Question

[make_your_move]

reposted from archway with permission.


In a large number of ways, I find LESS emotional risk in sex than in demonstrating and receiving romance .

It takes more courage to offer tokens of time, silliness, thoughtfulness, and affection than it does to indulge in lust.

This makes me curious. It also makes me want to man the torpedoes and address the issue!

The other half of this little conundrum is the courage of the receiver.

If you are poly, where does romance stand in the web of consideration for you, your partner, your secondaries, etc.?

I am curious to any thoughts on this/these topics.

Comments

since you copied and pasted the question, I'll copy and paste my answer

[russell-moore.livejournal.com]

For me, the romance part seems to come naturally. Honest heart felt compliments, warm caring hugs, holding hands while watching a sunset ... just seems like the natural thing to do for me.

My wife seems appreciative, so that aspect works well.

I also have nice interludes with others at events we attend. The biggest compliment I received was from a couple of older women I regularly flirt with, who gave me naked hugs, a big smooch, and thanked me for helping them feel pretty.

Thing is, I thought they WERE pretty, so did not hesitate to tell them so. Unfortunately, I guess others in their life don't verbalize as much.

Being romantic, and showing honest caring emotion, is not something that has to be limited to just one's signinifcant other. Oh, there are some little things that no one but my wife gets in the way of special attention. But I reap joy from making the other women in my life smile as well, which then makes me smile. Happiness all around.

And being romantic does not mean it has to be an event every time you do it. Low key sweet nothings whispered in an ear, walk-by I love you's, even a simple calm 5 minutes spent in the warm comfort of each others arms at the end of a work day with no words needing to be said ... all of these small little romantic things show caring, and can't really be forced. You either follow your instincts and do them or not. 'Forced' romantic efforts, that come from over analyzing rather than simply acting from the heart, usually end up as unsatisfactory.

There is also a misconception that romance should be limited to just the bedroom. This is a sure fire way of it never getting to the bedroom part in my opinion.

Have I rambled enough for you? lol ...

I'm not sure being romantic can be taught, but I think being romantic can be learned, if that makes any sense. It means simply quieting your brain a bit and following a more instinctive path with your partner or friend. And honest feeling and emotions are what should be your guide, rather than acting in a way you think should be correct.

Re: since you copied and pasted the question, I'll copy and paste my answer

[3ravensringo.livejournal.com]

Sounds a lot like what I was rambling about yesterday, authenticity. People want to feel genuine things from those around them, be it lust, love, or concern.

Re: since you copied and pasted the question, I'll copy and paste my answer

[radiant-one.livejournal.com]

And honest feeling and emotions are what should be your guide, rather than acting in a way you think should be correct.

Kind of falls into the prescribed romantic reactions that commercialism forces on people.

But the main reaction was... romance is thoughtfulness. It can just be a call/communication, out of the blue, to say "You are special to me....". Romance doesn't have to be "the big event" stuff. The best part of romance is filling your special person's moment with you.

[3ravensringo.livejournal.com]

Thank you BOTH for that question, as I think it just jelled some important things in my head.

Romance, for me, is a central consideration in all my relationships. I want to give it, and I want to receive it. Without it, and all those little involvements that Russ mentioned, things feel hollow. I feel underappreciated. I wither.

Damn good question.

[catya.livejournal.com]

For me it's the main differentiator between a relationship and a playmate :)

[catya.livejournal.com]

Hm. I'm not sure I know what you're asking? what's the differnee between sex with other people and romance with other people? or?

[kellfire.livejournal.com]

In a large number of ways, I find LESS emotional risk in sex than in demonstrating and receiving romance .

I can very much understand this, as it's been a big factor in my life. In my pre-marriage days sex was a sport, all it took was a willing partner, no relationship needed, no strings, sometimes even very little talking. I'm not proud of those days and rarely talk about it...but the basis of my promiscuity was the "fuck em and forget em" ... much easier than putting my heart myself on the line.

