing the discussion. If it is, quote what I've said and I'll be happy to try to explain myself.

-Dave


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> I concur - and I believe, personally, that any relationships that would provide an unhealthy or unsafe environment for any children created by or raised in them should be frowned on. Also, any that create an environment for spread of disease (beyond a reasonable point - even straight monogamy does this to a limited degree.)



On a related tangent, I know three brothers. One of them is about five years older than the other two, who are the same age. Yet the oldest brother resembles one of the two youngest very closely, and the third resembles neither.

This is because these brothers' father is in a long-term (a little less than 30 years, I believe) "marriage" with two different women. The two youngest brothers have different biological mothers, and were actually born about four months apart. As far as I know, their parents are in a triangular arrangement rather than a "V" as you put it elsethread - they all share a bed, for one thing.

I mention this because many people might think such an arrangement unusual, but in this case it has produced a well-adjusted set of children. All three brothers regard their father's two "wives" as their mothers without apparent reference to biology (at least, this is true of the youngest two; I don't know the oldest as well).

It's nice to have your beliefs about the unnecessary hysteria of sexual "morality" validated from time to time. I'm personally inclined towards monogamy, but I've never believed that a relationship between more than two people which was free of the power imbalances referred to earlier in the thread would *necessarily* be any less stable or loving a family in which to raise children - and I'm glad to know these brothers prove me right.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> On a related tangent, I know three brothers.



When I was 11, a friend of mine whose dad was a pastor of a nondenominational church he ran out of their home invited me to attend, and I did, and it was great. They all knew I was an athiest (at the time), and we had some very interesting conversations, but they never judged me or anything like that - we just talked about stuff. And I learned a lot.

Right after I turned 13, I went to go to church (my friend's house) one day, and found the family packing up their minivans and a moving truck. They had been found out by some people in our very unfriendly community. And what I mean by that, as my friend explained to me that day, was that my friend's aunt that lived with them wasn't his aunt at all, but the pastor's other wife, and the mother of my friend's older brother. They left, and I lost friends and it obviously ended my church attendance. :\


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 26, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Stuff not meant for Grandma.




I think that this thread, in its current state, may make my gram's heart stop... but, my gram is very old and very Suzie Homemaker in a very traditional way.

I will say that this thread has been... eye-opening for me.  My naive South Dakota brain was unaware that anyone that wasn't a pervert or a religious zealot would engage in a non-monogamous relationship.  Bit of a paradigm shift to know that people - people that I would consider *normal* - engage in this sort of thing.  Still don't think that I could approve of it - let alone engage in it myself, but it has certainly enlightened me.


----------



## PapersAndPaychecks (Apr 26, 2005)

What are the chances of getting this thread re-named?

It's about a lot of things, but one thing that it is very clearly NOT about, is "Female gamers."


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 26, 2005)

PapersAndPaychecks said:
			
		

> What are the chances of getting this thread re-named?
> 
> It's about a lot of things, but one thing that it is very clearly NOT about, is "Female gamers."



 I'll second that.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> Still don't think that I could approve of it - let alone engage in it myself, but it has certainly enlightened me.



Please don't take this the wrong way - I respect you and enjoy your posts - but my lifestyle doesn't require your approval. It is what it is, it doesn't hurt anyone, and beyond maybe seeing something occasionally in conversation (which I firmly believe you can handle), nobody is trying to involve you. If you're concerned for the souls and safety of the people involved, that's admirable and even appreciated, but realize we're adults - we can handle our own relationships with Deity and each other, just as you can.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Please don't take this the wrong way - I respect you and enjoy your posts - but my lifestyle doesn't require your approval.




I never said that your lifestyle *did* require my approval - no need to get defensive about it.  I am not - in any way - putting you down or attempting to sway your opinion based on my own.  That would be rude and just silly.

I was saying that the posts in this thread, for the first time, made me assess whether or not I do or do not (could or could not) approve of such a relationship on a personal level - it was not directed at you personally, Torm.  If it seems that way, my apologies.  It was directed at the topic in general.  

But, I've never - outside of the Elizabeth Smart case - been prompted to think about the nature of a relationship involving more than two people... and the situations brought up in this thread are _a bit_ (read: WAAAAAAAY) different that the situation that Elizabeth Smart was abducted into.

Though I could never, ever see myself as a participant in your lifestyle I have gleaned some valuable information - I can understand your lifestyle as a valid and potentially healthy choice and no longer would consider it to be outright perverted, as I would have 2 days ago.  

As such, I was saying that your lifestyle has really opened my eyes and educated me in many ways.


----------



## Von Ether (Apr 26, 2005)

In my 20+ years of gaming, I've seen too much. 

I've seen some interesting "undertones" in a couple of one-shot games, but that's been a rarity. Personally, to my regret there was a year when I got blindsided by the drama of such a soap opera and learned my lesson. And then there was the time my whole campaign came grinding to a halt when the two couples who made up 90 percent of my group both split up at the same time.

Now adays, most women I meet through gaming aren't my type, so there's not even a temptation. On the other hand, I've met a few cute, intelligent women (mid-twenties) who like to paint themselves with the chic-geek brush and claim to know about gaming, but are too cool to actually game. Though some may do console games instead. Saddly, it seems I'm too tame for them.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> I never said that your lifestyle *did* require my approval - no need to get defensive about it.



Sorry. I kinda thought YOU knew better, from things I've seen you post before, but the way you phrased that made me need to respond to the sort of people who might be reading this thread and think I DO need their approval, somehow.

