Category: Dating and Relationships
How many of you would, or could open your relationship up if you knew your lover loved you, wanted you, and desired you, but also had a need to be fulfilled sexually in another way?
An example would be if your lover were bisexual. Could you love them enough to give them that side of their nature too?
I’ll add that you know it will be safe, because they’ll only have one other lover besides yourself?
I pose this question without judgement, but to learn what you all think, feel, and believe?
I would. I've never found a totally gay guy that really interested me, so it would be a must. I wouldn't expect him to totally give up female companionship for me.
I'd like to say that I would be open minded enough for that but I'm not sure. Being that I've never had a relationship where my partner was 100 percent faithful to me, I'd actually like to have one of those first. lol I'm tired of sharing my toys.
Intelectually I'd say yes. Jealousy is something pretty primal though and I cannot honestly answer for sure.
I don't know if I'd be able to maintain totally open for a long period of time.
However, I would definitely try to add things to make the balance more qual.
For example, a threesome would be a nice compromise between two people,
one of whom is bisexual. It allows the bisexual person to have an outlet, and
the heterosexual person to maintain their physical connectedness. I'd be willing
to do some form of compromise like that.
Thanks for the post.
The subject interest me as to what people here believe, or feel.
I’d say that in the gay community a lot of us tend to stray just a little, even if we’re in monogamous relationships. Honestly, I did a one-night stand with a friend of mine a few years ago who has a partner, and the partner was okay with it. I think we could’ve gotten together again this past convention, but it didn’t happen. Me, I’d be into a threesome with two other guys if they were into it. I even proposed it to one half of a male couple I met when I was there, half-joking, of course, and I think he might’ve gone for it but for the fact that according to him, his boyfriend would not have been cool with it. In general though I think we tend to be a little more forgiving on issues of cheating or openness or whatever you wanna call it, than straights.
Straight people can stray as well it's not just a gay thing. As to where I stand, I'm not sure. I like to think I'd be okay with it but hmmm.
Yes, straights do stray, but my point was that maybe gays and straights are wired a bit differently when it comes to straying. My observation is that when one half of a straight couple cheats, strays or however you’d have it, there’s more jealousy. There’s still jealousy among gay males when one party has something on the side, but I still think it’s different, largely because perhaps it’s more expected that a male will stray, so we’re more apt to forgive the straying. Then again, admittedly I’m making a sweeping generalization.
First of all, II'm straight and never have been attracted to a woman. Nor would I want to share my man with another man. I've been married twice and in both cases, my x husbands cheated on me. So what I want now at this point in my life is a relationship with a loving man who puts me first in his life and gives his love unconditionally . I am done with always being second and never being cherished.
I think most people want stability. I don't understand the open relationship thing but that's just me.
Johndy, I too have the same perception about gays, but only the men.
Gay women/Lesbian, seem to tend to stick to one partner at a time until they move on.
In some cases where one partners bisexual, they will have a man for the partner that is bisexual, but he’s not shared, and is only used on occasion for the partner that requires the physical experience to take the edge off her other need.
In that situation, they are sort of like the men, but the extra lover isn’t a one night stand, but a regular trusted friend.
He seems to never be part of the core relationship.
Sometimes he’s used for creating children, because the couple wish to know the father of their child.
I know our views are sweeping as you said, but could you explain a bit more why you think as you do?
I’d like to get your opinion because I’m not gay and my thoughts may not be same?
In the situation I’m referring to, it is not cheating, but understanding for your lover’s needs and desires.
You are still first, and your lover won’t leave you for his or her extra, nor will the extra necessarily be shared.
It is said, opening this door actually keeps you and your partner safe, and stims urge, or desire to cheat.
It builds a stronger bond between you and them.
Thanks for all the post so far.
Yes; that’s why I limited myself to gay males. I think perhaps that men and women may be wired differently in that males, gay or straight, are more apt to stray or cheat than females. Again, this is a generalization, because that’s not to say that females never cheat. In fact, as men and women become mmore equal, it may be that women are catching up in the cheating arena. But if men are more apt to cheat than women, when you have a couple where both parties are male, maybe there’s more of an understanding of the biology of being male. Consequently, where one part of a male couple cheats from time to time, the other half is a little more likely to forgive because maybe he wants the opportunity to cheat himself if it ever arises. Again, though, remember that these are generalizations, and the vast majority of couples, gay or straight, will probably opt for stability, especially as we age.
Okay. Thanks for that.
It is how I view it as well.
No I don't think it's for me.
