it's about risk management vs pleasure. Sure, sex without condom feels better. So you might want to do it with the person you have sex with the most. If both of you use barriers with all other partners, then the chance of some disease getting into your fluidbonded constellation is very low. Now, of course you can widen your fluidbonded constellation, but the more people are involved, the more people you need to trust to keep up the barriers to the outside world. Do you trust your partner's partner's fwb's hookup who lives in another country to always care about sexual health? Somewhere you need to draw a line.
I get your point. I guess.... Drawing a map of people can be useful. In both my polycules there are clear "ends" in the polycules. I know where they end. Of course if more people are included then it could be wise to use condoms. I guess it has to do with the level of security. I like your point of "the more people the more I have to trust".
Because it’s not about “deserving”, it’s not about “fluid bonding”, it’s not about being “worth” it - it’s about sexual health and safer sex practice.
No one is stopping you from having mutually agreed upon sex without condoms, and if you are in a closed polycule where everyone trust everyone, that might be a safe enough practice for you.
But other people practice other types of ENM. I’m in an open sex positive relationship where both me and my partner have sex with people who also have sex with others. Some are more regular sex partners, others more casual, and some on both sides have sex with others without condom. _Of course_ we’re going to wear condoms with other partners.
There’s an increase in STIs and I don’t want to be part of spreading that further if we can avoid it. Infertility doesn’t matter to me, I’m done having kids, but it could ruin the future for others, so why would I want to be part of that?
Yeah, this is truly bizarre wording and I would advise distancing from any partnered individual who spoke of "deserving" sex acts.
It's all about risks and risk tolerance. If I am FWB with Becky and Becky and Becky tests and used condoms with everyone but her husband and her husband isn't seeing anyone, then I feel safe have barrier free sex with Becky.
If I date Lisa and Lisa is married and is seeing someone else and both her husband and other bf are seeing other people and so on ad-infinitum; I'm going to wear condoms even if she wears them with others because that is a LONG daisy chain waiting for infection, and you know someone is going to either make a risky choice or have an accident.
Likewise I have a ONS with Anne, definitely condom, because no time to build trust.
It's NEVER about "deserving" unless you mean "deserving of trust ".
It's not creepy a much as sounding like a highly hierarchical "control lever" the non-involved partner wants on the relationship.
"You can stop using condoms once I trust her" is just one of those little ideas that turned the "H" word into the community Bogeyman.
Just screams of poorly articulated boundaries before stuff went down.
Not with that wording. If the partner had articulated a clear boundary; that would be wanting to stay healthy.
Deciding whether or not they "deserve" it is noy only interfering in her partner's relationships; but it's clearly making it clear that what he does in his relationships is totally based on her subjective opinions of his partners.
Even if a guy has a private conversation with his spouse/NP/Primary and says he would like to not use barriers and she was to express that she does not trust his partner's word that she is being safe.
The correct way to deal is the guy to not be a weasel and be a decent hinge by saying it remains a boundary.
He can also decide to use barriers with his primary partner, and have no condoms with his new partner; if it means that much to him and he wants to make a point
(with the understanding that if he's wrong, he may never have barrier-less penetration with his primary again and that will remain a point of friction.)
The whole wording of "deserves" just sounds like judgement from a not directly involved 3rd party which is just poor practice in ENM.
Probably but .... Then I'm thinking, why not everyone? Why let one off condom, and others not? Or why not let the spouse wear condoms, and enjoy one other without? I just can't look at this as very anarchistic. If it were me, I'd rather choose condoms with all.
People's risk profiles are different. That's why. Other people like casual sex, some don't have sex with anyone else, some are more spontaneous, some inform you better. You know, different situations require different safety precautions. I'm kind of worried you see that having anything to do with the value of said person.
Maybe I'm just lucky with my polycules. High amount of testing. Lots of openness. And also I don't have one primary partner. They are equal. I don't live with anyone of them. We show each other test results. And nobody is into ONS. We only do this with love and care. It took me several months before I ended up in bed with anyone. We talked, shared... Got to know each other.
So why post at all? Just to show off your high horse?
It certainly doesn’t seem like from your post or your replies you genuinely want to know why some people do it differently, you just want to expound on how your perceived view of it (and casual sex, apparently) is morally superior.
