![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The least sexy part of sex
Hmmm. Potential challenge on the sexual horizon.
My safer sex policy is something like "If you do unprotected stuff with other people, I don't do unprotected stuff with you." This rule is not an issue with my boyfriends, because neither of them does any stuff with other people. One due to a complete lack of interest in dating anybody else, and the other because of lack of effort and opportunity, I suppose.
Well, that one -- non-cohabitating boyfriend -- has a date this week. Yay! I will probably have some feels about this, because it's really the first time he's gone on a date with somebody, but I expect them to be relatively mild. My big anxiety is, what if he determines that he actually wants monogamy and there's this rad monogamous girl offering him monogamy? But he's got himself clearly labeled as poly on his OKCupid profile, and apparently this date chick is poly, so I don't think that anxiety will get out of control.
However. All feels aside, there is a possible logistical issue. If this date works out and he starts seeing her (or someone else) and starts getting naked with her (or someone else), I fully expect him to go down on her. Based on what I know about him, a dental dam will not be in the picture. She'll probably go down on him, and it's safe to assume latex will not be involved there either. Receiving a bareback BJ has very, very, very little risk; if I recall correctly, going down on ladyparts is also pretty low-risk. But. It's still a bit of risk. And I will have to decide how to handle that.
This is complicated by the fact that he usually cannot maintain an erection with a condom on. This means we rarely have vaginal sex, and we do a lot of oral. If I decide I'm not comfortable with his junk in my mouth, we're down to necking and handjobs. Annoying. His condom problem also means he might be sorely tempted to leap at an offer of unprotected vaginal sex. But that's really bare speculation on my part.
Honestly, my risk tolerance is such that I wouldn't worry about him having unprotected oral with someone else. Cohabitating boyfriend, however, has a lower risk tolerance than I do. I don't know if any of this would wig him out. It seems to me that the risk of Chick #1 passing something to Dude #1 via oral, Dude #1 passing it to Chick #2 via oral or condom'd PIV, and Chick #2 passing it to Dude #2 via condom'd PIV is pretty dang low. To me, it doesn't seem appreciably riskier than the usual network of condom'd PIV. But it's not for me to tell him what level of risk he should accept.
This is the un-fun part of nonmonogamy, I suppose: Reconciling the varying risk tolerances of several people. Any feedback is welcome, but I think I really just needed to write that out.
My safer sex policy is something like "If you do unprotected stuff with other people, I don't do unprotected stuff with you." This rule is not an issue with my boyfriends, because neither of them does any stuff with other people. One due to a complete lack of interest in dating anybody else, and the other because of lack of effort and opportunity, I suppose.
Well, that one -- non-cohabitating boyfriend -- has a date this week. Yay! I will probably have some feels about this, because it's really the first time he's gone on a date with somebody, but I expect them to be relatively mild. My big anxiety is, what if he determines that he actually wants monogamy and there's this rad monogamous girl offering him monogamy? But he's got himself clearly labeled as poly on his OKCupid profile, and apparently this date chick is poly, so I don't think that anxiety will get out of control.
However. All feels aside, there is a possible logistical issue. If this date works out and he starts seeing her (or someone else) and starts getting naked with her (or someone else), I fully expect him to go down on her. Based on what I know about him, a dental dam will not be in the picture. She'll probably go down on him, and it's safe to assume latex will not be involved there either. Receiving a bareback BJ has very, very, very little risk; if I recall correctly, going down on ladyparts is also pretty low-risk. But. It's still a bit of risk. And I will have to decide how to handle that.
This is complicated by the fact that he usually cannot maintain an erection with a condom on. This means we rarely have vaginal sex, and we do a lot of oral. If I decide I'm not comfortable with his junk in my mouth, we're down to necking and handjobs. Annoying. His condom problem also means he might be sorely tempted to leap at an offer of unprotected vaginal sex. But that's really bare speculation on my part.