As I mentioned in my post prior to that one, I saw a friend's family - friends of mine in their own right, as well - run out of town. They were good people. I'M good people. And if I have my say, I'll never have to stand by and watch that happen again.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Sorry. I kinda thought YOU knew better, from things I've seen you post before, but the way you phrased that made me need to respond to the sort of people who might be reading this thread and think I DO need their approval, somehow.
> 
> As I mentioned in my post prior to that one, I saw a friend's family - friends of mine in their own right, as well - run out of town. They were good people. I'M good people. And if I have my say, I'll never have to stand by and watch that happen again.



 I know you're good people, Torm.  You are - by far - one of the most enlightened (and enlightening) people on the boards, so far as I'm concered.  I've learned a lot from your posts throughout my membership here at ENworld... and for that, I thank you.    If there's one thing I enjoy, it's learning about the whole big world that exists OUTSIDE of what I learned in South Dakota - because there's _a lot_ to learn.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> I know you're good people, Torm.



 Now stop that - yer makin' me all weepy eyed.


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 26, 2005)

PapersAndPaychecks said:
			
		

> What are the chances of getting this thread re-named?
> 
> It's about a lot of things, but one thing that it is very clearly NOT about, is "Female gamers."





How's that?


----------



## fusangite (Apr 26, 2005)

I like the new title. I think it might increase the number of people lured into reading the thread too. 

So, for people just coming in, the title was "On the subject of female gamers;" as you can see, Curtis has given us a more descriptive title now.


----------



## PapersAndPaychecks (Apr 26, 2005)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> How's that?




/beer die_kluge

That's better, thanks.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Apr 26, 2005)

They _totally_ mix.  Haven't you read the Conan RPG?


----------



## WayneLigon (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> If there's one thing I enjoy, it's learning about the whole big world that exists OUTSIDE of what I learned in South Dakota - because there's _a lot_ to learn.




I've always thought RPG's could be broadening; good to see that at least in a way it was  Three of the most interesting classes I ever had in college were Anthopology, Sociology of Religion and (perhaps oddly) Astronomy. Not for the subject matter but for the reactions of some students when they were confronted with something that they had never even heard of or considered but was practiced or beleived by at least some group of people elsewhere.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 26, 2005)

D'oh!  I came in expecting to be all titillated by some story of some miscreant gaming group only to find it's a thread that I've already read in it's entirety (with the exception of the last few posts, of course!)

Bad form!


----------



## Gentlegamer (Apr 26, 2005)

fusangite is truly a prophet.


----------



## diaglo (Apr 26, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> D'oh!  I came in expecting to be all titillated by some story of some miscreant gaming group only to find it's a thread that I've already read in it's entirety (with the exception of the last few posts, of course!)
> 
> Bad form!




ditto.

hook, line, sinker....


----------



## Angel of Adventure (Apr 26, 2005)

I don't know about y'all, but I've always strongly felt that roleplaying/sexual fantasy should be kept seperate.  Let's just say that I've been in a couple of adventuring parties whereby a PCs overt sexuality sucked in other PCs and, whadda ya know, all the PCs are trying to do each other or the hottest NPCs that come along.  I think it was obvious that something was missing in said characters lives and the initial silliness of it all quickly degenerated into groans (not of estacy!).  (Some of them hooked up outside of the game, too, and yes, much awkwardness followed when the romances dwindled.)

So, as an aside, how do you DMs out there handle the sexual/hedonistic aspect of your games?  We don't play in a chaste world full of virgins of the utmost moral standards, but I don't get into much detail when sexiness comes into play.  Usually I just say, "You enjoy a romantic night together."  What about y'all?


----------



## Rel (Apr 26, 2005)

Angel of Adventure said:
			
		

> What about y'all?




"And a good time was had by all!..."


----------



## Gentlegamer (Apr 26, 2005)

All I know is that in an old AD&D campaign, my fellow PCs invariably encountered disguised vampires in every brothel they patronized (I abstained, staying at the inn always).  This was before _From Dusk Til Dawn_, too.

After a time, all amorous episodes of that nature were shunned.


----------



## The_Universe (Apr 26, 2005)

> Usually I just say, "You enjoy a romantic night together." What about y'all?



In our games (yes, it's come up before) I usually stick to generalities, as well. Something along the lines of "She's/he's willing. Are you?" and that's about it.

It's been a mostly interesting wrinkle in the campaign, but it's also produced some annoyance.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

PapersAndPaychecks said:
			
		

> What are the chances of getting this thread re-named?
> 
> It's about a lot of things, but one thing that it is very clearly NOT about, is "Female gamers."





At least, NOT ANYMORE!


----------



## fusangite (Apr 26, 2005)

Angel of Adventure said:
			
		

> So, as an aside, how do you DMs out there handle the sexual/hedonistic aspect of your games?  We don't play in a chaste world full of virgins of the utmost moral standards, but I don't get into much detail when sexiness comes into play.  Usually I just say, "You enjoy a romantic night together."  What about y'all?



This issue is worthy of discussion, so worthy that it would be better to discuss it in a separate thread in an on-topic forum.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Now stop that - yer makin' me all weepy eyed.





Look what you've done... you've made him blush now.....


----------



## der_kluge (Apr 26, 2005)

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=2199283#post2199283


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> D'oh!  I came in expecting to be all titillated by some story of some miscreant gaming group only to find it's a thread that I've already read in it's entirety (with the exception of the last few posts, of course!)
> 
> Bad form!




 

Fool ya!!


----------



## Nebulous (Apr 26, 2005)

I've never even vaguely considered that DnD and kinky sex should mix. I mean, this thread was a surprise for me. Not that i'm a prude, hey, by no means, but it seems like a...shall i say... a conflict of interest.

But i suppose it works for some folks, and maybe it's not real different from dating in gaming circles, except that feelings can invariably get hurt for all parties involved.