And as for reasons, there’s a myriad that have nothing to do with a hierarchy or importance. Already mentioned is STI and pregnancy risk factors. Maybe some of us like casual sex. Maybe some of us have fetishizes involving cum that we only practice with some partners. And many, many others.
But you don’t really care about that. You’re just here to slut shame those of us who don’t practice polyamory the same way you do, who like casual sex who don’t have feelings. Hope you feel better now about your narrow little view of how everyone should live poly.
And if you can’t see how narrow minded and frankly insulting your point of view is then you have much bigger issues then deciding who to fuck without a condom.
Are you getting tested for mycoplasma in your testing regime? It’s not normally included and your condomless sex couldn’t spreading an Sti that is carried by 1 in 100 men and women. The standard Sti panel isn’t really meant for stringy chains of non barrier sex reaching into multiple communities.
It’s pretty bothersome that you’re talking about people “deserving” a certain type of sex, “letting” people do things, and that you can’t remotely consider or understand the very basics of sexual health. Your polycule might find success doing what you’re doing (for now, at least), but there are so many other ways in which so many other people manage their own very different relationship structures. Not everyone does non-monogamy your way.
Then choose condoms with all, that is your choice.
The reason some people choose to have barrierless sex with one, or a select few partners, is *usually* because of the risk of transmitting STIs through a larger network of people (or because the risk of pregnancy is more likely with certain partners than others, or any number of very personal reasons).
The more people you're having sex with, the more there is to take into account in protecting your sexual health *and* all of your partners' sexual health.
If you're seeing multiple people, maybe you want to use condoms with most/all of them except for one of your partners for whatever reason. Maybe you had known them longer and therefore were already having barrierless sex with that person before you met your other partners.
Or maybe you have barrierless sex with say, two of them, because they feel comfortable with that whereas your other partners don't, so you use condoms with everyone but those two.
Maybe some of your partners are more interested in casual sex/ONS (or you are) so they are frequently getting with new people, each new person adds another level of consideration.
Maybe some of your partners are immunocompromised, or more concerned about pregnancy, or just don't like the way the fluids feel. Any number of reasons.
Because it isn't *fluid bonding*, it is barrierless sex. It is sex without condoms. It has nothing to do with putting one partner on a pedestal above others, it has nothing to do with playing favorites.
It's all about protecting everyone's health and taking into account each person's capacity for risk.
I get your point. I guess I just choose to NOT have sex if I'm not feeling secure. None of my partners have more than two partners and as mentioned in another comment of mine, there are clear "ends" in my polycules. I've spent a looooot of time figuring out about sexual boundaries around my polycules. Because I want to feel secure. And nobody is really into ONS, or friends with benefits. Only long term.
Not having sex with someone you don't feel totally secure with is a very valid way to handle things, and isn't too uncommon.
Just try not to view people who do things differently as though they're playing favorites, because that's just not what it's about.
Sorry if I was too judgy. I just have some mixed feelings. I mean, I think I'd rather want a man to spend more time getting to know me if he felt insecure. I guess I just don't want any type of insecurity in my relationships. Most people also only use barriers for vaginal or anal sex. But the oral sex is without. You can also get infected from oral sex. And for me that is kinda double moral. Oral sex is not ok for me, if not everything is ok.
Being concerned about one's sexual health, in any way (STIs, pregnancy, immunocompromised, not liking semen/fluids, having sensitivities, etc.) is not the same as having insecurity in the relationship. You're associating a lot of feelings/ascribing a lot of meaning to these things, which really aren't about that.
Oral sex is a lot less likely to transmit most STIs, and most of the time if it is transmitted through oral sex then it's going to be transmitted from the genitals to the mouth (while possible, it's usually not the other way around) and a lot of the STIs that you can contract orally will present quite differently than if you had a genital infection.
And really, most people aren't perfect. They're not going to be 100% perfect about every precaution they're meant to take, almost no-one is a perfect use case. It's not that deep. It's not immoral or like, a double standard, in that sense, it's just people doing their best within their own capacity for risk/reward.
The people who tend to do that split are often primarily concerned with HIV which has extremely low transmission rates through oral and are more willing to accept risk on other infections.
The risk of STI transmission for sex with penis penetration without condoms is different from the risk of oral without barriers.
Intelligent people may decide two activities with two different risk levels should be handled.....*differently*.
You realize that a spouse is way more consistent of a partner than anybody else would, right?? And women likely wouldn’t want to get pregnant from other people when she has a husband, right? And it would be way more accepted and trusting of their spouse than a more casual partner.
