I've messed around, but not been brought to climax by another person, nor brought them to climax. (I do own a vibrator, and have for a decade.)
Is not climaxing or helping someone else to cum part of your morals?
Have Samantha and Taylor also stopped making each other cum (privately or in your presence) for whatever reasons since they started dating you? They've stopped vaginal intercourse. I wonder if they went backwards on the sexual-release piece too? I am just thinking of all of you "fooling around" just shy of the point of climax, and then all going to separate rooms to relieve yourselves in private (!). Or are you anorgasmic?
Perhaps there is a fear of pregnancy on all your parts, and an aversion to condoms or IUDs or hormonal birth control. But that wouldn't/shouldn't stop two women from orgasming together during outercourse (non-penetrative sex).
I'm just throwing ideas out there... I tend to talk things to death. Communication, open and honest, is the number one rule in polyamory, and has been my policy for a long time. (Plus, I come from just outside NYC, and in that culture we speak our minds, no frills, no euphemisms, in general. It can seem rude to people from other parts of the country, I know.)
~In my mind we will all three be married. To me, we are all committed, will all take part in the ceremony, and will all be married. I do realize that wouldn't be a common opinion in the general public or, apparently, on this board.
There are as many ways to do poly as there are people doing it. I have heard, on Reddit, that there are a lot of "one true wayers," but we don't do that here. And we (all poly folk) deal with the "marriage" concept, in a few common ways. Some do a Celtic pagan ceremony called handfasting, for example. Some people have been known to divorce their first spouse and marry the newer partner, while still remaining loving nesting partners with the first. Some never marry or handfast with any of their partners. It's kind of like being gay was until so recently. You could be married in spirit, even if not legally. I pretty much feel that way about my two partners, and I know Pixi feels and acts that way with Malachi and with me.
~ I have read a lot more on this topic than people assume. "Most" of the books/articles linked on the bibliography? Most might be a big word, but close. I've read 2 of the books, part of another, and several of the articles.
So you've read two and a half books and a few articles. I believe I added about 25 books to the reading resources thread. (Edit, I counted; it's actually over 50 books.) Maybe you didn't notice. I am not saying you (or anyone) needs to read that many books (!) but I just wondered if you actually saw the whole thread.
~ We don't really treat ourselves as having an "established" couple with me as an add on. They hadn't been dating long (at all) when we all met, and had only gotten fairly serious in the couple weeks before we met.
In your OP you said:
A little over a year and a half ago I met a couple Taylor (33M) and Sam/Samantha (34f) who had been dating for about four years, and were, at the time, engaged.
Do you mean to imply they only became "serious" when they got engaged? They went from casual to engaged?
I met both of them at the same time and we started hanging out. Sam had always been bi, and one of the concerns of their relationship was only being with a man OR a woman for the rest of her life. They weren't actively looking for a throuple, but had discussed how in a perfect world it could work for them. Then, all of a sudden... we all were hanging out all the time.
To me (and most people) four years of a relationship (and with a full and complete sex life) is much different than an 18-month relationship with no PiV and no orgasms allowed. I don't mean to be rude. I am just super confused at the idiosyncratic "morals" involved here. How are they not more established at four, and now, five and a half years than you with them at 18 months?
~ We aren't all on the EXACT same page about religion and all of this, but close enough that they were willing to respect my wishes. It probably does impact why we are getting married within 18 months of starting, but 18 months isn't exactly 6 months... We still didn't SPRINT.
~ We want to try sharing a bedroom, with the second bedroom being an office space with a bed for when someone is sick.
Also in your OP, you wrote:
I think I lean toward all three of us sharing a bed. I always imagined sharing a bed with my partner, and don't want that to change with two. But I know a lot on here don't like the realities of that for sleeping. My thought is getting a king-sized bed. My main reason is the general intimacy of sharing a bed, but I also like this for sex reasons. Obviously there's no problem with any two of us having relations. It doesn't always have to be a threesome, but I worry with separate rooms it could lead to more jealousy, like, why are those two picking each other more often, etc., and having to discuss/plan if we want to be all active together (which I anticipate being the most common sexual act anyway!). Whereas, sharing a bed, I feel that would mean everyone knows what's going on, has the choice/ability to join in, and can help with jealousy.
I know you felt overwhelmed by my prior questions, which you felt were condescending. I've been poly since 1999, so I am just speaking from experience, as Laminar said.
You've never shared a bed with a bf. And since it seems that this is your first same-sex relationship, you've never shared a bed with a romantic female partner either. You imagine it would be nice to share a bed with one or two people. Sure! It's nice, it's cozy. It can also feel claustrophobic to some, sometimes or all the time. But in the archived thread, we see that people do manage to sleep three to a bed, whether they are in a triad or a V.
However, assuming that sharing a bed will prevent jealousy and FOMO, as you wrote above, is just completely wrong. "Sickness" is not the only reason one member of a triad might not want to share sleep or sex with either of the other members. One dyad may have a better sexual chemistry, or stronger libidos, and want to share sex more often, or for longer, or with a greater intensity than another dyad. This could be any dyad-- you and Taylor, you and Samantha, Sam and Taylor. (And of course, it could vary.) Sex/gender is irrelevant. We've seen mismatched libidos with straight, bi and gay couples.
For example, I have a friend in a triad (she doesn't live with her couple) and the three of them have FMF sex. The guy passes out after his one orgasm, and the women continue for another hour or two. Mightn't the guy want to say, "See ya, girls, have fun" and move to his own bed, or the couch?
Getting pregnant can really mess with your libido, due to nausea, hormones, lack of ability to sleep, etc. And having kids... the kid will want to sleep with the mother that is breastfeeding it, for at least part of the night. You can bedshare with two adults and a newborn/infant, and maybe a toddler, but add in a third adult, you're gonna need a room full of mattresses on the floor. In a couple, sometimes the mom sleeps with the breastfeeding child and the dad sleeps with the older weaned one, so everyone can get the most rest. You don't want a crying infant to wake the toddler, and you don't want a preschooler who is potty training (or having night terrors or whatever) to wake an infant.
Some people (adults) stay up later than others, and come to bed when the early-to-bed person is in a light sleep phase, and disturb the first person. (God forbid they wake the baby, too.) The night owl/robin situation happens with both my bf and gf and me. (We never share sleep all three.) But I go to bed around 11, and my partners both tend to stay up until 2, or sometimes later. If they stay up later, I request they spend the night on the couch, because if they come to bed at 3, I'm in a light sleep phase and generally will be up for the day, and need a nap later, which is annoying as f.