And herpes.


----------



## rgard (Apr 26, 2005)

Von Ether said:
			
		

> In my 20+ years of gaming, I've seen too much.
> 
> <SNIP>when the two couples who made up 90 percent of my group both split up at the same time.
> 
> <SNIP>




Ok, still trying to figure out the math on this one.  Is there a .44 of a person attending?  2 couples normally equals 4 people...then again...with all the poly variations listed in this thread, I may be wrong.  

Sorry, couldn't resist.  

thanks,
Rich


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> I think that this thread, in its current state, may make my gram's heart stop... but, my gram is very old and very Suzie Homemaker in a very traditional way.
> 
> I will say that this thread has been... eye-opening for me.  My naive South Dakota brain was unaware that anyone that wasn't a pervert or a religious zealot would engage in a non-monogamous relationship.  Bit of a paradigm shift to know that people - people that I would consider *normal* - engage in this sort of thing.  Still don't think that I could approve of it - let alone engage in it myself, but it has certainly enlightened me.




I know it was certainly eye-opening for me when I first read about Torm's lifestyle via email.....   It was certainly a shock, moreso than stuff I've seen/heard about at various conventions I've been to. (and certainly NOT Fantasm, Torm!)  But I've not encountered people who I like who practice this kind of life. And I was wondering about its effects on the children who probably don't know all there is that's going on in the room down the hall from theirs....


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 26, 2005)

Nebulous said:
			
		

> I've never even vaguely considered that DnD and kinky sex should mix.



A little while back, there was some thread about some guy's "frisky gay furry" D&D game.  So, I guess they mix for _someone_.  Certainly not for me.

Then again, I'm not at all gay, and I play with a bunch of guys currently, so the thought never really crossed my mind either.


----------



## megamania (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> It isn't MY fault! There was this blue suit with horns, and somebody said something about a "weirdness magnet", and now I can't get out...





BLUE DEVIL!    oops    lost control of the comicphile in me.   Back to the thread....


----------



## megamania (Apr 26, 2005)

It amazes me everyone is so weirded out by this thread and the subject it touches on.  There is love and there is sex.  I wonder if people are mixing or confusing the two.

Relax.

So long as no one is hurt I don't see the issue with it.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Nebulous said:
			
		

> I've never even vaguely considered that DnD and kinky sex should mix.



Why do you assume the sex itself is "kinky" just because the lifestyle is different? Not defensive, just curious.

I'd say that if you've gamed with a few different gaming groups, you've probably gamed with someone who is involved in polyamory - or if they aren't, it is because the opportunity hasn't presented itself. SCA groups tend to draw poly people like moths to a lightbulb, for some reason - strange to me, because I've never really been that interested in it myself. (I think some of the trappings like weapons and clothes are nice, but prefer to "live in the now".) And SCA tends to overlap with RPGing, so..... But most poly people don't even have the tells that gay people have, so you might _never_ know.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

rgard said:
			
		

> Ok, still trying to figure out the math on this one.  Is there a .44 of a person attending?  2 couples normally equals 4 people...then again...with all the poly variations listed in this thread, I may be wrong.



I noticed this, too, and thought almost EXACTLY the same thing. (With the addition of thinking to myself, "No, silly - 3 isn't a _"couple"_, its a _triad_."  ) But then I just let it pass - after all, we all know that 76.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.


----------



## megamania (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> - after all, we all know that 76.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.




   so true


----------



## megamania (Apr 26, 2005)

and 9 of 10 dentists agree


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> But I've not encountered people *who I like* who practice this kind of life.



Well   !



			
				Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> And I was wondering about its effects on the children who probably don't know all there is that's going on in the room down the hall from theirs....



As in ANY situation, it depends on how the parents handle it. My wife and I have handled it so that when it hasn't worked out, it has been no more disturbing to the kids than having a good friend move away - probably about the same way a responsible single parent deals with dating when it doesn't work out. And we don't lie to our kids. The last time we had a girlfriend, our daughter was too small to understand much of it anyway, but our son knew that mommy and daddy had a girlfriend, and we had already had several talks with him about the different ways that people are. He was a little sad when we told him she wouldn't be coming around anymore, but more for us than for himself.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 26, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> It amazes me everyone is so weirded out by this thread and the subject it touches on.  There is love and there is sex.  I wonder if people are mixing or confusing the two.
> 
> Relax.
> 
> So long as no one is hurt I don't see the issue with it.



 I think that is what is so shocking to me about the subjects in this thread.  A three-way for the sex is something I can understand... it's something that I've heard practically every man I know express a desire to engage in.  But, a three-way, loving, equal relationship is something that it a completely new topic to me.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> But, a three-way, loving, equal relationship is something that it a completely new topic to me.



Think for a moment what would happen to society if, rather than seeing all the good guys get taken up and feeling like they have to make due with whatever dregs are left over - regardless of what that may mean for their lives and their kids - women could still find men of quality. PROVEN quality, because they are already demonstrating it in practice. Some might argue that this is unfair to the other men - it isn't. It provides a motivation early in life to straighten their acts up to compete properly - or to just go ahead and pursue a life of non-romantic pursuits, which isn't such a bad thing if they weren't suited to them in the first place. Also, think about what it does for a family when one parent can still stay home to raise the children, while TWO incomes can still come in from the other adults. And if one partner dies, in a lot of cases the other two would still have each other to get through it.

Not evangelizing, just pointing out that there are aspects to such a lifestyle that certainly make it nothing to frown on.


----------



## devilish (Apr 26, 2005)

So I'm guessing that the original couple in question are looking for new players?

Which raises the question ... are they Player Characters or _Playa_ Characters?