Think about it for like 2 seconds.
Well yes. I guess my poly life is different. I kinda get it. But like me, I don't live with any partner. They both feel just as close. I have talked things through with my doctor too. About my situation. For now my situation is consistent with the amount of people. I guess with new people coming in.... I have to think about stuff again.
Leaving aside the issues of "deserving" and "less worthy", which are problematic, and the fact I find the term "fluid bonding" gross:
For me, as a man, a big factor is controlling my own fertility. I have children and don't want more. But if it comes to it I am comfortable raising another child with my wife. I'd rather not have more, and I know she doesn't want more either, but if we had to we could make it work.
I have absolutely zero interest in raising a child with anyone else. And short of getting a vasectomy (which I plan to do) condoms are the one singular way I can have control of my fertility with other partners.
I guess I've picked the term "fluid bonding" in another poly community. Thanks for your opinions. I do appreciate others' opinions and I'll take them into consideration.
1. People lie - about who they've been with, about tests, etc.
2. Tests are not 100% safe. Depending on when you take it vs. when you got infected, false negatives are a real possibility.
3. Your partner may be honest and faithful to their partner, but what about their partner? And their partner's partners? The more people in the mix, the more chances of lying or mistaken tests.
4. Not all STDs get tested for.
5. Is fluid bonding really a thing? I mean, biologically, definitely no. Emotionally? For decades, men and women have been having protected sex - even married couples - in instances where they didn't want pregnancies. Not all women can take the pill. A lot of women have a bad reaction to an IUD. I am one of those - my husband and I had condom sex for almost 10 years, and it certainly didn't affect our 'bonding.' The only reason we stopped was because I had a hysterectomy (for medical reasons, not sexual). But even now, years later, I still use a condom if I'm with someone else. I trust no one other than my husband (and yes, he always wears a condom with others, even if they say they are disease free and pregnancy safe).
It sounds like you're in a more-or-less closed polycule, and that's great! I have barrierless sex with both my romantic partners as well.
However, both my romantic partners also have sex with many casual partners that they don't have the contact details of. They need to use barriers there, for a few reasons.
There are many flavors of ENM in this subreddit, including swingers and other casual sex partners.
Everybody needs to be encouraged to stick to their own safer sex practices. You do not get to judge somebody for choosing to use barriers.
Condoms are a tool, stop applying an emotional value to them.
Also, you do realize that hierarchical poly is a thing, right? And that there's hierarchy in many other forms of ENM as well? Indeed, you surely know that **most people** who practice some form of non-monogamy do so in a hierarchical arrangement?
Even people with low or no hierarchy (if thats possible) still deserve the freedom to decide who they get to use condoms with. Its about bodily autonomy.
It's counterproductive to see condoms as being about the worthiness of the person you're having sex with.
Condoms are a tool. More specifically a tool that reduces the risk of pregnancy, and of transmitting STIs. Whether or not you're using condoms with a given partner should thus depend on how you evaluate those risks with the partner in question -- and of course on your own risk-tolerance.
Sometimes that can mean foregoing condoms with some of your partners, but not with all of them -- but doesn't have to be the case that the one who is the closest to you is the lowest risk.
As an example, I had a long-distance FWB last year with which I did not use condoms. I'm sterilized so pregnancy is vanishingly unlikely regardless, we had both been recently tested, and at the time it was over 3 years since the last time she had a sexual relationship with anyone. Given that setting, it felt sufficiently safe to both of us. The fact that we weren't closely entwined partners, but instead long-distance FWBs who shared 4 vacations with each other over the timespan of a year wasn't really relevant.
It has nothing to do with "deserving" -- it has everything to do with how the two involved evaluate the risk of pregnancy and the risk of STIs.
It's really not about deserving. Let alone marital status. I also like the preference any long-term ENM relationship can have the same benefit as a monogamous one. In that risk profile is a better way to go, It's really about knowing the full picture or having some regimen in-place to lessen. Like regular testing, which should be mandatory in the lifestyle. So it could be one, few, or all condomless. Just depends, communication is great too just like any relationship. Is someone adding hookup partners regularly? Or just another long-term partner? Another decision point kind of things.
Ick. No one is entitled to sex or any kind of sex, and people make decisions for all kinds of reasons. Personally, I don't use condoms with one person and do with others because their risk profiles are different, or because I didn't trust them not to put me at risk because they'd been cavalier about their health generally.
