Cast changes

Things have shaken up a bit in my love life.

L has moved away and entered a monogamous relationship, so we’re extra not seeing each other.  We still talk and I still owe her a box of her stuff, and I promise I’ll send it next week, sorry, you knew I forgetful when you left it with me.  Every time the Big!Andy plushie looks at me out of that box I feel a little guilty.

I’ve also relatively recently started seeing a couple of new folks. I’m going to have to come up with a new anonymizing scheme, though, because at this point there have been three different As mentioned here, and it’s only a matter of time before we double up on initials.  What I’ve decided to do is to use the official D&D Name Generator.

Eilella Glimmergaunt (neutral good Elven Loremaster, previously known as “E”) is a grad student at Brown to whom I owe a picnic that keeps either getting rained out or delayed because of my hectic schedule and/or terrible mood.  Eilella is lots of fun, but quite shy, which is an interesting contrast with my own boisterous nature. She is very physically affectionate, which is nice; I’m naturally very physical, but I tend to hold it back a little until I determine someone else’s comfort level.

Stoella Tumblebelly (chaotic neutral* Halfling Monk) is a comic artist, ertswhile roller girl, and kung fu nerd in the sense of knowing a lot of kung fu rather than being a huge fan of kung fu movies (the latter may also be true, we haven’t really discussed it).  Stoella got me out to my first roller derby match, which was excellent, as was the afterparty; I definitely intend to go to more of these.

I still occasionally see Aliella Serpenthelm (chaotic good human cleric of humanism), who is a good friend but is at least considering monogamy with her prime beau, so hanky panky is on hold and/or over.  We have a great time, but this doesn’t count as “seeing” as per my glossary post at this point.

And of course as always there is my soon-to-be-bride, your Other Protagonist, Carrie (Carella Chorster, neutral good human ranger with a feline animal companion, not that she needs the anonymity).  We are now two weeks out, scrambling to put the finishing touches on the wedding plan and get the guest list settled (yes, we’re still sort of working on that).  She’s also about to take a trip to Rome for the week before the wedding, which is awesome and also hilarious.

There are a few bit players out there who may drift in and out and will get character sheets as appropriate, but this is basically the people with whom I’m romanticosexally involved at the moment.  Your mileage may vary, not all ingredients listed, terms subject to change.

(Also, L will be known as Lady Lorasys Woodsoul, neutral half-elf wizard.  If you’ve been mentioned before and you want me to update you with a new character, let me know and I’ll add it.)

*Stoella has insisted that she is chaotic neutral, as opposed to the chaotic good that I originally had down.  I am not one to get on the bad side of a halfling monk, so I’ve made the requisite change.

Advertisements

Dear attractive internet person

Hello there!

I find your pictures attractive and your profile non-repulsive.  I have therefore come to the conclusion that if I were to put my penis inside you, a good time would be had by all, and that we’d both find each other interesting enough to navigate the process.  I suspect that, on seeing my pictures and reading my profile, you will reach the same conclusion.

I propose the exchange of several internet messages during which neither of us brings this up.  After 3-6 messages on each side, we should meet in person and also not discuss these conclusions.  At the end of that meeting, I will make some sort of physical advance, without, of course, verbally acknowledging it ahead of time, and you will either accept that advance or clumsily reject it.  In the latter case, I will apologize, as will, for some reason, you, and we will laugh nervously and make plans to repeat the process.

If, instead, you accept the advance, we will begin another clumsy, non-verbal (of course) process of fits and starts where I will attempt to escalate the contact.  You know, of course, that my end goal is naked body rubbing, as do I, and you have already decided how far toward that we will progress this evening, but of course neither of us will discuss this because that would be weird.  If you do stop me, we will follow the laugh-nervously-and-reset process outlined previously.

Over the course of one or more evenings of this, assuming no major faults on either side (you’re not a juggalo/ette, right?), we will achieve the naked rubbing end goal that both of us have been planning on since we first saw each other’s photos.  It is at this point that we will find out if our sexual styles and abilities are in any way compatible with and enjoyable to one another.  If not, one or both of us will awkwardly avoid contacting the other one until one or both of us gives up.

Assuming that it works out, though, congratulations!  We may now discuss sex.  Also, you can let out that fart.

Sincerely, or as close to it as cultural restraints will allow,

–Nick

A relevant conversation

vis a vis the last post

L: heh, right
would it be enough to have one bool and one int?
boolean isLookingForMore, int currNum
this way you can avoid hypercubage
so single + searching is (1, 0)
‘seeing someone’, in the traditional monogamous way is (0, 1)

me: hm.

L: though this doesn’t give a good way to show weight among relationships
oh, hah, if you make it two ints, you could potentially say “I am searching for this many more”, “I have this many”

me: That works. I mean, provided you’re seeing fewer than 2^16th people.
We could use a collection, and let people put whole objects in the “looking for” bit.
See, this is where weak typing is useful.
var relationships = [
“has” : [“wife”, “girlfriend”, “boyfriend”],
“seeking” : [“slave”, “mistress”]
]

L: hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

me: Then you could test for Nick.seeking(Str) and see if it shows up.

Juggling

Having really just started learning the logistical gymnastics of dating two people at once, I’m even more in awe of those who manage a handful of simultaneous capital-R Relationships.  Trying to make sure that the proper amount of time is spent with Carrie and that I still see L once a week or so has been taxing, even more so when one adds in the demands of a non-doin’-it social life.  In an email exchange with a friend recently, she indicated that she’s seeing someone new and that someone has five simultaneous relationships.  I’ve been pondering this, and have come to the conclusion that that does not, in fact, fit into a mortal person’s 168-hour week.  I have a few theories as to how this can be managed, though:

  1. A time-turner would make this trivial, and frankly this would be a much better use of it than trying to cram 25 credit-hours into a semester.  No, this does not mean that Emma Watson is poly, shut up.  At least, not to the best of my knowledge.
  2. Some sort of self-replication would also work, but in most portrayals only one body is the real body, and then you have to rotate that around so as to avoid offending someone, I’d imagine.  Or else the primary body just stays home with your primary? Also allows triad or V relationships that only include two people, or, for two replicators, the ability to be both polyfidelitous and monogamous.
  3. Robotic impostors are an intriguing path, although you’d be missing out on part of the fun.  Plus, they would inevitably rise up against their human masters, but hey, maybe you’re a switch and that’s okay.
  4.  One could also spend time with multiple people by astrally projecting. One obvious problem with this path is that there wouldn’t be any touching, but I think you’d probably sully your chakras and end the projection if you tried, regardless.  Plus, it’s not about the sex, right?
  5. Combining one and two, a Time Lord would probably have no trouble with this sort of thing.  One question: is it still poly if you’re dating two different incarnations of the same man? And if so, can I get Ten and Eleven at the same time?
  6. Of course, if you don’t experience time in a linear manner, I suppose you can’t have anything but nonmonogamous relationships, as you’re seeing everyone you’ll ever see all at the same time, which sounds like a hell of a party. One that my ex-fiancée would ruin, I’m sure.