Having said that though, I was reading up on it quite a bit as my last relationship was ending as he wasn't being intimate with me at all, not that he would have ever agreed to opening it up, and I would have never cheated.
But if I was in a relationship with someone who is happy to compromise with me on things, and be intimate of course (none of which I got from said prev relationship), I wouldn't be into that, no. I think I'd be too jealous ultimately.
I'd like to think so. Since I've shed culturally prescribed norms in that department, I'd like to think so. We humans do, after all, at least want to make each other happy. The trouble always comes in the implementation, sorry for the engineering reference.
Cody's thinking right, I think. I mean, you've got someone who's got a scheme that'll work, if all are into it. Instead of one person either being neglected, or worrying that the other might be feeling neglected. Both could and would happen I suspect.
I have thought on this topic some more. I don't think that it would work for me because I'd be jealous. At least I was when my spouses cheated on me and didn't think I knew. Knowing ahead of time would make no difference to me as far as eliminating the jealousy. I really don't want to share my man with anyone else, neither man nor woman. I try to be open minded and have achieved to a small degree being more so as I've grown and changed over the years. Relationships are fragile enough without introducing a third person into the mix. To me that just means that the needs and wants and behavior of another person must be dealt with. Also, even though there may be a promise that neither person from the original relationship will leave, promises are not worth the paper they are written on as I have surely found out with two divorces. So yes, it all comes down to stability for me.
Lalady, who's to say that having one man would mean he'd be faithful to you? I think you have a false sense between how you *want* things to work, and how things sometimes *actually* work. Because as has been said, everyone wants stability, in whatever form that takes.
As for opening up my relationships, I was listening to a podcast on open relationships the other day, and it made me think in a way I hadn't thought before. Meaning, I think the term "open relationship" applies to more than just opening up a relationship with a partner in a sexual sense. I think the term also signifies that we as human beings need to have open discussions with our friends.
For example, instead of avoiding a difficult conversation with a friend, where they've said something ignorant relating to our disability or some other subject, having an open relationship with our friends means that we'll share our thoughts with him or her without holding back. So instead of letting their comment(s) slide, we'd explain ourselves clearly, so that the other person will hopefully come away with things to think about, if nothing else.
I think Cody is being selfish though, and here is why: saying he'd do a threesome, in order to let a woman fulfill her bisexual needs, shows that he's still putting himself in the equation. What if his woman wants to be with a woman by herself, just as she has time alone with him by herself?
I bring that up, cause I've spoken with Wayne at long length about this, as well as posted my thoughts here, and I think the ultimate expression of love is to allow people to be who they are, rather than trying to control their spirit.
Although this is something I've gone back and forth on, due to my own experiences, I'd have to have open relationships in the future--I have several chronic illnesses, as well as the brain condition I've mentioned, where anything could happen to me at any time.
So, because of all those things, I'd want the person I'm with to be able to feel free to get their needs met elsewhere, when the time comes that I'm unable to meet them. I also want that same freedom for myself, because it's about allowing yourself to love in many forms, rather than being constrained by monogamy.
This may change for me someday, but I don't know that it will, given the fact that there is no cure for any of my conditions/chronic illnesses.
I don't think open relationships are soley good or bad. They are what they are.
Thanks again for all the thoughts here.
I'll not post mine for a while, because I'm interested in what the Zone thinks.
No judgements from me.
It is about what you think, and why, not about what I think.
Yes, Chelsea, we've talked this over, and posted on other topics on related issues. Health being one of them.
Again, thanks for the post. Keep them coming.
I've got a bit of an inferiority complex, so I really don't think I could do this. I’d always be wondering if he (or maybe she?) WAS better, more loving, preferred. I have, sad as I am to admit it, been that guy who dated two different girls at the same time. That's a bit different, in that they didn't know about each other. I was younger then, and at the time I truly felt like I cared about and even loved them both equally. Only later did I realize that even if that was true, it didn't matter. Whether I did or didn't, I was still dividing my attention between two people who deserved to be loved exclusively. That wasn't fair for either of them. And what's more, I don't think I could handle being one of two. That's a double-standard which I'm ashamed to admit I once held. I really believe now that people deserve to be exclusive in someone’s life, and if I could, I’d go back in time and give the old me a very sturn talking to.
Now, I realize what is being discussed here is a bit different. An open relationship suggests that not only are both parties aware of their partner’s divided affections, but are supportive of them. That, to me, is a pretty foreign concept. I basically feel about this the same way I feel about polygamy; I simply can’t wrap my head around how it could work long-term. I would imagine the long-term success rates of relationships like these would be quite low. Of course there are exceptions to every rule.
