If you indulge her interest, you get to ask her if she wants a shared arrangement. This heavily implies a threesome. This time, the "not tonight" is her saying she's not up for that tonight. She wants a night just with you. As we know, she doesn't even want anything sexual in the first place. However, you can interpret this "not tonight" as her being open for a threesome with that origin companion another time. Regardless of you asking for this, the rest plays out the same as before. You get your first date, nothing more, which means she never meant to share anything more than a bottle with the rest at the party, which is also shown by her sharing it with you on the spot if you double down on going with the other companion.
So that leaves the question of the interpreted interest in a threesome - everything else, you misinterpreted.
Well, guess what. We know what happens with this, too! Screw interpretations, bring on the facts.
Just like I said many, many posts ago, this implied threesome is with another origin companion. And do you know when else such a proposition with other origin companions is made? In act 2. Up to 5 times, including with that same origin companion. And she shuts all of them down. Because she, if she was ever interested in the first place (this is left to interpretation), is no longer interested in it (not left to interpretation, because she shuts the idea down even with the very person that you suggested it with in the first place). This is because she's now in love with you. It's not about asking you for a first date anymore to see if she really likes you. It's her actually really liking you, and thus no longer even considering the idea of what at the party would've been a casual threesome. She's entirely, utterly, mono at this point, and wants only you. That's the character development she went through. Assuming anything other than that is insanity. Just like me making this post was insanity.
(My emphasis added)
This is very helpful, thanks! We are discussing a video game romance. We're all mad here
To use some words you suggested recently. Would you reply to this sentence "would you like a punch in the face"? With: "not tonight"? Perhaps. But if you did you would probably be making a joke. You'd be playing with irony. Because (with very rare exceptions) people don't enjoy being punched in the face. The answer to that question is "no". No, you want don't be punched. You wouldn't say "not tonight" which implies that perhaps you wouldn't mind if I asked the question again on Saturday night.
While this is likely to get me accused of 'flooding' poly comments again - I was once with someone who kept mentioning another person she had a great sexual relationship with. After they were mentioned about 5 times I asked her if she wanted to involve them and the answer was "not at this point, it would be too confusing". But later . . .
So, yes, my interpretation is influenced by life experiences - and Auric and Niara are correct to emphasize that we ALL interpreting - all of us. Humans are flawed creatures and we are forced to interpret the world through the limits of our experience. Hell, we can't even see in the dark! In my experience it's not at all unusual to for a relationship to start with two people and then expand.
I agree with Auric - one SH's boundaries is that she MUST be primary, she is unwilling to be the secondary in the relationship. As someone who is usually the secondary in relationships I found the "spare lover" a bit insensitive but think the author meant it to be coming from a place of pain. In my interpretation - SH who has just had her entire reason living taken from her at the time she commits to the relationship - is looking for an anchor, she needs rock to stand on. But, once her feet are on solid ground, once she feels secure, once she knows Tav won't abandon her she's happy to explore. Backpacking rules apply - establish base camp before you explore.
What is obvious is that "not tonight" was said twice - once in wine conversation, once with the twins and then "tonight" happens.
Btw, how did you extract that text? That was very helpful