When I got into the scene I played along similar lines, not much discretion in who I played with. Eventually I realized how empty I was feeling and stopped playing randomly. (I didn't want to be everyone's meantime girl)

I still have to be very alert to getting physical when it's inappropriate, and am learning it is ok to simply show affection (no matter how many times I say I'm not romantic turns out deep down inside I am.

[blushing-grace.livejournal.com]

I like romance and like to think it's something I do frequently/constantly.

In the spectrum, until romance has entered the equation it's just a playmate or friend-with-benifits ... and not too many. Until I hit the right romance level I try not to move beyond a certain point physically.

[alricthemad.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty much with Russell on this one.
I'll let you and anyone else decide if what I do is romantic. I enjoy holding doors, soft 'I love you's holding hands etc.

I want to have that in my relationships, especially if sexual imtimacy is involed.
I have had some sexual relatiosnhips that were just that. It's fun occasionally. Sharing the emotional initmacy as well makes the relatiosnhip worth while.

[bittibuddha.livejournal.com]

I don't think I've used the term "romance" to define how I interact with my husband and my partners, but its there anyway. Its the thinking of them when we are not together. Its the buying little presents I think they would like. Its the sharing of interesting pieces of news or just calling because I'm thinking about them and miss their voice. Its allowing myself to be less-than-perfect and a little bit territorial where they are involved.

I experience these things with my Husband, with my Wife and with my Boyfriend. Its reciprocated in different degrees, but it plays a role in each of those relationships. Its what separates these three relationships from the rest of the world.

[paulpomes.livejournal.com]

There are two elements to the question and answer. First is energy balance, where we direct our finite resources: career, school, family, self-maintenance, relationships, etc. If career is in a tight spot then there might not be so much energy left for risk-taking. That's when I draw on established relationships where the people are aware of the ebbs and flows within my life.

Romance is a way to build trust, to show that there are feelings of warmth and affection. It brings down barriers to increased intimacy. When I turned forty I found that finding sex was easy; finding intimacy and connection that can make sex explosive was hard.

Romance is more important

[sierra-victor.livejournal.com]

Emotion, caring, all that stuff, is more important.

Sex, good sex, great sex, can have all of that. The very best sex must have it.

But, sex itself can be meaningless. You can cum and hate it as you get off. You can cum and it can be great, but without love, romance, caring, it just sex.

Too much of that kind of thing can leave you feeling hollow and down. It's like the tummy-ache you get from eating too much candy. It was tasty at the time, but afterwards you really regret eating in the first place.

So, is romance more risky? Hell, yeah. OK, so no one ever got AIDs from holding hands. Over the years, jeeze decades, I've been around polyness, I've seen many more relationships go down in flames because of issues of romance, caring, committment, than ever to do with sex in and of itself.

Sex is the wood, the coal. It's what we can all see. But, it's the fire, dancing, changing, never-ever quite the same, that's romance and can both warm and burn us.

S_V

[grail76.livejournal.com]

Not the best of times to get philosophical on this at the moment. Sex by itself is just an event. Romance puts you out there to get hurt and takes more effort and time?

[drwex]

If you are poly, where does romance stand in the web of consideration for you, your partner, your secondaries, etc.?

Way way way too much to type than I have time for. Good topic. Sad I never see you to talk about things like this.

*hugsandruns*

[puppy-no.livejournal.com]

It's extremely important for me to have a partner who will accept romantic gestures, no matter how gooshy they get, and not be uneasy with them. It's natural to be uneasy because in traditional or vanilla relationships, in the beginning these gestures can stand in for actual communication, and accepting romance can be misread as accepting some sort of love or commitment. I need to just discuss emotional boundaries in a poly relationship, keep checking in on them, and be myself when it comes to being romantic (which is usually excessively so). I do not need it reciprocated, as I tend to be attracted to people who are not naturally "huggy," but I do need it to be accepted and welcomed. Otherwise, I feel inhibited, cautious, and not myself.