I agree with Margort in that open relationships are neither good or bad. They are what they are. In my opinion, however, the more people involved in a relationship the more likely there is to be complications, which may lessen the likelihood for success. Maybe I should say that open relationships are not for everyone. Like Remy, I recognize that I have an inferiority complex so to speak and would be insecure about my standing with my core lover. Competition is something that is emphasized from the time we are small children and, whether good or bad, is part of life. That's a whole new can of worms. Maybe in theory, giving permission ahead of time might seem to be a deterrent for cheating. But we are only human and behave and react as humans. Therefore, the outcome could be just as unpredictable as in a traditional relationship should one or more of the three renege or wish to change the terms of the agreement. Yes, Chelslicious, I'm the first to admit that maybe I do have a false sense of how things should be and how they actually work.
A few things here, which I'll address using numbers to hopefully make my thoughts more succinct.
1. There is no competition in an open relationship unless people feel that there is. It is not about who is better than who, or a person wanting to have other lovers because he or she thinks the person they're currently with is inadequate. It's simply about loving who you're with fully, and accepting the fact that no one human being can meet another human being's every need.
2. It is a misconception to think that open relationships present more difficulties than do monogamous relationships--the key word being "open," means that there is effective communication with all involved. And, in the cases where someone's humanity gets the better of them and they fall short or make a mistake, someone in their circle will eventually help them through that, and no one will be worse for wear.
3. Personally, the only thing I own are my actions, my thoughts, and my way of being in the world. I do not, in any way, own another human being--and along those same lines, I want someone to be with me cause they truly wanna be, and if they ever become unhappy, to know that I will wholeheartedly support them in whatever their decision happens to be. Because, the reality is that things change, and so do people. A person may not be fulfilled by their one partner anymore, the person's one partner may not be willing to participate in an activity that is crucial to the other person's happiness, or perhaps things have just gone stale, and there is no reason other than they just went stale, as happens throughout life. You know, the whole thing of, "Sometimes people are in your life for a season, sometimes for a reason, and sometimes to teach you something within a short time that they could not have taught you had they stayed."
4. Another side to this though, is the fact that personally, I want whoever I'm with to have a community to thrive in, when I die. I don't want someone grieving because I was "the one" and now they've lost their heart and soul because I'm gone. I would want them to celebrate my life, and continue to find fulfillment sexually and otherwise, because humans are sexual beings.
All of those points are well stated, and terribly rational Chelsea. The problem, our emotions and feelings are not always governed by our rationality no matter how hard we wish it were otherwise. I am not refuting your statements, but adding the human equation modifier.
I think the problem with your outlook chelsea is that you see posts like
LALadies as saying that open relationships themselves are bad, and/or cause
jealousy, or drama. I don't think that's what she's saying, or I'm saying when I
say I don't know if I could handle one because I'd get jealous too. I'm simply
saying I don't think I could handle being in an open relationship. Not that one
should be jealous if one is in an open relationship. The simple thought of
someone else having sex with the person I love is enough to make me jealous, I
even get that way with x's. Its a problem I am struggling to work on. So I don't
think I'd be cut out for an open relationship. That doesn't mean I think that an
open relationship is worse or more jealous or anything. Its just not my basket of
kittens.
Hmm Chelsea well described.
Cody, it takes guts to acknowledge that. We're all working on stuff, so don't beat yourself up.
Oh I'm not beating myself up Leo. I just know I have a problem with trust and I
need to work on it. Its a natural thing.
I think that Pasco is right on. It's easy to say that there would be no competition or jealousy or any of those human emotions, but reality is we are human and cannot escape emotion or reacting in a way that we know is undesireable sometimes. I already do in some aspects of my life and I don't think that I'm that different than most people when it comes to behaving like the human I am. Not to say that we aren't all different to some degree, but expressing emotion, after all, is what defines us as humans rather than animals. Yes, and maybe sometimes it would be easier to be an animal rather than human when it comes to relationships. Hahaha.
And what animal would you be lalady?
Okay, back to serious.
Again, thanks all for your thoughts, feelings, and reasons.
There's no right or wrong answer guys, just so you know.
It's all in what we as individuals would feel comfortable with.
Nowhere in my posts did I say that being in an open relationship means that one's humanity doesn't show itself. Of course it does; for anyone who thinks that's what I was implying, think again.
I simply said that if one feels jealous in an open relationship at times, it's that person's responsibility to own that feeling, and to fix it themselves. Whereas, when people are in monogamous relationships, they feel it's their partner's duty to fix the thing. There's a huge difference between the two.