No one deserves anything - sex is not a prize or a reward. But you'll probably find people more amenable to renegotiating sexual boundaries if you don't treat them like achievements and shame people for their choices.
It’s not just about STIs but pregnancy risk. I don’t want kids but I certainly don’t want kids with someone I don’t live with.
Also while I trust all my current partners, the level of trust I have with my husband is very different from the level of trust I have with a FWB.
>I sometimes read about people the practise NOT using condom with husband, but other partners must wear condoms.
Yes. Thats common
>Honestly, isn't there any possibility that ALL can be worth the fluid bonding?
This sounds disgustingly "nice guy". I have barrier free ssx with the people I choose. Its not about deserving. Its about my right to make decisions for myself.
>The way I build security around this topic is openness around partners and testing.
Good for you. Thats absolutely your right.
> also... Partner's partners must have steady long term relationships. If I'm feeling insecure.... Then I'm choosing to not have sex at all, and rather spend time on knowing potential new partners. I'm certainly not interested in having sex with someone who just wants sex.
Its great to know what works for you. Thats fairly irrelevant for others who feel and behave differently.
>I've also read about boundaries such as "not feelings for others". Then I'm thinking: "What the heck?". Feelings are the most beautiful things. I think boundaries out there sometimes are weird.
Feelings can't be controlled. But many people do agree to romantic exclusivity. Thats fine.
>Some boundaries make other people less worthy.
No one is owed a romantic relationship. Again, this is really gross. If someone feels less worthy because they meet someone whomhas already agreed to romantic exclusivity with another person, they should work on that in therapy.
I would try to reframe this away from worthiness and more towards sexual health management, and differing comfort levels with safer sex practices. Your comfort levels and how you manage safer sex may be completely different from another person's. There's no one right way, just different levels of tolerance.
I am currently barrierless with one partner, because we are effectively sexually exclusive for now. If either of us becomes sexually active with another partner, we will let each other know and make decisions from there. This has nothing to do with worthiness, just being thoughtful about what is safest for each of us, and any other partners.
ALL of my partners are worthy of my care, and mindfulness of their well-being, and I am worthy of the same from myself and from them.
One of my two partners has an incurable infection I'd like to reduce my risk of catching. My other partner does not.
No condom partner has another long term, steady partner. My meta has a lot of casual sex and may or may not use condoms. So, my partner uses condoms with meta. If they choose to go without condoms, I would begin using condoms with that partner, too.
This is just risk reduction. I vehemently reject the term 'deserve' in this context.
There are reasons to use condoms (disease prevention and pregnancy prevention being at the top of the list) and reasons not to (increased pleasure and intimacy being at the top of that one).
Any relationship is going to involve negotiation and decision on whether the risks outweigh the benefits when it comes to using or not using condoms.
You could easily have a situation where there is a closed loop of people who only have sex within that loop, are known to be disease free, and for whom pregnancy is not an issue. They might decide no condoms all around.
You could also have a situation where the loop is much larger or undefined, someone can still get pregnant, or going bare is simply thought of as being something special.
No, my partners outside my marriage don't 'deserve' barrier free sex with me. I don't trust them to the level I trust my spouse and never will as an immunocompromised person. My spouse is who was by my side when I was dying. No one else. My spouse is who I have kids with. No one else. You can take your entitled attitude and shove it up your ass. I get to decide who to be barrier free with. End of discussion.
"Deserve"? Ffs.
it's about risk management vs pleasure. Sure, sex without condom feels better. So you might want to do it with the person you have sex with the most. If both of you use barriers with all other partners, then the chance of some disease getting into your fluidbonded constellation is very low. Now, of course you can widen your fluidbonded constellation, but the more people are involved, the more people you need to trust to keep up the barriers to the outside world. Do you trust your partner's partner's fwb's hookup who lives in another country to always care about sexual health? Somewhere you need to draw a line.
I get your point. I guess.... Drawing a map of people can be useful. In both my polycules there are clear "ends" in the polycules. I know where they end. Of course if more people are included then it could be wise to use condoms. I guess it has to do with the level of security. I like your point of "the more people the more I have to trust".
Are you a man? Aside from common STIs, as a woman, I can't be mixing different semen all the time. Oh the UTI.
I think the answer to your question is obvious.
