The bisexual ideal

[GoldenDelicious]

so a high value male can do what he wants? what if the woman is high value, can she fuck around too?

yes.

im personally a medium to high value guy atm (i still have to get some other stuff sorted. gimme 3 months), and i have a few girls at the moment whose attitude is simply "id rather have you like this than not have you at all". these are girls in their early 20s who have had a handful of boyfriends all of whom are either in uni or working full time from good families sought after by many men, have modelled at some point in their lives if not now etc.

a high value girl can do the same thing eg a high end model can happily have 5 boyfriends at the same time. she can replace any of them at whim and so is in complete control (so long as shes willing to next the guy tahts pissing her off or not buying her reality)

if yorue question was high value guy vs high value girl in the same dynamic and theyre both hetero...its usually going to go to "open relationship" or the traditional "closed relationship, but cheat on the sly" type thing

 

[redsamurai]

that kind of relationship just doesn't have any appeal to me.........I'd just as soon be fuckbuddy's........which is pretty much what that is anyway, just with a few more financial commitments. I dunno, if I was with a woman whom I was close enough to warrant me saying "I love you"...........I wouldn't want to be with another woman, but that's just me. There's so much of these type of moral gymnastics going on in marriages "just too keep them together".........that I say why be together at all?? Just so you can say you're married? who gives a fuck?? Why is being single so stigmatized that people get into these type of marriages where they have to fuck someone else a couple times a month just to make their marriage tolerable???

yes.

im personally a medium to high value guy atm (i still have to get some other stuff sorted. gimme 3 months), and i have a few girls at the moment whose attitude is simply "id rather have you like this than not have you at all". these are girls in their early 20s who have had a handful of boyfriends all of whom are either in uni or working full time from good families sought after by many men, have modelled at some point in their lives if not now etc.

a high value girl can do the same thing eg a high end model can happily have 5 boyfriends at the same time. she can replace any of them at whim and so is in complete control (so long as shes willing to next the guy tahts pissing her off or not buying her reality)

if yorue question was high value guy vs high value girl in the same dynamic and theyre both hetero...its usually going to go to "open relationship" or the traditional "closed relationship, but cheat on the sly" type thing

 

[GoldenDelicious]

that kind of relationship just doesn't have any appeal to me.........I'd just as soon be fuckbuddy's........which is pretty much what that is anyway, just with a few more financial commitments. I dunno, if I was with a woman whom I was close enough to warrant me saying "I love you"...........I wouldn't want to be with another woman, but that's just me. There's so much of these type of moral gymnastics going on in marriages "just too keep them together".........that I say why be together at all?? Just so you can say you're married? who gives a fuck?? Why is being single so stigmatized that people get into these type of marriages where they have to fuck someone else a couple times a month just to make their marriage tolerable???

its a multiple long term relationship. there can be as much, or as little, financial committment as you like. and if yorue the type of person who can align to a woman so strongly that she is ok with you having sex with other women because she understands that its the sort of persn you are but you can still care for her intensely and have the same viable, quality relationship with others as you do with her yet not detract from your relationship...then the only gymnastics that happen...happen in the bedroom

 

[Mickey36]

bisexual women are great for low to medium value males, because there is no need to manage the conflict that normally arises due to jealousy, territorialism etc when it comes to other females.

if youre a high value man, you can date straight women in the same manner. I know straight men who have one or two life partners and still go out and pick up new ones openly, because their straight life partners are aligned with them and accept their promiscuity as a normal thing.

in short...bi girls are great for straight men who are either possessive (which is ironic), selfish (again ironic) or who dont have what it takes to engineer such a dynamic with a purely heterosexual woman

Actually, your statement is way too broad. For a man to be in a successful relationship where his love is bi and enjoys another woman both emotionally and physically, he cannot be jealous or insecure. I have found that most men, superficially, could handle two women at one time physically but if there is an emotional attachment to his siginificant other and there is a consistent partner of the female persuasion, then an insecure male would not be able to handle it because he feels like he cannot compete with another woman. I am sure that the rules are different and your simplistic statement might apply when the "players" are younger, immature, and in a more superficial relationship. I would also want to know your definition of what a "high value" man is. I have found out that what a man might consider high value qualities and what a woman would consider are sometimes two very different things.

