Problems with quid pro quo as a negotiating position for threesomes


 

House of the Virgin Mary now a chapel in Ephes...

 

Quid pro quo, something for something, seems innocent enough. We use it everyday when buying an item in the store (money for the item) or when trying compromise. This strategy gets used by couples when they are trying to protect their position by not giving up too much when they try to compromise. Couples will even employ this strategy when discussing threesomes.

 

Imagine a fictitious couple, Mary and Joseph, who are discussing a threesome and never had a threesome. Mary states she will participate in Joseph’s two woman threesome if Joseph is willing to participate in Mary’s two man threesome. Joseph ponders the idea for a while and Mary then comes back stating, the two man threesome must occur first.

 

Should Joseph agree to Mary’s proposal? In this author’s opinion Joseph should not agree to it unless he is using the two woman threesome as a negotiating position to get his threesome. It is this author’s feeling Mary’s position has two flaws. The first flaw, people’s opinions change. Having one threesome does not guarantee another threesome will occur. It is quite possible after having the first threesome Mary may not want to have another threesome. In such a situation, Joseph agreed to the threesome but Mary has decided not to reciprocate leaving Joseph feeling, most likely, upset. This will leave Joseph feeling, to some extent, he cannot trust Mary and erode at their relationship.

 

Second flaw, having contact with the same gender can raise issues for many people. The idea, in its abstract, sounds plausible but when faced with making it a reality, can cause some people to rethink their decision. Depending on the statistics an individual is willing to accept, approximately 5% – 10% women are either lesbian or bisexual and the figure is about 1/2 for men. This means the vast majority are straight and the issue of same sex contact can pose a “mental roadblock,” for some. This means even though the person’s intention at the time was to go through with having the planned threesome, it is possible when they are confronted with the reality of having the second threesome they may change their mind.

 

The above scenario does not take into account other issues such as the first threesome brings up issues that prevents the other threesome from happening, Joseph changing his decision about having his planned threesome, or the issue of seeing their partner having sex with someone else. Nonetheless the two scenarios does highlight such an agreement is fluid and subject to change. This means anyone who makes a quid-pro-quo agreement regarding having a threesome should do so with the understanding that both threesomes are not guaranteed and that the decision is made on incomplete information. If such an agreement can be made with the understanding it is subject to change then hopefully it will limit any damage done to the relationship due to a change in decision.

 

 

36 thoughts on “Problems with quid pro quo as a negotiating position for threesomes

  1. I am of course writing this response as a woman and as someone that has had a threesome MFM FMF with her husband. It is important because there are obvious gender issues that come up along with this entry and for most people when considering a threesome of any kind. Since Mary and Joseph are fictional and we do not know everything about them I can only speak from my own experience and knowledge.

    With my experience single men outnumber single women when it comes to willingness and availability to join a couple. The numbers alone support a very good reason why Mary’s threesome would happen first. Should it happen first, is arbitrary: a threesome would give them the experience they need involving another body and help them to put down some ‘after the fact’ coping skills regardless if it is a woman or a man. Why wouldn’t they be searching for both at the same time and agree whatever sex comes along first is the first as long as the person fits? But you made a point of using the word MUST in regard to Mary’s demands but I don’t know her.

    I have to admit that if my husband was AGAINST another man being involved in my threesome then I would apply the same request to his: I would feel that my fantasies was somehow regarded ‘less than acceptable’ than his, if that were the case we have no reason to involve other people. If my husband was homophobic and could not be mature enough to handle or accept that accidental male on male contact can occur than obviously this would not be the activity for us. A lot of women do not enjoy being sexual with other women but involve them with threesomes for the pleasure of their male partners: there are those that like to watch or agree to light kissing and touching but won’t go down on another woman.

    There are so many wonderful sexual variables out there I think imagination is key.

    Nobody should feel they have to take one for the team in order to get what they want but what you’re right, it might not happen, and the fact that after a serious talk about a threesome and the logistical reality, couples have to also agree that not having one might very well be the last option. I have to be honest and say that it never came up with us as a couple, we talked about it and when the right person and opportunity came along I was confident we could deal: we had a FMF first but we have had twice as many MFM.

    Every study out there depends on how homosexuality is defined! Women are more likely than men to be honest during an anonymous study/servey – women are more likely to be responders.

    For some reason it seems perfectly acceptable in social circles that a woman have a same sex encounter: 11.5 % of women 18-44 admit to at least ONE same sex encounter (CDC) but it doesn’t say if kissing is considered same sex sexual contact but this would mean that there is a very large number of women out there who do not have any sexual contact with other women. You have to remember that women outnumber men in the general population so of course our numbers will appear higher but it does not justify anyone saying ‘ there are more bi sexual women out there so I get to have two women first’. Again 6% of men admit to same sex contact but it does not clearly define what that contact is and men are less likely to respond to surveys.

    Is Mary bisexual? Has she ever been with a woman before? Has she had a FMF MFM in her past? And the same questions go for Joseph. Most couples will take these questions into account when considering a threesome with a partner. I had more group sex experience than my husband but I concluded it to mean he was very capable at handling variations to sex with others I just had to be careful to not assume he was naturally capable of keeping up. I did not feel entitled to have a MFM because he had a FMF first she just happened to have come along first.