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

devilish said:
			
		

> Which raises the question ... are they Player Characters or _Playa_ Characters?



LOL.


----------



## the Jester (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> "swingers" - who generally admit what they're doing isn't strictly speaking right, but, "hey, take it easy, baby"




Not sure where you got this.  I don't think there's anything wrong with livin' a swingin' lifestyle, though I've never quite been there.  Nor do most swingers think it's wrong, ime.


----------



## Rel (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Not evangelizing, just pointing out that there are aspects to such a lifestyle that certainly make it nothing to frown on.




You need to shut up, Torm.  Us roleplaying geeks are having a hard enough time getting our share of the chicks as it is! 

(Not me of course, being as how I'm happily married and I've got your cousin waiting in the wings just in case...)


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Why do you assume the sex itself is "kinky" just because the lifestyle is different? Not defensive, just curious.




That was my first thought when I first heard it.... Little did I know....



> I'd say that if you've gamed with a few different gaming groups, you've probably gamed with someone who is involved in polyamory - or if they aren't, it is because the opportunity hasn't presented itself. SCA groups tend to draw poly people like moths to a lightbulb, for some reason - strange to me, because I've never really been that interested in it myself. (I think some of the trappings like weapons and clothes are nice, but prefer to "live in the now".) And SCA tends to overlap with RPGing, so..... But most poly people don't even have the tells that gay people have, so you might _never_ know.




Well, the SCA is full of freaky people anyways.... :\ So far, in my gaming group, we don't have any polyamorous people. None that I'm aware of. I'm sure there's some at cons but I haven't run across them...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Well   !




Well, it's not like I've actually MET you in person....   And you and your wife are the only people I know who are polyamorous. 



> As in ANY situation, it depends on how the parents handle it. My wife and I have handled it so that when it hasn't worked out, it has been no more disturbing to the kids than having a good friend move away - probably about the same way a responsible single parent deals with dating when it doesn't work out. And we don't lie to our kids. The last time we had a girlfriend, our daughter was too small to understand much of it anyway, but our son knew that mommy and daddy had a girlfriend, and we had already had several talks with him about the different ways that people are. He was a little sad when we told him she wouldn't be coming around anymore, but more for us than for himself.




Ok. I didn't know how they'd percieve a "second mommy", not having experienced such myself... As long as they're cool with it, that's fine.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 26, 2005)

Rel said:
			
		

> You need to shut up, Torm.  Us roleplaying geeks are having a hard enough time getting our share of the chicks as it is!
> 
> (Not me of course, being as how I'm happily married and I've got your cousin waiting in the wings just in case...)




You know Torm... he's a greedy little whore....   Gotta have them all!


----------



## Evilhalfling (Apr 26, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> <snip> a customer who's a bit slow in the brain and a seemingly quiet sort, saying naughty stuff about what he'd like to do with this one blonde girl at work...



 Bill O'Rilley shops at this store? 

too much?


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

the Jester said:
			
		

> Not sure where you got this.  I don't think there's anything wrong with livin' a swingin' lifestyle, though I've never quite been there.  Nor do most swingers think it's wrong, ime.



Personal experience with people in "open relationships" and such. But as always, YMMV. And don't worry. I've never been one to judge _individuals_ based on an impersonal trend I've noticed, anyway - there's always a Good Samaritan out there somewhere.


----------



## Torm (Apr 26, 2005)

Evilhalfling said:
			
		

> Bill O'Rilley shops at this store?



LMAO at Evilhalfling.  

Now, now. If you wish to opine, no bloviating - that's his job. Bloviating.


----------



## the Jester (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Personal experience with people in "open relationships" and such. But as always, YMMV. And don't worry. I've never been one to judge _individuals_ based on an impersonal trend I've noticed, anyway - there's always a Good Samaritan out there somewhere.




I've always found the best policy is to be honest and respect one's partner, and to bear in mind that they are worthy of the utmost respect and courtesy; it's no good to hurt their feelings to get a taste of some new piece of ass (or sausage, as the case may be).

Torm, you have a very enlightened view (imho) and you sound like someone I'd be honored to meet.


----------



## Fenris (Apr 26, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Think for a moment what would happen to society if, rather than seeing all the good guys get taken up and feeling like they have to make due with whatever dregs are left over - regardless of what that may mean for their lives and their kids - women could still find men of quality. PROVEN quality, because they are already demonstrating it in practice. Some might argue that this is unfair to the other men - it isn't. It provides a motivation early in life to straighten their acts up to compete properly - or to just go ahead and pursue a life of non-romantic pursuits, which isn't such a bad thing if they weren't suited to them in the first place. Also, think about what it does for a family when one parent can still stay home to raise the children, while TWO incomes can still come in from the other adults. And if one partner dies, in a lot of cases the other two would still have each other to get through it.
> 
> Not evangelizing, just pointing out that there are aspects to such a lifestyle that certainly make it nothing to frown on.




Excellent points Torm. But part of the reason this lifestyle is so rare is not only the shortage of quality men to participate, but of women, confident and selfless enough to participate. You enlightened beings are few and far between you know  But finding three people who can share a relationship equally, regardless of gender, is the tough part there.

As for me, well, a poly lifestyle would just mean I would put my foot in my mouth twice as often as I do now. Heck I am outmatched by my wife now, I don't need to give her an ally


----------



## Gentlegamer (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Why do you assume the sex itself is "kinky" just because the lifestyle is different? Not defensive, just curious.
> 
> I'd say that if you've gamed with a few different gaming groups, you've probably gamed with someone who is involved in polyamory - or if they aren't, it is because the opportunity hasn't presented itself. SCA groups tend to draw poly people like moths to a lightbulb, for some reason - strange to me, because I've never really been that interested in it myself. (I think some of the trappings like weapons and clothes are nice, but prefer to "live in the now".) And SCA tends to overlap with RPGing, so..... But most poly people don't even have the tells that gay people have, so you might _never_ know.