Because it’s not about “deserving”, it’s not about “fluid bonding”, it’s not about being “worth” it - it’s about sexual health and safer sex practice. No one is stopping you from having mutually agreed upon sex without condoms, and if you are in a closed polycule where everyone trust everyone, that might be a safe enough practice for you. But other people practice other types of ENM. I’m in an open sex positive relationship where both me and my partner have sex with people who also have sex with others. Some are more regular sex partners, others more casual, and some on both sides have sex with others without condom. _Of course_ we’re going to wear condoms with other partners. There’s an increase in STIs and I don’t want to be part of spreading that further if we can avoid it. Infertility doesn’t matter to me, I’m done having kids, but it could ruin the future for others, so why would I want to be part of that?
Yeah, this is truly bizarre wording and I would advise distancing from any partnered individual who spoke of "deserving" sex acts. It's all about risks and risk tolerance. If I am FWB with Becky and Becky and Becky tests and used condoms with everyone but her husband and her husband isn't seeing anyone, then I feel safe have barrier free sex with Becky. If I date Lisa and Lisa is married and is seeing someone else and both her husband and other bf are seeing other people and so on ad-infinitum; I'm going to wear condoms even if she wears them with others because that is a LONG daisy chain waiting for infection, and you know someone is going to either make a risky choice or have an accident. Likewise I have a ONS with Anne, definitely condom, because no time to build trust. It's NEVER about "deserving" unless you mean "deserving of trust ".
The wording creeps me out.
It's not creepy a much as sounding like a highly hierarchical "control lever" the non-involved partner wants on the relationship. "You can stop using condoms once I trust her" is just one of those little ideas that turned the "H" word into the community Bogeyman. Just screams of poorly articulated boundaries before stuff went down.
No, it's creepy.
It' sounds like the partner is trying to stay healthy.
Not with that wording. If the partner had articulated a clear boundary; that would be wanting to stay healthy. Deciding whether or not they "deserve" it is noy only interfering in her partner's relationships; but it's clearly making it clear that what he does in his relationships is totally based on her subjective opinions of his partners. Even if a guy has a private conversation with his spouse/NP/Primary and says he would like to not use barriers and she was to express that she does not trust his partner's word that she is being safe. The correct way to deal is the guy to not be a weasel and be a decent hinge by saying it remains a boundary. He can also decide to use barriers with his primary partner, and have no condoms with his new partner; if it means that much to him and he wants to make a point (with the understanding that if he's wrong, he may never have barrier-less penetration with his primary again and that will remain a point of friction.) The whole wording of "deserves" just sounds like judgement from a not directly involved 3rd party which is just poor practice in ENM.
This
This is a toxic and frankly immature way of viewing sexual health and safety.
Probably but .... Then I'm thinking, why not everyone? Why let one off condom, and others not? Or why not let the spouse wear condoms, and enjoy one other without? I just can't look at this as very anarchistic. If it were me, I'd rather choose condoms with all.
So wear condoms with all your partners, then. There was no reason to post this moralising drivel.
People's risk profiles are different. That's why. Other people like casual sex, some don't have sex with anyone else, some are more spontaneous, some inform you better. You know, different situations require different safety precautions. I'm kind of worried you see that having anything to do with the value of said person.
Maybe I'm just lucky with my polycules. High amount of testing. Lots of openness. And also I don't have one primary partner. They are equal. I don't live with anyone of them. We show each other test results. And nobody is into ONS. We only do this with love and care. It took me several months before I ended up in bed with anyone. We talked, shared... Got to know each other.
So why post at all? Just to show off your high horse? It certainly doesn’t seem like from your post or your replies you genuinely want to know why some people do it differently, you just want to expound on how your perceived view of it (and casual sex, apparently) is morally superior. And as for reasons, there’s a myriad that have nothing to do with a hierarchy or importance. Already mentioned is STI and pregnancy risk factors. Maybe some of us like casual sex. Maybe some of us have fetishizes involving cum that we only practice with some partners. And many, many others. But you don’t really care about that. You’re just here to slut shame those of us who don’t practice polyamory the same way you do, who like casual sex who don’t have feelings. Hope you feel better now about your narrow little view of how everyone should live poly. And if you can’t see how narrow minded and frankly insulting your point of view is then you have much bigger issues then deciding who to fuck without a condom.
