The happy trio, who reportedly have shared a bed for years and say they want to raise a child, took an oath of love in early October in the presence of Rio de Janeiro notary public Fernanda de Freitas Leitao.
"This union is not just symbolic," because it defines "how they intend to have children," attorney Leitao said.
The lovers -- a businesswomen and a dentist who are both 32 and a 34-year-old office manager -- have been together for three years and wish to remain anonymous. Despite salacious media speculation about their supposed love life, they are in fact shy, their lawyer said.
I predict a thorny cake issue.
17 comments:
I thought this was gonna be about waxing.
"Sharing a bed" three ways means someone is always trapped in the middle. I'll start a circular mattress business where "pi multiplied by at least two radicals equals cir-comfortable!"
Their shyness inhibits them from waxing poetically about their love.
I am getting waxed today. love a smooth crack, back and sack.
Al Molinaro from Happy Days died-Troop bait.
tits and muscles.
Does three women makes it somehow more palatable than if a man and two women where to try?
That's how it appears to me.
OK, they say it "defines how they intend to have children" . Doesn't that still require a man someplace?
The lovers -- a businesswomen and a dentist who are both 32 and a 34-year-old office manager -- have been together for three years and wish to remain anonymous
Any Moslems in Brazil?
Adamsunderground said...
"Sharing a bed" three ways means someone is always trapped in the middle
Strap-ons work both ways.
Well, that wouldn't happen to us. We're not a Catholic country.
Dentist to Businesswoman: I'm gonna drill you hard, baby.
Businesswoman to Dentist: Not with your inventory you ain't.
Office Manager: OFFICE SUPPLIES!
Rhythm and Balls said...
Well, that wouldn't happen to us. We're not a Catholic country.
But we're a country of former slave owners, right?
What does slavery have to do with plural marriages, ed? Were the Mormons great slave-owners?
For a thousand years or so, the Catholic Church sanctioned the legitimacy of royal dynasties, while nary a hoot was made over each king's widely acknowledged dalliances, mistresses and illegitimate heirs. Now, after the reformation, it's hard to find a royal house embroiled in what would today be called "scandal" like that. And as regards slavery of indigenous Americans, apparently the Church changed its tune between the 1540s and the 1740s. That's a lot of native slaves and concubines in the interim. But hey, Jesus said that the obedience of slaves was really important.
Note that the religious leader objecting to the development in the trailing quotes is an Evangelical.
My point is that I'm just not sure that a community of supposedly celibate leaders knows how to handle sexual matters at all, but of course YMMV. After all, you're a guy with negligible participation in the economy who also never tires of lecturing others on how it should work.
"Does three women make it somehow more palatable than if a man and two women were to try?"
Less palatable. Freakish in fact. There are probably hundreds of man and two women marriages in the United States alone. No great stretch to understand those arrangements. Lesbians three on the other hand...well, it's disturbing...and almost certainly EXTREMELY unstable.
Unless you're "evolved." Then it's MAHVELOUS, darling!
"Three little maids from school are we,
filled to the brim with girlish glee"
apparently
You would need a picture of the three women involved to reach a reasonable, balanced judgment of this. If the girls were really hot, I would need further details about how they carried out their conjugal duties in order to make an informed decision. If, as sometimes happens among lesbians, the girls are total eyesores I would wish them happiness together and hope to never hear of them again.
Imagine if they sync up their cycles?
Yikes!
Rhythm and Balls said...
What does slavery have to do with plural marriages, ed?
Makes about as much sense as what Ritmo's babbling.
Trooper York said...
Imagine if they sync up their cycles?
Plural divorce in 2 weeks.
"What does slavery have to do with plural marriages, ed?"
Makes about as much sense as what Ritmo's babbling.
Lol. Shorter ed: Ritmo babbles. Therefore, so will I!
Don't ever change, ed. Don't change a thing.
Because both are big parts of Brazil?
And Ritmo's drivel makes about as much sense?
Post a Comment