It's the Reny crowd that crosses over into the SCAers, that is what you have noticed.  Renys are notoriously randy.

*Hides photos of self at Ren Fest in garb*


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> If you wish to opine, no bloviating - that's his job. Bloviating.



Wow, that's almost as cool a word as chunder...


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Fenris said:
			
		

> But part of the reason this lifestyle is so rare is not only the shortage of quality men to participate, but of women, confident and selfless enough to participate.



I really don't think the jealousy is hardwired in _women_ though, like it is in a lot of men, from what I've seen, so much as it is brought forward by socialization and their opinion of the specific other woman involved. An example: If I say a woman that my wife is friends with or finds appealing is attractive, she meets me with nothing but agreement. But if I say a woman she has a low opinion of, or that she for some reason thinks would try to come between us, is attractive, I'm (very briefly) in the doghouse. 

And really, I think that is what jealousy in women is about (ladies here can correct me if I'm wrong for them, of course) - whether someone is coming between them and the relationship that is already theirs or threatening their kids somehow. With men it usually seems more _territorial_.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Fenris said:
			
		

> As for me, well, a poly lifestyle would just mean I would put my foot in my mouth twice as often as I do now. Heck I am outmatched by my wife now, I don't need to give her an ally



With the right other woman, THIS, in my experience is a LOT more like what actually happens than either of them getting jealous.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

the Jester said:
			
		

> Torm, you have a very enlightened view (imho) and you sound like someone I'd be honored to meet.



Thankee. I'm feeling so very very loved today.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Wow, that's almost as cool a word as chunder...



Yep. Chunder is hard to beat.  

Sometimes, O'Reilly makes me want to chunder.  (And other times, I _agree_ with him.  )


----------



## Gentlegamer (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Yep. Chunder is hard to beat.
> 
> Sometimes, O'Reilly makes me want to chunder.  (And other times, I _agree_ with him.  )



And other times, you just throw up in your mouth a little . . .


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> With the right other woman, THIS, in my experience is a LOT more like what actually happens than either of them getting jealous.




Heck, I know guys in regular relationships who have the tendency to stick foot into mouth on a regular basis.... One of which is why his girlfriends have broken up with him.... The last one, not that I know the exact cause of the breakup, sent him one of those BS "Dear John" letters as the only way to tell him she was breaking up... Which was total BS, IMO, as there's several ways to get in touch with him.... Mother, answering machine, email... just calling him!

Bill told me that I'd get my "hackles" up when he'd talk to other girls.... but then that was before I found out he likes to make a fool out of people.... like me. Saying one thing, meaning another and then blaming the whole eff-up on me!


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

Gentlegamer said:
			
		

> And other times, you just throw up in your mouth a little . . .





That's just plain.... EWWWW...!!!!


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Bill told me that I'd get my "hackles" up when he'd talk to other girls.... but then that was before I found out he likes to make a fool out of people.... like me. Saying one thing, meaning another and then blaming the whole eff-up on me!



See, you can't even tell from that, because it sounds like he was trying to intentionally MAKE you uncomfortable with situations. :\

I know he's your friend, but I swear, the more you talk about this Bill, the less I like him.


----------



## BOZ (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Yep. Chunder is hard to beat.




there's always fomunda.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> See, you can't even tell from that, because it sounds like he was trying to intentionally MAKE you uncomfortable with situations. :\
> 
> I know he's your friend, but I swear, the more you talk about this Bill, the less I like him.





Usually he's a pretty decent guy.... except for that one instance.... I don't think he was being intentional, it's just that he's got lots of female friends..... and it's almost like a "competition".... but then since he's done that sorta stuff, I don't trust him like I used to. He's still a friend but never more than that. 

At least he isn't as bad as another friend who, because of a few bad instances, think all women are evil. And seemingly like to point this out to me oh a regular basis. And can only come up with "sorry" when I told him over the weekend that I considered it an insult against me as well because I'm female as well....  :\ 

Makes me glad I'm single.... less hassle and stress.....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> there's always fomunda.





Maybe you guys need to start a "I'm gonna be more disgusting than you" thread!


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> And really, I think that is what jealousy in women is about (ladies here can correct me if I'm wrong for them, of course) - whether someone is coming between them and the relationship that is already theirs or threatening their kids somehow. With men it usually seems more _territorial_.




I think jealousy in women is very much territorial... and some women have a broader or narrower sense of what their "territory" means.  Example - a couple of my girlfriends are HYPER-Christian.  They go so far as to define their "territory" with their significant others as thoughts and dreams: if you think about another woman, you are cheating on her.  As such, they become jealous of EVERYTHING - to the point of attempting to monitor and regulate their man's thoughts.

Other women that I've met have a very lose definition of where their "territory" ends and begins - letting their significant others engage in activities that I cannot even begin to wrap my brain around (who knew that it wasn't cheating unless they were *having sex*? I didn't!)

Now, that said, I've got a pretty broad sense of "territory" (ask The_Universe, he knows    ).  But, not nearly as extreme (in either direction) as some women I've met.

((Torm - your wife has got to be the most comfortable, confident women on the face of the the planet.  For that, she deserves mad props.))


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Apr 27, 2005)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> Three of the most interesting classes I ever had in college were Anthopology, Sociology of Religion and (perhaps oddly) Astronomy. Not for the subject matter but for the reactions of some students when they were confronted with something that they had never even heard of or considered but was practiced or beleived by at least some group of people elsewhere.