 

[redsamurai]

I know for a fact I couldnt' handle my wife having an emotional attachment with a woman she was having sex with............what's the point of even being married then? It's not about insecurity, it's about personal relationship dynamics. As soon as things get rocky she's running off to her g/f. Sex is another matter, as I understand people's different physical needs............but if I as a husband cannot completely fullfill my wife sexually AND emotionally............I see no point to our coupling. At that point we're just good friends living together and enjoying the tax benefits of being married. I would not want to have children in such a situation either. How do you explain mommy's g/f who stays the night on a consistent basis? At some point, kids do catch on.

Actually, your statement is way too broad. For a man to be in a successful relationship where his love is bi and enjoys another woman both emotionally and physically, he cannot be jealous or insecure. I have found that most men, superficially, could handle two women at one time physically but if there is an emotional attachment to his siginificant other and there is a consistent partner of the female persuasion, then an insecure male would not be able to handle it because he feels like he cannot compete with another woman. I am sure that the rules are different and your simplistic statement might apply when the "players" are younger, immature, and in a more superficial relationship. I would also want to know your definition of what a "high value" man is. I have found out that what a man might consider high value qualities and what a woman would consider are sometimes two very different things.

 

[Mickey36]

I know for a fact I couldnt' handle my wife having an emotional attachment with a woman she was having sex with............what's the point of even being married then? It's not about insecurity, it's about personal relationship dynamics. As soon as things get rocky she's running off to her g/f. Sex is another matter, as I understand people's different physical needs............but if I as a husband cannot completely fullfill my wife sexually AND emotionally............I see no point to our coupling. At that point we're just good friends living together and enjoying the tax benefits of being married. I would not want to have children in such a situation either. How do you explain mommy's g/f who stays the night on a consistent basis? At some point, kids do catch on.

There are many points of being married and people get married for many different reasons. I got married because I found my best friend, the greatest lover I have ever known, physical attractiveness, emotional attachment, the feeling of wholeness... I agree that in a rocky marriage or one without total communication, the marriage would most likely end in failure. I have learned that everyone loves and cares for each other differently so there is no hard and fast rule. The kid issue is different. Our daughter is 7 now and we would not bring another woman into our relationship for her psychological and emotional health. With all things, there is a balancing equation and with our daughter in the equation and not healthy or safe answers, we would not bring another woman into our relationship.

 

[Bikini Mod]

I agree for the most part with what GD said about *high value males and females* but one component he failed to factor into the equation when discussing those people (they can replace and replace partners quickly and with ease as they have a greater degree of physical beauty than most) is how those individuals value themselves.

This is NOT a slight on anyone.

When one isn't really looking for a LTR there is nothing wrong with floating through partners like bees from flower to flower but as one goes through life at some point they may (or may not) realize that, "Shit, who is going to love me FOR ME and not simply for what they can get from me?" Then the playing field changes.

For those couples who swing and follow the rules they put in place, the experience that has been relayed to me as that it works GREAT and actually enhances their marriage. I have even heard of LTR between three parties but even they admitted they were certainly NOT *average* (as in how they viewed life PERIOD).

As I have stated, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult, I see no reason to cast any negative comments. If all parties are happy and it works for them, who are we to judge?

But Spartacus, with all due respect, to say that a bisexual woman is somehow of higher value in general than a non-bi woman isn't really a fair statement. Neither would the reverse be. However, to say that a FOR YOU PERSONALLY a Bi-woman would be of most value (as in she would HAVE to be bi in order for you to consider her seriously to be a life partner) would be completely fair.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

Actually, your statement is way too broad. For a man to be in a successful relationship where his love is bi and enjoys another woman both emotionally and physically, he cannot be jealous or insecure. I have found that most men, superficially, could handle two women at one time physically but if there is an emotional attachment to his siginificant other and there is a consistent partner of the female persuasion, then an insecure male would not be able to handle it because he feels like he cannot compete with another woman. I am sure that the rules are different and your simplistic statement might apply when the "players" are younger, immature, and in a more superficial relationship. I would also want to know your definition of what a "high value" man is. I have found out that what a man might consider high value qualities and what a woman would consider are sometimes two very different things.