Honestly, my risk tolerance is such that I wouldn't worry about him having unprotected oral with someone else. Cohabitating boyfriend, however, has a lower risk tolerance than I do. I don't know if any of this would wig him out. It seems to me that the risk of Chick #1 passing something to Dude #1 via oral, Dude #1 passing it to Chick #2 via oral or condom'd PIV, and Chick #2 passing it to Dude #2 via condom'd PIV is pretty dang low. To me, it doesn't seem appreciably riskier than the usual network of condom'd PIV. But it's not for me to tell him what level of risk he should accept.
This is the un-fun part of nonmonogamy, I suppose: Reconciling the varying risk tolerances of several people. Any feedback is welcome, but I think I really just needed to write that out.
no subject
But I am glad things /will/ get talked about, with you as go-between :).
Rereading the thread with my theoretically-more-awake brain, I still worry that I sounded harsh. Besides being sick and super sleep-deprived, I was having a wrist tendonitis flareup that made my typing uncharacteristically terse. You know I am your huge admirer, right?
Some bits from before:
>His condom problem also means he might be sorely tempted to leap at an offer of unprotected vaginal sex. But that's really bare speculation on my part.
Would he really do that, knowing what it might cost him with you? Does he have trouble thinking things through to their consequences? I am wondering how realistic this concern of yours is. I don't know the guy :).
>A while ago, when non-cohabitating boyfriend and I got back together and it became apparent that his condom issue wasn't going to improve, I raised the issue of dropping condoms with him. Cohabitating boyfriend was very uncomfortable with that. Despite the fact that he and I always use condoms, he doesn't go down on me, and non-cohabitating boyfriend wasn't sleeping with anyone else. That seems like a very low risk tolerance to me.
Was it really about risk? This is another classic P&K question :). You know how sometimes people talk about a fear of STIs because it seems more acceptable than talking about a fear of closeness. Could he have been concerned that sex without condoms would feel more intimate to you, or to non-co-bf, or to himself?
I totally agree that non-co-bf is not going to run off into the sunset to be monogamous with a poly girl, BTW :). But it's still fine to have twinges about it. There is so much cultural conditioning to feel that way. Better to feel it and let it pass than to stuff it, IMO.
no subject
I don't think my concerns are particularly realistic. I guess that was unclear when I wrote. I was venting all my anxieties, including the ones that have little or nothing to do with reality.
Cohabitating boyfriend doesn't seem to equate condomless sex with intimacy. I haven't asked him, mind you. But I would be very surprised to learn he felt that way.
no subject
Your guys sound like they are pretty different from you in terms of talking about stuff. That surprised me!
no subject
Cohabitating boyfriend will discuss all kinds of stuff with me, but that feels extremely intimate to him, and I don't think he would like getting into emotional and sexual stuff with a friend. I think you've suggested that men tend to get their needs for emotional intimacy met almost exclusively with their romantic partners, not with their friends. He's definitely like that.
Non-cohabitating boyfriend is not emotionally forthcoming with anyone, even with me. It's an ongoing struggle for me to accept this. I broke up with him over it once, and have considered leaving again a time or two since we got back together. He is getting better at receiving my emotional stuff, at least, and he has suddenly started talking more about sex with me. To my knowledge, he doesn't discuss sex with his friends.
no subject
I do think it's the custom for men in our culture, or some segments of our culture. I think it's the root of things like PUA anger at women, for example. Men are told they can only get this need met by women who sleep with them, and so sexual/romantic courtships get this whole additional charge. A nonconsensual (on the part of the women who are not dating them) power dynamic, really.
But I don't think it's inherent in men :). In some sub/cultures it's the other way around -- men's deep emotional connections do not include women.
I think it's big thing in geek culture -- which strikes me as odd. Geek guys I know often have very long term, very important relationships with male friends. But they do not talk to them! To me, talking about emotional stuff is how I define a friend vs. an acquaintance, so my mind boggles.
>Non-cohabitating boyfriend is not emotionally forthcoming with anyone, even with me. It's an ongoing struggle for me to accept this. I broke up with him over it once, and have considered leaving again a time or two since we got back together. He is getting better at receiving my emotional stuff, at least, and he has suddenly started talking more about sex with me. To my knowledge, he doesn't discuss sex with his friends.
Well I can sure see why these two would not talk! I am happy to hear that this guy is starting to open up a bit to you :). Being able to listen is a good start :).