That's one of the reasons why I majored in Studies in Religion. In fact, those of us heavily involved in the department held a trivia night where a bonus round involved people naming the obscure sect with the weirdest practices they could think of.

I picked the Sklotsky sect of Russia, which in retrospect was fairly tame - mandatory self-castration, sex is the root of all evil, big deal. Someone else named an Eastern Christian sect which produced a hierarchy of all living beings from God right down the bottom, which put women just below pigs. The winner, however, was the most senior professor in the department (big surprise), who picked the Eastern European sect which practices enemas as their exclusive means of sexual arousal.

It's true, though; running into people who'd never considered things outside their own faith traditions is always an entertaining and fascinating experience. I especially loved the history of early Christianity course I took which was stuffed full of evangelicals who included phrases like "as we all know from Scripture" in their presentations.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> I think jealousy in women is very much territorial... and some women have a broader or narrower sense of what their "territory" means.  Example - a couple of my girlfriends are HYPER-Christian.  THe go so far as to define their "territory" with their significant others as thoughts and dreams: if you think about another woman, you are cheating on her.  As such, they become jealous of EVERYTHING - to the point of attempting to monitor and regulate their man's thoughts..



You're kinda making my point - that isn't jealousy, she's _afraid_.



			
				Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> ((Torm - your wife has got to be the most comfortable, confident women on the face of the the planet.))



Not in all things. But she knows she has _me_, ain't no doubt.


----------



## Nebulous (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Why do you assume the sex itself is "kinky" just because the lifestyle is different? Not defensive, just curious.
> 
> I'd say that if you've gamed with a few different gaming groups, you've probably gamed with someone who is involved in polyamory - or if they aren't, it is because the opportunity hasn't presented itself. SCA groups tend to draw poly people like moths to a lightbulb, for some reason - strange to me, because I've never really been that interested in it myself. (I think some of the trappings like weapons and clothes are nice, but prefer to "live in the now".) And SCA tends to overlap with RPGing, so..... But most poly people don't even have the tells that gay people have, so you might _never_ know.




Oh, i didn't mean to offend anyone. I was thinking "kinky" as in not practiced by the norm. If 50% of couples practiced threesomes and group sex on a regular basis I guess it would become the norm, and socially acceptable by even your grandma. Then again i don't know how common such practice is, but i never would have thought mixing gaming and sex.  I mean, in my mind, they're two totally different things, and one would detract wholly from the other. How can you think rationally about the bugbear breathing down your neck while there's a foot sliding up your crotch? 

But maybe it's not that different than dating at the gaming table, which is tremendously common.


----------



## devilish (Apr 27, 2005)

I often get my hackles up about guys taking 
more than they deserve .. aka dating/playing with 3 women at
a time and taking 2 prospects out of the pool.  They usually do
it with no interest in committing to them, just getting notches
on the bedpost or just being "whimsically indecisive" as
one cur once told me.

Torm's situation is different as they are looking for commitment and are
serious about it.  Rock on Torm!



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> there's always fomunda.




I can't believe I actually looked this one up.  Boz, your
vocabulary is ....unique.  I'm going to go ralph now....


----------



## BOZ (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> You're kinda making my point - that isn't jealousy, she's _afraid_.




jealousy is a fear-based emotion my friend.  someone who does not get jealous either has nothing to lose, or is not afraid of losing it.


----------



## BOZ (Apr 27, 2005)

devilish said:
			
		

> I can't believe I actually looked this one up.  Boz, your
> vocabulary is ....unique.  I'm going to go ralph now....




if you don't want to know the answer, do not ask the question.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> jealousy is a fear-based emotion my friend.  someone who does not get jealous either has nothing to lose, or is not afraid of losing it.



Well, yeah - after I posted that I realized it wasn't the best way to say what I was trying to. Let me try again:

Men tend to get what I consider "jealous" - afraid they will lose what they have with little to no data to that end. If a woman joins a book reading club (or whatever), and there is a man there, her husband will get _jealous_ - even if that is completely stupid.

If a man joins a book reading club, and there were women there, his wife won't get jealous unless there is some extra something - like there's a woman there he talks about excessively, or he comes home acting like he has done something wrong, or the old cliche lipstick on the collar. Something that _logically_ makes her feel like the other woman is a threat to what she has. OR, she may get "jealous" if socialization has told her she _should_ be.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

OR, it _is_ possible that the sample of women that I have been involved with is skewwed somehow - there _has_ been, for instance, an unusually high number of bi or outright lesbian women in my past...

One thing I definitely do know, though, is that the cure for jealousy - even if what you really want to do at the moment is be angry at them for suggesting that they have reason to be jealous - is a hug.


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Nebulous said:
			
		

> Oh, i didn't mean to offend anyone. I was thinking "kinky" as in not practiced by the norm. If 50% of couples practiced threesomes and group sex on a regular basis I guess it would become the norm, and socially acceptable by even your grandma.



[Groucho]You obviously didn't know MY grandma.[/Groucho]

I wasn't offended at all. I just have definitely noticed a trend for people to think we're into all sorts of weird fetish stuff or BDSM or what-not if they find out that we're poly, and I don't get why, so I was asking if that was what you meant.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> [Groucho]You obviously didn't know MY grandma.[/Groucho]
> 
> I wasn't offended at all. I just have definitely noticed a trend for people to think we're into all sorts of weird fetish stuff or BDSM or what-not if they find out that we're poly, and I don't get why, so I was asking if that was what you meant.




Common misconception.

People think stuff is fetish or BDSM if it's not "normal sex" between one man and one woman that doesn't involve more than the "classic" position. And certainly doesn't involve all the other ones pointed out in sex manuals...

