Informed consent  (32)

Wonderer, I similarly don't feel obligated to give my wife a full report of all my daily activities, and I count myself wise enough to know that one person cannot be expected (or obligated) to meet all of one's wants in life. A lot of stress and problems arise form that view, I think. My wife and I agree that we are esentially two individuals, with individual lifepaths, and individual challenges to face along those paths. We see each other as helpmeets in life. We have made a kind of pact - well yes, I suppose it is EXACTLY that, a Pact between us - that we can deal with what we each consider the 'small stuff' by ourselves, we trust one another to have that autonomy, but we also trust that if something gets too big to be dealt with individually we will bring it to the attention of the other.

This is really good when one of us notices that the other is in low spirits, or preoccupied, its a simple question to ask, lightly, and once - is it something about 'us?' and if the answer is no, its respectful to give the other the space they need to think it through and find peace of mind over it themselves, or deal with as much of it as they can before calling the other one in to help. We trust implicidly in each other's honesty there.

So - we do allow each other a great deal of privacy, in that respect.

And, I must explain this clearly - I've had a huge change of heart in my life, from believing it unwise to place all one's eggs in one basket, to thinking the exact opposite.

I know that I 'own' my feelings of love, that they are mine. Do I worship my wife as a goddess on earth? Do I lead a total fantasy life divorced from the reality of what human beings really are? Am I wrapped up totally in my wife at my own expense? No, no, I don't think so, no. No, I wouldn't say so, no.***

My wife has been working on the common today, came home JUST in time for dinner, pinched a roast parsnip from the tray as I was dishing, fell asleep later. I went out to the shops to get some water while she was asleep - I've just got back - I went the long way, along the canal, stood on a humped bridge looking at the canal snaking away beneath me, then it started to rain, quite hard, an unnexpected shower. I got wet. I stood watching the rain drops hit the water. The light coming from the sky was so interesting, bright, yet dark at the same time. I thought to myself - my wife has brought me here. (Because she did). I owe her my loyalty. I owe her my respect.

I love the whole of my life, with her.

. . .

***'No, no, I don't think so, no. No, I wouldn't say so, no.' - these lines were originally spoken by William Hartnell in the role of Doctor Who in the BBC TV story 'The Web Planet' first broadcast in 1966.

Edited 4 Dec 11, 10:40 PM by Grownup_Frankie

Funnily enough, I did roast parsnips for my dearest last night along with chicken dinner. The roast parsnips are one of her favourite things and - though I say it myself - they were lovely and crunchy and just slightly charred.

I'm not going to say a lot about her because she's understandably not very keen on being talked about on here. In fact I shall be saying less in future, other than that she exists and is my beloved to whom I'm devoted "for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, till death us do part". I'm not looking for partners or seeking play so the details of our relationship are not really anyone else's business.

I don't think it's helpful to try and measure or compare loves, but if we did I think it might be better to consider what is given rather than what isn't given.

"Wisdom begins in wonder” (Socrates)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" (Albert Einstein)
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est. http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/226772/

Edited 4 Dec 11, 5:51 PM by wonderer

We have all at one time or another wished the world was as we would like it to be ..... but pragmatically we have to accept that it is more productive to concentrate our efforts on those parts of the world we can control or influence and not bay at the vast majority of it which is beyond our control.

You obviously feel very strongly about married cheats @Admin and I respect your right to have your opinions (even when they differ from mine ), after all you own the bat, the ball, the stumps, the bails, the pitch and the TV rights, but I think there is a question of proportionality and perspective here. You have posted umpteen strongly negative posts on this topic whereas I don't recall any such salvoes on other types of lying which are quite clearly central to the functioning of this site (and hence directly your responsibility as its owner) and which represent a much more clear and present danger to IC users themselves. For example; people who lie about their skills and endanger their playmates, people who do not disclose important information about their health to playmates, people who prey on newbies and dupe them into unsafe or unwanted activities by obtaining uninformed consent, people who only disclose they are in a relationship after a playmate is hooked, people who ignore hard limits after their sub is rendered unable to resist, etc..

I am not claiming that you are in favour of any of these activities - you are clearly not as they are proscribed by the AUP - but, if I were to judge by your posting priorities, the behaviour of people within the IC community to each other seems to be of less concern to you than the behaviour of some IC users in their personal relationships outside IC.

But what the hell - it's only a website!

Incidentally, I think it would be really illuminating to have a serious discussion on the notion of informed consent and its practical application in BDSM, preferably not fuelled by all the baggage of present discussions. Probably belongs on the main boards. It will probably be a few weeks before that could be achieved.