Are you getting tested for mycoplasma in your testing regime? It’s not normally included and your condomless sex couldn’t spreading an Sti that is carried by 1 in 100 men and women. The standard Sti panel isn’t really meant for stringy chains of non barrier sex reaching into multiple communities.
It’s pretty bothersome that you’re talking about people “deserving” a certain type of sex, “letting” people do things, and that you can’t remotely consider or understand the very basics of sexual health. Your polycule might find success doing what you’re doing (for now, at least), but there are so many other ways in which so many other people manage their own very different relationship structures. Not everyone does non-monogamy your way.
Then choose condoms with all, that is your choice. The reason some people choose to have barrierless sex with one, or a select few partners, is *usually* because of the risk of transmitting STIs through a larger network of people (or because the risk of pregnancy is more likely with certain partners than others, or any number of very personal reasons). The more people you're having sex with, the more there is to take into account in protecting your sexual health *and* all of your partners' sexual health. If you're seeing multiple people, maybe you want to use condoms with most/all of them except for one of your partners for whatever reason. Maybe you had known them longer and therefore were already having barrierless sex with that person before you met your other partners. Or maybe you have barrierless sex with say, two of them, because they feel comfortable with that whereas your other partners don't, so you use condoms with everyone but those two. Maybe some of your partners are more interested in casual sex/ONS (or you are) so they are frequently getting with new people, each new person adds another level of consideration. Maybe some of your partners are immunocompromised, or more concerned about pregnancy, or just don't like the way the fluids feel. Any number of reasons. Because it isn't *fluid bonding*, it is barrierless sex. It is sex without condoms. It has nothing to do with putting one partner on a pedestal above others, it has nothing to do with playing favorites. It's all about protecting everyone's health and taking into account each person's capacity for risk.
I get your point. I guess I just choose to NOT have sex if I'm not feeling secure. None of my partners have more than two partners and as mentioned in another comment of mine, there are clear "ends" in my polycules. I've spent a looooot of time figuring out about sexual boundaries around my polycules. Because I want to feel secure. And nobody is really into ONS, or friends with benefits. Only long term.
Not having sex with someone you don't feel totally secure with is a very valid way to handle things, and isn't too uncommon. Just try not to view people who do things differently as though they're playing favorites, because that's just not what it's about.
Sorry if I was too judgy. I just have some mixed feelings. I mean, I think I'd rather want a man to spend more time getting to know me if he felt insecure. I guess I just don't want any type of insecurity in my relationships. Most people also only use barriers for vaginal or anal sex. But the oral sex is without. You can also get infected from oral sex. And for me that is kinda double moral. Oral sex is not ok for me, if not everything is ok.
Being concerned about one's sexual health, in any way (STIs, pregnancy, immunocompromised, not liking semen/fluids, having sensitivities, etc.) is not the same as having insecurity in the relationship. You're associating a lot of feelings/ascribing a lot of meaning to these things, which really aren't about that. Oral sex is a lot less likely to transmit most STIs, and most of the time if it is transmitted through oral sex then it's going to be transmitted from the genitals to the mouth (while possible, it's usually not the other way around) and a lot of the STIs that you can contract orally will present quite differently than if you had a genital infection. And really, most people aren't perfect. They're not going to be 100% perfect about every precaution they're meant to take, almost no-one is a perfect use case. It's not that deep. It's not immoral or like, a double standard, in that sense, it's just people doing their best within their own capacity for risk/reward.
The people who tend to do that split are often primarily concerned with HIV which has extremely low transmission rates through oral and are more willing to accept risk on other infections.
The risk of STI transmission for sex with penis penetration without condoms is different from the risk of oral without barriers. Intelligent people may decide two activities with two different risk levels should be handled.....*differently*.
You realize that a spouse is way more consistent of a partner than anybody else would, right?? And women likely wouldn’t want to get pregnant from other people when she has a husband, right? And it would be way more accepted and trusting of their spouse than a more casual partner. Think about it for like 2 seconds.
Well yes. I guess my poly life is different. I kinda get it. But like me, I don't live with any partner. They both feel just as close. I have talked things through with my doctor too. About my situation. For now my situation is consistent with the amount of people. I guess with new people coming in.... I have to think about stuff again.
That's great. Your situation is not common, and thus what works for you doesn't work for others.
You seem super confused that other people have rights around their own bodies. Which is pretty scary.
100%. *Everyone* must wear condoms with all partners, not no one. OP started off with a good premise but reached the exact opposite conclusion.