i can see where youre coming from, particularly as the dynamic shifts to a long term polygamous bisexual relationship with a low value male. my statement was largely geared to more highly sexed, younger men ie low 30s max. my statement does come from experience though. the crew i hang with are...interesting lol

my definition of a high value man is of course varied, but its basically one who has all of their attraction switches turned on, is well balanced, has their financials/career sorted and so is attractive both short and long term. its hard to articulate, but we're talking about a guy who

has good social status (maybe a good job, or just how people deal with him on a day to day basis ie they come to him)
is attractive to other women and has several interested in him
is plain intelligent
is emotionally intelligent
protects his social group/family
is a leader (of men, women, social group)
is excellent in the things he does

that sort of thing.

bikinimom, you raise a good ppint - theres perceived value, and real value - but the thing with value is that in a society where there are thousands of people interacting, people with high perceived value abut low real value can only get away with it for a short amount of time, because the way human beings intereact includes testing one another for character flaws bla bla bla which influences their alignment with them. after a while, people tend to gravitate to people similar to their own value after a while, and particularly sexually, because there are hardwired drives that force us to make these decisions of sexual alignment (TEND to. there are always exceptions)

 

[Mickey36]

i can see where youre coming from, particularly as the dynamic shifts to a long term polygamous bisexual relationship with a low value male. my statement was largely geared to more highly sexed, younger men ie low 30s max. my statement does come from experience though. the crew i hang with are...interesting lol

my definition of a high value man is of course varied, but its basically one who has all of their attraction switches turned on, is well balanced, has their financials/career sorted and so is attractive both short and long term. its hard to articulate, but we're talking about a guy who

has good social status (maybe a good job, or just how people deal with him on a day to day basis ie they come to him)
is attractive to other women and has several interested in him
is plain intelligent
is emotionally intelligent
protects his social group/family
is a leader (of men, women, social group)
is excellent in the things he does

that sort of thing.

I do not believe a low value male would be in a long term polygamous relationship. A low value male has issues getting one partner, never mind multiple for a physical and emotional relationship. My husband would be considered high value under your definition as he has a high social status - attorney, is in his early 30s, has many women attracted to him, is very intelligent, emotionally intelligent which I will return to, is a good protector as shown by his career and that he was a Ranger, and the rest follows. My husband does not feel the need to be with a whole bunch of women to fulfill his "primal" need to be "king of the jungle". This is where emotional intelligence comes into play. It is my belief that your high value males are lacking in the emotional intelligence department as they need to be with as many women as possible for one possibler reason among many to fulfill a void that they are wanted and desired by many. I have met many different people who have open, semi-open, and extremely open relationships. My observations are those that have multiple independant partners, both with and without their partners knowledge but with their partners general awareness, are those that tend to suffer more from some sort of physchological flaw. That is my opinion and your group of people could be the the exception but I disagree that all of those with that behavior are high value under your definition. Maybe if you drop the emotional intelligence, your broad sweeping statement might ring a little more true.

 

[Bikini Mod]

I do not believe a low value male would be in a long term polygamous relationship. A low value male has issues getting one partner, never mind multiple for a physical and emotional relationship. My husband would be considered high value under your definition as he has a high social status - attorney, is in his early 30s, has many women attracted to him, is very intelligent, emotionally intelligent which I will return to, is a good protector as shown by his career and that he was a Ranger, and the rest follows. My husband does not feel the need to be with a whole bunch of women to fulfill his "primal" need to be "king of the jungle". This is where emotional intelligence comes into play. It is my belief that your high value males are lacking in the emotional intelligence department as they need to be with as many women as possible for one possibler reason among many to fulfill a void that they are wanted and desired by many. I have met many different people who have open, semi-open, and extremely open relationships. My observations are those that have multiple independant partners, both with and without their partners knowledge but with their partners general awareness, are those that tend to suffer more from some sort of physchological flaw. That is my opinion and your group of people could be the the exception but I disagree that all of those with that behavior are high value under your definition. Maybe if you drop the emotional intelligence, your broad sweeping statement might ring a little more true.

Couldn't have said that better myself.

INTELLIGENCE - (both IQ and E IQ) are prized very highly by *high value* females.