"Wisdom begins in wonder” (Socrates)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" (Albert Einstein)
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est. http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/226772/

Edited 4 Dec 11, 11:03 PM by wonderer

Stepping over a line now, wonderer. Thin ice...Very thin ice indeed beyond this point. Choose your words carefully. A man stakes a great deal of pride in his parsnips.

Edited 5 Dec 11, 12:16 AM by Grownup_Frankie

If someone wants to start a group for people who want to lie about their experience then we'll comment on that. If people want to say it's ok to deceive people about limits and Admin gets mentioned on the thread, then we'll respond to that too. But the point is that people aren't very brazen about those other pathological behaviours you've listed so there is little to reply to.

There have been plenty of times when action has been taken about deceit on the site. For example, identifying when people are using sock-puppets to deceive other members. But again, this action tends to take the form of warnings to stop it rather than people being kicked off for dishonesty.

Admin

Remember: it's only a website
Please read this page before contacting the Admin team - thanks!

The above makes sense and, for the same reasons, I can't see Admin allowing a group named something along the lines of Breathplay_without_watching, flogging_the_unsuspecting or similar either. To have a group focussed on making deceit OK is a bit ironic with the site name.

I understand some people are saying the group is just to denote married and availability status, when engaging in full consent with all involved. But agreed availability status is not denoted by relationship name or paperwork.. This also wouldn't make sense to use the term married to declare non monogamy .. there are many settled pairs who are unmarried anyway - partnered people are partnered already and lots of them are looking, as well.

There is a group already for people engaging / wishing to engage in more than one loving relationship - the poly group.

For other non monogamists:

What about a couples_seeking page instead?

Or what about a consensual_nonmongamy group for people who are not polyamorous (ie engaging in more than one serious loving relationship) as such, but may wish and be free to engage in more than one relationship?

De

Just as a footnote re other issues of implied risk.. I am certain that were someone a confirmed abuser or danger that Admin would remove them. Eg were Claire's killer known to be here.

Vote to repeal the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/282427/
Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Edited 5 Dec 11, 10:41 AM by Degenerate

and here is the group profile it is referring people to http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/p/married4same/

I wanted to check what the group says its for as some people are saying it's for all kinds of married people including 'ethical non monogamists'*. I'd say it doesn't seem to have been created with the latter in mind at all.

The profile says nothing directly about unfaithfulness and dishonesty, however, the word married as used here seems to assume everyone here on IC is negative about married people. I think that's obviously not true, I'm married and people here are fine about people being married. I think it isn't what is truly meant - the only obvious negativity on IC about married (and other attached people as well) is about deceit and people going behind their partner's backs nonconsensually (whether married or not).

Therefore, I think the subtext of the whole thing is that 'married' in this context seems to imply the group is for people who are married AND deceitful - unless its creator is so naieve and as to think that if married there must always be some deceit going on.

As a married person I find that implication a bit offensive - I am a married polyamorist who has no trouble whatsoever being honest with my partners. Civil marriage is not a strictly monogamous contract, even (I know because I checked I could get married honestly with my other partner taking part in the ceremony openly) - I can't speak for religious (Christian, or otherwise) marriages though as I don't know.

This site revolves and is unified around the concept of informed consent as it relates to sexuality and intimate relationships or adult partnerships. We here know all sorts of ways to be non monogamous which are more ethical than going behind someone's back. Many here wouldn't want to engage in relationships with people who lie to their partners, as they expect further dishonesty aimed at them too and I can undestand that. Which ethical non monogamous married people would even want to join that group? I certainly don't!

Which leaves us with what? Deceitful seeks deceitful. What a charming place..! Would nice non-honest non-monogamists even want to join it?!

De

* ethical non-monogamy Just want to clerify this is not a term I made up and am using subjectively, it's a general term in usage which indicates what might otherwise be called honest non-monogamy - ie having more than one intimate adult relationship (of any type) with the full knowledge and consent of all involved - the partners / lovers / playmates / spouses / and partner's partners (and even their partners if relevant!) .

"IC Name: married4same Joined: 26 Nov 2011 Last visit: 10 hours ago Type: group profile Location: UK

Recent group blog threads

"Not a replacement" (1) by Amber_Light (last reply 2 Dec 11, 9:32 AM by subtrainer69) "Married" (1) by mingusbass (last reply 28 Nov 11, 6:51 PM by Belasarius)

This group is for people who want a judgment free zone for seeking other married people and people who support married people looking for the same. Apparently we are often pariahs. Well not here we aren't. This group will be for anyone who is married to seek someone else in the same situation regardless of gender or orientation. If you aren't married but wouldn't mind meeting someone who is, feel free to message on here too.

This group is run by @mingusbass

This profile was last updated on 28 Nov 11, 4:12 PM. "

Vote to repeal the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/282427/
Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Edited 6 Dec 11, 10:35 AM by Degenerate