Nevermind that usually "fetish" involves whips, 'cuffs and the like...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

What I found surprising is that Torm and I waaaay outposted anyone else on this thread! Scary!


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 27, 2005)

Nebulous said:
			
		

> How can you think rationally about the bugbear breathing down your neck while there's a foot sliding up your crotch?



It _does_ make the game much more challenging. And in a *GOOD* way! But then again, I've been playing for 25 years and have a good memory for rules retention, while it's much more of just a casual game for most of the rest of the group. So I could pretty much play in my sleep with my current groups. The fun part is seeing if I can keep my breathing and my voice calm enough so that no one notices. And then there's the fun of turning it around and teasing her and getting her to flinch. 

When I'm DMing, it's a different case, though.

-Dave


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 27, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> It _does_ make the game much more challenging. And in a *GOOD* way! But then again, I've been playing for 25 years and have a good memory for rules retention, while it's much more of just a casual game for most of the rest of the group. So I could pretty much play in my sleep with my current groups. The fun part is seeing if I can keep my breathing and my voice calm enough so that no one notices. And then there's the fun of turning it around and teasing her and getting her to flinch.
> 
> When I'm DMing, it's a different case, though.
> 
> -Dave





Sounds like you've got more willpower than the average guy.....


----------



## Torm (Apr 27, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> What I found surprising is that Torm and I waaaay outposted anyone else on this thread! Scary!



I don't find that surprising at all, considering I'm one of two people with poly lifestyles who have spoken up (unless I missed something) - and you're the one person on the board that I've seriously approached about it.


----------



## BOZ (Apr 28, 2005)

also, you guys are posting a ton of personal information in a public messageboard.    not that i haven't before...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 28, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> I don't find that surprising at all, considering I'm one of two people with poly lifestyles who have spoken up (unless I missed something) - and you're the one person on the board that I've seriously approached about it.





And one who is opposed to participating in it....   But I think most of that has to do with you being married more than anything!


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 28, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> also, you guys are posting a ton of personal information in a public messageboard.    not that i haven't before...




Can't sleep, can ya, Boz?   

Not as much as went into private email!


----------



## BOZ (Apr 28, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Can't sleep, can ya, Boz?




i was hinting at my other thread, yes.    baby due in oh-13 hours??  aiieee!


----------



## megamania (Apr 28, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> i was hinting at my other thread, yes.    baby due in oh-13 hours??  aiieee!





When I saw you post here BOZ I was hoping to catch you and ask about the kiddo.  Coming soon.  13 hours = 2pm...I'll just be getting out from one job and getting ready for the next.  I'll be thinking about you.


----------



## megamania (Apr 28, 2005)

I'm still not sure what to make of this thread.  Your lifestyle doesn't bother me.  However I keep thinking about it.  It's just so...different.  My first reaction was false.  I thought you involved in one night stands but it is so much more than that and that is what is so different.  I can't honestly understand it.  It takes special people to live that way and for three such people to find each other is amazing.

I just...gee...I don't know what to think still....


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

Megamania: it's not for the faint of heart like we have....


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 29, 2005)

BOZ said:
			
		

> also, you guys are posting a ton of personal information in a public messageboard.    not that i haven't before...



That's OK, Boz, it's not like people know our real names or, uh, what we... look... like...


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> That's OK, Boz, it's not like people know our real names or, uh, what we... look... like...




Only if you and Boz look like your avatars.... Torm posted an older pic of his awhile back but I haven't posted my pic here....


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> Only if you and Boz look like your avatars.... Torm posted an older pic of his awhile back but I haven't posted my pic here....




To post my face would bad for computers

To post my gut would shatter screens nationwide


----------



## Kemrain (Apr 29, 2005)

I can't believe I totally missed this thread. I gotta get at least one post in here. Very entertaining read. Very enlightening about Torm, too. I didn't really know such relationships were posible, or at least viable. Wish I could get me one of those. Wish I wasn't too petty and jealous to ruin it.

- Kemrain the Barely Safe for One Lover.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

Is Torm lucky...I guess

I know I couldn't handle that life style.

All the more power to him and his extended family.


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Is Torm lucky...I guess.



Yes. But that's because I have a great relationship with my wife. The rest is part of that.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

yupper sir-ree


----------



## Goblyn (Apr 29, 2005)

Kemrain said:
			
		

> I can't believe I totally missed this thread. I gotta get at least one post in here. Very entertaining read. Very enlightening about Torm, too. I didn't really know such relationships were posible, or at least viable. Wish I could get me one of those. Wish I wasn't too petty and jealous to ruin it.
> 
> - Kemrain the Barely Safe for One Lover.




You an' me both, K.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

My relationship is questionable at best.

I work 70 hours aweek and get the kids to school.

She works 40 hours a week and picks them and deals with the house.

Every second Saturday we have "quality" time together.

It really sucks.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.


----------



## Kemrain (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.



Last weekend, I think.. Why?

- Kemrain the confused.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

crazy man.  just crazy.


----------



## Goblyn (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.




Maybe the ENWorld community is becoming closer. This isn't the word I want to use, but my mental search engine came up 404.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

404   ?


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

Kemrain said:
			
		

> Kemrain the Barely Safe for One Lover.



Darn it! Every since I read this earlier, I can't get "Brand New Lover" by Dead or Alive to quit running through my head.


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> 404   ?



Page Not Found error code.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

does not compute.




sorry couldn't help myself.


----------



## Goblyn (Apr 29, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Page Not Found error code.




Torm wins a cookie.


----------



## megamania (Apr 29, 2005)

and I get the crumbs?



where's the mallet-  need more crumbs


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.