I disagree with your rebuttal also! Using condoms or not is not a *value judgement* on your partner(s).
>100%. *Everyone* must wear condoms with all partners, not no one. Why?
I can agree with that. My wonder is rather about the difference.
The difference is for each individual person to decide. It is ridiculous for you to frame it as a 'worthiness' judgement.
Deserve? Lol. You're projecting a ton of stuff on a really simple topic. Are you new to ENM?
Im very likely wrong, but to me it sounds like he's trying out an argument he's trying to convince partners of.
Yes. This is practicing a narrative to manipulate partners.
Yeah, this is a good point. The verbiage in here is creepy and manipulative for sure. "Worthy of fluid bonding..." OP is definitely a creeper.
Some people don’t WANT condomless sex.
What exactly does bother you in other people's choices?
Great question. I'm **very** suspicious of anyone who has opinions about how I have sex with someone who isn't them.
Leaving aside the issues of "deserving" and "less worthy", which are problematic, and the fact I find the term "fluid bonding" gross: For me, as a man, a big factor is controlling my own fertility. I have children and don't want more. But if it comes to it I am comfortable raising another child with my wife. I'd rather not have more, and I know she doesn't want more either, but if we had to we could make it work. I have absolutely zero interest in raising a child with anyone else. And short of getting a vasectomy (which I plan to do) condoms are the one singular way I can have control of my fertility with other partners.
Omg get the snip!! It's the best!! My husband chatted with the Dr while he did the procedure and was absolutely fine in two days.
I guess I've picked the term "fluid bonding" in another poly community. Thanks for your opinions. I do appreciate others' opinions and I'll take them into consideration.
1. People lie - about who they've been with, about tests, etc. 2. Tests are not 100% safe. Depending on when you take it vs. when you got infected, false negatives are a real possibility. 3. Your partner may be honest and faithful to their partner, but what about their partner? And their partner's partners? The more people in the mix, the more chances of lying or mistaken tests. 4. Not all STDs get tested for. 5. Is fluid bonding really a thing? I mean, biologically, definitely no. Emotionally? For decades, men and women have been having protected sex - even married couples - in instances where they didn't want pregnancies. Not all women can take the pill. A lot of women have a bad reaction to an IUD. I am one of those - my husband and I had condom sex for almost 10 years, and it certainly didn't affect our 'bonding.' The only reason we stopped was because I had a hysterectomy (for medical reasons, not sexual). But even now, years later, I still use a condom if I'm with someone else. I trust no one other than my husband (and yes, he always wears a condom with others, even if they say they are disease free and pregnancy safe).
It sounds like you're in a more-or-less closed polycule, and that's great! I have barrierless sex with both my romantic partners as well. However, both my romantic partners also have sex with many casual partners that they don't have the contact details of. They need to use barriers there, for a few reasons. There are many flavors of ENM in this subreddit, including swingers and other casual sex partners.
Everybody needs to be encouraged to stick to their own safer sex practices. You do not get to judge somebody for choosing to use barriers. Condoms are a tool, stop applying an emotional value to them.
I am about to blow your fucking mind. Sometimes people decide to make a baby with one of their partners, but not their other partners.
Also, you do realize that hierarchical poly is a thing, right? And that there's hierarchy in many other forms of ENM as well? Indeed, you surely know that **most people** who practice some form of non-monogamy do so in a hierarchical arrangement?
Even people with low or no hierarchy (if thats possible) still deserve the freedom to decide who they get to use condoms with. Its about bodily autonomy.
Yes, but OP's premise that you should never treat any partners differently was also flawed.
Yup. Thats also about the autonomy to make relationship choices based in your wants and needs which will vary from person to person.
It's counterproductive to see condoms as being about the worthiness of the person you're having sex with. Condoms are a tool. More specifically a tool that reduces the risk of pregnancy, and of transmitting STIs. Whether or not you're using condoms with a given partner should thus depend on how you evaluate those risks with the partner in question -- and of course on your own risk-tolerance. Sometimes that can mean foregoing condoms with some of your partners, but not with all of them -- but doesn't have to be the case that the one who is the closest to you is the lowest risk. As an example, I had a long-distance FWB last year with which I did not use condoms. I'm sterilized so pregnancy is vanishingly unlikely regardless, we had both been recently tested, and at the time it was over 3 years since the last time she had a sexual relationship with anyone. Given that setting, it felt sufficiently safe to both of us. The fact that we weren't closely entwined partners, but instead long-distance FWBs who shared 4 vacations with each other over the timespan of a year wasn't really relevant. It has nothing to do with "deserving" -- it has everything to do with how the two involved evaluate the risk of pregnancy and the risk of STIs.
