The latest edition of DNA has two beautiful boys, Aden and Jordan on the cover. They are a real life couple who are starting out in porn after being together for a few years. They are hot, and yeah, I’d watch them in porn for sure. There is something that has been bothering me about the article though. I don’t know if the magazine called them monogamous or they did, but they certainly claim to be “one person people”.
I totally understand from reading the article that they are completely committed to each other, but monogamous? No. They are not. They are working in porn, therefore sleeping with other people, and they say in the article that yes, they’ve had others join them for sex in their private lives from time to time as well.
How on earth could they call that monogamous? Monogamy by it’s very definition means to only be with one other perons, not at a time, or per day, but one other person, the one you are in the relationship with. I don’t care what they do. I have friends in various forms of open relationships and understand that sex and emotion aren’t necessarily connected, but be honest about what you call it. If you are having sex with other people, for gratification or work, you are NOT being monogamous.
Neither of them do anything for me - they look like 2 Ken dolls.
Yecch!
Dear Brenton, their monogamy is based on one thing; love is just for the two of them and sex is for everyone so they have their own monogamy. A lot of folks do it that way. Don’t bother yourself about this kind of things and know yourself monogamous if your sex and love is just for your mr right, white horse or not. Be hugged by me living a very monagamous life.
I totally agree. A monogamous relationship is just that, one person.
It seems that monogamy is such a fluid word these days.
I’ve heard “oh, we’re monogamous. We only have 3somes together, not apart”.
*sigh*
Well, I can’t comment on their private life escapades, but you should know that all of their scenes in front of the camera involve them having sex with one another. They have not to this point split off to have scenes with other partners.
Um… what’s with the histronics? Plenty of people use the term “monogamous” to describe their relationship if they have a three/foursome on the very rare occasion and no sex at all that doesn’t include each other. Yes, you can claim to have them on a technicality, but as far as the English language goes, it’s nowhere near as important an issue as people who confuse “you’re” with “your.”
amen! gays are always looking to redefine something or other. that ain’t no monogamy. WTF!
xo
Rants, Thoughts & Merde
http://www.rantsthoughtsmerde.com
Arnon and Nom de Plume, Get a dictionary and look up monogamy, it’s not a technicality. Maybe we should all start to redefine words that don’t quite fit our own agenda?
It’s clear to me that they mean emotional monogamy - yes, they’re having sex with others, but not in a context that would lead to emotional involvement.
And if you want to get super-technical - and apparently you do - the definition of “monogamy” in my dictionary refers to the practice of marrying only one person at a time or being married only once in a lifetime. So if they’re not married, they’re mis-using the word and you’re getting your tail in a twist over nothing.
Oh dear. Very tired and boring topic mr. Let try be positive about people for a change please :-)
I’m sorry rich, but “that’s not what the dictionary says” really is a child’s argument. It’s called common usage. The literal and common uses of a word don’t always coincide, and changes to the latter over time can and do result in your much cherished dictionary being updated to reflect what people really mean when they say something. As individuals we aren’t free to “redefine words that don’t quit fit our own agenda” as you suggest, but as a society we are.
I’ll grant you that “monogamy” usually means two people who have no sexual contact with anyone else ever, but what else describes the situation here? It’s ironic that the post is titled “Call it what it is” yet makes no attempt to do so. It’s certainly not an open relationship if neither of them has sex outside it (as the Jarics say they don’t), non-monogamous gives no clue as to what the state of the relationship actually is, and polyamorous suggests that it’s a regular or ongoing thing (and they imply it is not). You could put forward an argument that “almost monogamous” or “largely monogamous” is probably the most correct term, but that would just make their sex life sound more interesting than it actually is.
Honestly, if somebody in a committed relationship told me they weren’t monogamous because they’d had a threesome on their partner’s birthday two years ago, I’d think they were a sad little poseur. But I’d think it quietly rather than shrieking that they were despoiling my own notions of sexual freedom by not doing in “properly.”
Nom de Plume
Trying be pseudo intellectual makes you sound like a tosser. There, I’ve called it like it is. AA dictionary, buy its very definition define the common usage of words - that’s how we understand each other and communicate. You invalidate your whole argument by stating that we understand words by their common usage and then stating…
“As individuals we aren’t free to “redefine words that don’t quit fit our own agenda” as you suggest, but as a society we are.
I’ll grant you that “monogamy” usually means two people who have no sexual contact with anyone else ever”
Therefore, society has decided that the common usage is two people. Therefore these guys aren’t in a monogamous relationship and it is in fact you who is the individual trying to change words for your own usage. Now that’s what I consider to be childish, just in the same way that my five-year-old nephew makes up his own words.
The guys can do what ever they want, but don’t try and claim the hetero normal respectability of monogamy and then go and shag other guys on camera. I’m totally with Brenton, call it what it is and don’t be ashamed of it.
I’m in a monogamous relationship with xtube.
The dictionary said so when I looked up my name.
The new Britney song is about threesomes.
I feel like a Chiko roll.
The internet is fun. :)