Polyamorous. Something Master and I are not.

The psychology of me as a sexual being. »« Beautiful objectifying hoods.

Polyamorous. Something Master and I are not.

Rating: 0.0/7 (0 votes cast)

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, polyamory can be defined as the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, romantic can be defined as having an inclination for romance marked by expressions of love.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, a relationship can be defined as a romantic attachment.

Polyamory is a term I have heard for many years now and after much consideration, much reflection on all the definitions I have read, on speaking with those who believe they live a polyamorous life, I would have to say that my desires, my choices, the life I lead would be inappropriately defined as polyamorous. The exchange between me and Master is unique and not shared with any other person regardless of our sexual interactions. Master and I have discussed at great lengths what we want to experience, of all we wish to expose each other to and although there are some differences between our lists, the one topic we do not differ on is love.

I am in love with only one person, Master. I do not wish to be in love with any other nor am I seeking to find any love interests for Master. My love is reserved for him alone just as his is reserved for me. I am not seeking to find another man or woman to be a part of the relationship Master and I share, rather, Master and I are open to exploring sexual proclivities, sexual fantasies with other people, to explore another human being and experience an exchange with that person, such as the exchange we have with pet. Realistically, mine and Master's relationship is one of monogamy.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, monogamy can be defined as the condition or practice of having a single mate during a period of time.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, mate can be defined as either member of a couple and especially a married couple.

Now I am not so foolish nor naïve as to believe that many people define both monogamy and polyamory in very different terms, nor do I believe that there are not dictionaries with alternate definitions as well. I know that through time and experiences, people have altered and or added meanings to such words and I accept that some may not agree with the examples I have provided. Regardless though if one should disagree with the examples I have shared, they do exist, they are valid and they most certainly describe the relationship between me and Master.

The relationship we, (Master and myself) have with pet is just that, a joint relationship. What we share with pet is not individual, we are a union, a couple who participates in a power exchange with pet and although that exchange involves emotion, involves a level of attachment, it does not involve romance, it does not involve love. At the same time though, it does involve care, compassion and friendship all of which allows us to embrace our desires, to participate in a safe and secure environment; one which allows us to control pet, to use pet sexually as well as giving pet the numerous experiences she desires.

Our quest to finding a plaything, a pet, was brought about because both Master and myself wanted to experience new sensations, all of which contain some level of sexual pleasures; however, we were not nor are we seeking to simply have sex with a bunch of people, random or otherwise. The goal to finding a pet was to have someone to train, to control, to play with and have fun with all while appreciating and enjoying each other, (as well as providing a unique experience for someone else). Engaging in random sex is not something either Master or myself tend to participate in which is why neither of us identifies as a swinger, which is what some people have labeled us as.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, a swinger can be defined as one who engages freely in sex.

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, freely can be defined as without restraint or reservation.

Once again, these definitions most certainly do not accurately describe me or Master. Neither me or Master wishes to have sex with just anyone and because we are in a committed relationship and respect each other we do not simply act on impulse, act without speaking with each other, without understanding the other person's views. This does not mean that Master could not have sex with someone without my knowledge, or have sex with someone only to tell me later; however, he and I have spoken about just that said scenario and he understands he would jeopardize our relationship should he engage in said behaviours. And the same goes for me. I am not permitted to have random sex with someone, I would need Master's permission prior; more importantly though, I would not wish to act in such a manner because I value and respect the relationship we share, therefore I would not wish to cause any harm to our intimate dynamics.

To go one step further though, I would not wish to have sex with just "anyone" or with a multiple of "anyone's" because sex for me is something that I explore with someone I trust, someone I have some feelings for and at this particular time is something I wish to experience with only Master. This is where Master and I do vary slightly; however, Master has shared with me more than once that having sex with someone he does not know, with someone he has no feelings for is rather uneventful and lacks in a certain amount of pleasure.

Overall, I am not a big fan of labels, of any kind. I do not believe a label is necessary, for me at least, to know who I am and what I am. I also believe that labels often make it difficult to change, to grow and therefore I try my best to avoid using them both with myself and with others. At the end of the day though, I know what I have with Master, I understand, respect and love Master and know he shares in my sentiments and there truly is nothing else that matters.

~His

Slave musings