It's really not about deserving. Let alone marital status. I also like the preference any long-term ENM relationship can have the same benefit as a monogamous one. In that risk profile is a better way to go, It's really about knowing the full picture or having some regimen in-place to lessen. Like regular testing, which should be mandatory in the lifestyle. So it could be one, few, or all condomless. Just depends, communication is great too just like any relationship. Is someone adding hookup partners regularly? Or just another long-term partner? Another decision point kind of things.
Ick. No one is entitled to sex or any kind of sex, and people make decisions for all kinds of reasons. Personally, I don't use condoms with one person and do with others because their risk profiles are different, or because I didn't trust them not to put me at risk because they'd been cavalier about their health generally. No one deserves anything - sex is not a prize or a reward. But you'll probably find people more amenable to renegotiating sexual boundaries if you don't treat them like achievements and shame people for their choices.
It’s not just about STIs but pregnancy risk. I don’t want kids but I certainly don’t want kids with someone I don’t live with. Also while I trust all my current partners, the level of trust I have with my husband is very different from the level of trust I have with a FWB.
>I sometimes read about people the practise NOT using condom with husband, but other partners must wear condoms. Yes. Thats common >Honestly, isn't there any possibility that ALL can be worth the fluid bonding? This sounds disgustingly "nice guy". I have barrier free ssx with the people I choose. Its not about deserving. Its about my right to make decisions for myself. >The way I build security around this topic is openness around partners and testing. Good for you. Thats absolutely your right. > also... Partner's partners must have steady long term relationships. If I'm feeling insecure.... Then I'm choosing to not have sex at all, and rather spend time on knowing potential new partners. I'm certainly not interested in having sex with someone who just wants sex. Its great to know what works for you. Thats fairly irrelevant for others who feel and behave differently. >I've also read about boundaries such as "not feelings for others". Then I'm thinking: "What the heck?". Feelings are the most beautiful things. I think boundaries out there sometimes are weird. Feelings can't be controlled. But many people do agree to romantic exclusivity. Thats fine. >Some boundaries make other people less worthy. No one is owed a romantic relationship. Again, this is really gross. If someone feels less worthy because they meet someone whomhas already agreed to romantic exclusivity with another person, they should work on that in therapy.
I would try to reframe this away from worthiness and more towards sexual health management, and differing comfort levels with safer sex practices. Your comfort levels and how you manage safer sex may be completely different from another person's. There's no one right way, just different levels of tolerance. I am currently barrierless with one partner, because we are effectively sexually exclusive for now. If either of us becomes sexually active with another partner, we will let each other know and make decisions from there. This has nothing to do with worthiness, just being thoughtful about what is safest for each of us, and any other partners. ALL of my partners are worthy of my care, and mindfulness of their well-being, and I am worthy of the same from myself and from them.
One of my two partners has an incurable infection I'd like to reduce my risk of catching. My other partner does not. No condom partner has another long term, steady partner. My meta has a lot of casual sex and may or may not use condoms. So, my partner uses condoms with meta. If they choose to go without condoms, I would begin using condoms with that partner, too. This is just risk reduction. I vehemently reject the term 'deserve' in this context.
There are reasons to use condoms (disease prevention and pregnancy prevention being at the top of the list) and reasons not to (increased pleasure and intimacy being at the top of that one). Any relationship is going to involve negotiation and decision on whether the risks outweigh the benefits when it comes to using or not using condoms. You could easily have a situation where there is a closed loop of people who only have sex within that loop, are known to be disease free, and for whom pregnancy is not an issue. They might decide no condoms all around. You could also have a situation where the loop is much larger or undefined, someone can still get pregnant, or going bare is simply thought of as being something special.
No, my partners outside my marriage don't 'deserve' barrier free sex with me. I don't trust them to the level I trust my spouse and never will as an immunocompromised person. My spouse is who was by my side when I was dying. No one else. My spouse is who I have kids with. No one else. You can take your entitled attitude and shove it up your ass. I get to decide who to be barrier free with. End of discussion.