Without getting too political (and really, it wouldn't anyway, because I think it's going on almost everywhere - not just the U.S.), I think people are starting to wake up to the fact that things are kinda sliding into the crapper. People trying to get closer to people of like minds, conversations only vaguely related repeatedly turning to the religious or political - mostly religious, as we're looking for answers.

I try not to let it get in the way of living, but honestly, for myself, I've been more worried in the last 6 years or so than I ever was living under the Cold War threat - all they were likely to do then was nuke us. Couple of anxious hours, and then game over. Now the threats are vague and coming from every direction - even our own governments. Maybe it was like this when I was younger, too, but I just didn't notice. Maybe a lot of people are noticing what I am. I don't know. Feels like we're right on the cusp of something really good, or something really, really bad.


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

Don't mind me - I'm so screwed up on cold medication right now I barely know which end is up.


----------



## Henry (Apr 29, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Couple of anxious hours, and then game over. Now the threats are vague and coming from every direction - even our own governments. Maybe it was like this when I was younger, too, but I just didn't notice. Maybe a lot of people are noticing what I am. I don't know. Feels like we're right on the cusp of something really good, or something really, really bad.




Hanging around ENWorld as I have for, Lo, these past 5 years now, I rather find that the personal info stuff goes in cycles - in fact, it's ALWAYS here - it's how I know half the people I do here -- their birthdays, their kids, their jobs, their near-future plans, etc. You have cycles where people are spilling their guts, and then cycles where all people want to do is talk about gaming. However, we've only had the Off-topic forum for a few years now (about two and a half, maybe less?) and prior to then when the conversational stuff stopped it just got absorbed into the General.

And as for "worse now than then", That's a human constant, too. It's always worse now than it used to be - it doesn't matter WHEN you ask, there's always that feeling among a percentage of the populace - it just rises and falls with the rest of the cycles. Take it from someone who's been on ENWorld FAR too long for his health. 



> Don't mind me - I'm so screwed up on cold medication right now I barely know which end is up.




Been down the "Hot Theraflu and bed rest" route yet?


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> And as for "worse now than then", That's a human constant, too.



Well, I'd tell you that I know this and I think I've compensated for this in my conclusions, but I prefer your answer, anyway.


----------



## Torm (Apr 29, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> Been down the "Hot Theraflu and bed rest" route yet?



More like the "NyQuil and turning my bed into a swimming pool" route, but yep, close enough.


----------



## Goblyn (Apr 29, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Don't mind me - I'm so screwed up on cold medication right now I barely know which end is up.




That one. : points :

Anyone familiar with old Nostrodamus's predictions about this time?

The third AntiChrist goes by the name of Mabus. The first was Napolean. The second was Hitler. Mabus will fall quickly, but his fall will herald the coming of another great war whi will last for 40 years. After that peace will reign for a time.

Gotta love the discovery channel.

The only problem I can see with his predictions is that they seem only to be visible using hindsight, darn it.


----------



## Henry (Apr 29, 2005)

Goblyn said:
			
		

> The only problem I can see with his predictions is that they seem only to be visible using hindsight, darn it.




Like ANY good Prophecy - ask Piratecat.


----------



## Kemrain (Apr 29, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Darn it! Every since I read this earlier, I can't get "Brand New Lover" by Dead or Alive to quit running through my head.



Ha-ha!

- Kemrain the Nelson.


----------



## Kemrain (Apr 29, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> Like ANY good Prophecy - ask Piratecat.



Pkitty has some cool prophecy?

Anywhere I can take a peek?

- Kemrain the Interested.


----------



## Goblyn (Apr 29, 2005)

Kemrain said:
			
		

> Pkitty has some cool prophecy?




You're surprised?


----------



## Kemrain (Apr 29, 2005)

Goblyn said:
			
		

> You're surprised?



Not at all. He'a a great GM. Played with him at a Gameday. Would love to again. I just didn't know.

- Kemrain the Praiser of Piratecat.


----------



## TerraDave (Apr 29, 2005)

When I saw the title of this thread I thought "I _did_ have to much wine with lunch"...then I kept reading and realised: "No, wine can't do that"

(_but this isn't the most outragous, there was a RPG.net and Enworld hybrid, and well, that should tell you. There was also a drugs n' gaming thread that still sticks in my mind_)


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

Torm said:
			
		

> Darn it! Every since I read this earlier, I can't get "Brand New Lover" by Dead or Alive to quit running through my head.




ROFLMAO


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Is Torm lucky...I guess.




If you count "lucky" being that he has a SO.... then yup. 

Considering all I have are "male friends", nothing more than that.... I guess that's better than nothing.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.





There was. People at work acted like everyone was on a PMS trip.   

I guess this is Enworld's "personals"...


----------



## tarchon (Apr 29, 2005)

megamania said:
			
		

> Threads lately have been very personal.  Boz's kid, Torm's lifestyle, People questioning their future ....Must have been a full moon recently.



It seems like everything strange happens within a couple weeks of a full moon.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Apr 29, 2005)

tarchon said:
			
		

> It seems like everything strange happens within a couple weeks of a full moon.




Usually people just act stupid. Now we're divulging personal info....


----------



## DaveStebbins (Apr 30, 2005)

tarchon said:
			
		

> It seems like everything strange happens within a couple weeks of a full moon.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! It took a moment, but I got it before it went too far past.

Good one!
-Dave


----------



## megamania (Apr 30, 2005)

funny?  no.   Full moon once per four weeks thus always within two weeks.  Didn't miss it.  Just wasn't .....shrugs shoulders.


----------



## ssampier (May 1, 2005)

*Huh...*

I never thought to game to find women. The ones I know don't even like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings movies.


----------