    Theory is one thing and doing it a whole other basket of eggs: I get that you are using Mary as the one that might change her mind but again I feel that it could be either of them because the truth is threesomes are risky. If a couple is about keeping a score card I would be less likely to involve them in my sexual activities; Is that really how any couple wants to go along with their sexual adventures together? I am sure it happens but I am sure it is also why I have seen so many things go wrong.

    Another great entry, thank you!
    Pyx

    • Thank you Pyx for your well thoughtful reply. The premise of this article is something that this site has come across a few times where the scenario goes something like:

      Discussion about having a threesome occurs and the other partner in the relationship is open to the idea provided they can have their threesome too. They agree and then after the first threesome one partner changes their mind and does not go through with the second threesome. This creates feelings of anger and resentment for the partner who did not get their threesome.

      In this situation article this author tried to keep it very simple without trying to complicate the discussion and tried to do it from Joseph’s perspective. Joseph is the one who is wanting the threesome and the only way to get it is by agreeing to give Mary’s hers. This is the first threesome experience for both and both are naive about it. In this posting, this author chose Mary to go first since it is easier to find a willing male participant and it is the most common threesome. After the threesome, Mary becomes reluctant about finding another woman for Joseph’s threesome. The reason(s) are irrelevant since the author left open Mary’s decision to change her mind, in order to demonstrate that statements made are fluid that can change when more information is obtained (e.g. after having the threesome). The point that is trying to be made here is using a quid-pro-quo approach to agree about having a threesome is a defective approach that will most likely lead to further problems and the best approach is to agree to one then review the experience before deciding to have the next experience.

  2. I think that quid pro quo is the ‘standard’ negotiating thing to do because, in most cases – and in my experiences – this usually starts with one person wanting something the other person may not immediately agree to so it’s usually, “If you do this for me, I’ll do this for you!”

    If a couple dives right in after making this agreement, that could be a recipe for disaster; it’s better that they take all the time necessary to discuss both sides of this so they can, in effect, test the strength of their relationship because, as you say, things can change at any point in this. I say that thinking that you can deal with seeing your wife having sex with someone else is one thing, watching her do it really something else.

    So while quid pro quo goes hand-in-hand with the way we normally negotiate for things, an in-depth conversation covering all of the pros and cons that can be thought of is, in my opinion, so mandatory it ain’t even funny. And if anyone has any lingering doubts about any of it, by all means, DO NOT DO IT!

  3. If I may, again, I’m liking what Pyx is saying about this! There are a lot of issues that can come up after the fact that’ll break the quid pro quo agreement. Guilt, embarrassment, and jealousy, just to name a few. If some latent leaning toward homosexual sex is uncovered, this could be the end of the QPQ agreement as well.

    I don’t get all into the statistics of failure/success rates; I just know that most of the people I know who have tried this have catastrophically failed and even in the middle of the front end of the QPQ agreement, which will ensure that the second half never happens.

    It really does make one wonder why people try to do this when they’re so ill-prepared to deal with the consequences of their actions.

  4. Pingback: Quid Pro Quo « Thoughtrepostrepository

  5. Pingback: Threesomes and variations

  6. Pingback: Perils of using a friend or co-worker for a threesome « Threesomes and variations

  7. Pingback: Working through a threesome that has gone wrong « Threesomes and variations

  8. Pingback: Planning a threesome – In detail. « Threesomes and variations

  9. Pingback: Meet and greet – no pressure way to meet « Threesomes and variations

  10. Pingback: Moving beyond the initial conversation « Threesomes and variations

  11. Pingback: Having an uncomplicated threesome « Threesomes and variations

  12. Pingback: Couple’s Cuckolding and the ‘what’ scenario « Threesomes and variations

  13. Pingback: Threesome Safety – An Overview « Threesomes and variations

  14. Pingback: Defining threesome, swinging, and open relationship « Threesomes and variations

  15. Pingback: Etiquette of accommodating « Threesomes and variations

  16. Pingback: Relationship requirements for a threesome « Threesomes and variations

  17. Pingback: MFM questions for a couple « Threesomes and variations

  18. Pingback: Questions for a couple to ask the third person « Threesomes and variations

  19. Pingback: Reconnecting afer a threesome « Threesomes and variations

  20. Pingback: Suggesting a threesome – What does it mean? « Threesomes and variations

  21. Pingback: Simulating a threesome « Threesomes and variations

  22. Pingback: Threesome stages « Threesomes and variations

  23. Pingback: George’s & Martha’s threesome adventure – Chapter 2 « Threesomes and variations

  24. Pingback: Why do we choose full-swap threesomes? « Threesomes and variations

  25. Pingback: What does relationship mean in a threesome? | Threesomes and variations

  26. Pingback: How do I ease her into swinging or cuckolding? | Threesomes and variations

  27. Pingback: How do I ease her into swinging or cuckolding? | Threesomes and variations

  28. Pingback: How to have a mfm threesome without being bisexual | Threesomes and variations

  29. Pingback: How to have a threesome: Secret #1- nice to have versus must have | Threesomes and variations

  30. Pingback: How to persuade them to have a threesome: Secret #5 – looking beyond quid pro quo | Threesomes and variations

  31. Pingback: Easing into cuckolding or a threesome | Threesomes and variations

  32. Pingback: 10 things you should know about having a threesome but were afraid to ask | Threesomes and variations

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s