Also, what I think some people fail to grasp, is the concept that there are just some people in the world, myself among them, who are not jealous. Jealousy is literally not in our nature, because we come from a place of happiness--I'm not saying that we're happy all the time necessarily, but rather, that we handle things with ease and calmness, rather than high stress/frustration/what have you. (Wayne, I'm sure you know what I'm getting at, so feel free to elaborate on that, as I'm not sure I'm conveying myself exactly how I'm trying to).
Actually, I guess one way to say what I'm trying to convey, is that people who believe open relationships suit them, are not as uptight as monogamous people seem to be, hence the misconceptions and assumption that being in an open relationship somehow makes things more difficult.
Thanks again for the post.
I'm here to learn what people think. I'm not going to agree, disagree.
I would like to understand thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and why we have them.
No judgements.
Something else I meant to address, is that Remy touched on the fact he's seen two women at the same time, and even liked what those women offered him. So what I'm wondering is, if you truly enjoyed the women as you say you did Remy, why are you now trying to convince yourself otherwise? Why do you feel that the women you were with "deserved" someone who would love them and only them? Because obviously, they liked being with you, if what you wrote is true. So if they loved it, why would you wanna project something different and unwanted onto them?
Chelsey, that was his past. As has been stated, there is no right or wrong answer. So why then are you trying to persuade people to think as you do? You are taking an open discussion and turning it into an argument.
Chelsea, the answer to your question is simple: They didn't know they weren't the only one I was seeing. I know for a fact neither would have been okay sharing, because to them, this was a monogamous relationship. My actions, as I stated, are not ones I am proud of. This is of course different than an open relationship where there is an acknowledgement that the relationship is not exclusive. Had both known of the other, and been okay with it, it still would not be right, because I would not have wanted to share either of them. Hense the double-standard. I justified my actions at the time by acknowledging that I don’t do well alone, and if one relationship did not work, the other might. And I truly convinced myself that I cared about both of them in equal measure. They each provided something different to my life. Personally, I believe everyone deserves someone who will love them unconditionally and exclusively. Sure, there are some people who might not need that, but without statistics to back me up here, I still don’t think it’s a stretch to say they are probably the minority. Most of us want to feel important to someone. Hense why I believe what I did was wrong. and I have spent many years beating myself up over it, even though I’m in touch with neither girl any longer. I have paid for my actions, physically and emotionally, and I have changed my way of thinking.
I'm not arguing with anyone, I'm simply having an open discussion, as you all are. Not just that, but if someone doesn't want certain things to be talked about, they should not bring them up in the first place. It just so happens that something Remy brought up made me think, so I commented on it. No malicious intent, just honest, thought-provoking discussion.
Moving on. Remy said something in his last post that is exactly why I believe open relationships are best. Both girls he was with, added something different to his life--that's exactly the point I've been trying to get across here, is that everyone brings different things to the table, whether we're talking about a friendship, or an open relationship.
In the case of an open relationship, as I said in an earlier post, it's impossible for one partner to meet another person's every need, no matter how it's sliced. So, when someone is in an open relationship, that frees up the burden of the person needing to feel like they're someone's everything, and instead, he or she can rest assured that they're free to love without limits.
Also, an aspect of this that most people seem to be missing here, is that just cause a person likes what they like, doesn't mean their bisexual girlfriend's female lover, also likes what the guy likes. People don't seem to be considering the fact that not everyone's needs are the same. That’s why I called Cody out on his saying he'd only allow his woman to have a threesome, cause maybe she doesn't want that, nor does her female lover. Maybe her lesbian lover is more kinky than the guy is, so things between all three of them wouldn't mesh anyway. It could be any number of things, most of which no one here considers or believes to be true.
Again, I'm not attacking anyone's beliefs, nor telling anyone that they should see my way or else; I'm simply stating my beliefs. This happens to be a subject I'm passionate about, because I feel it's the greatest gift a human being could give themselves and those in their circle (whether platonically or romantically).
It is true that in some cultures, what we would call open relationships are the norm, not the exception. Cheating has always gone on with both genders in all times of history engaging in it. I have always thought that our penchant for monnogomy may be more an artifact of up bringing than something natural. Even those who strongly believe in monnogomy may, if circumstances are right, stray. Or, maybe it is just a personal choice which varies from person to person like so many other preferences in sex. I agree with Chelsea on one thing though, love, and the giving of love, whether platonic, or romantic is a wonderful and often not appreciated gift.
Ah but an open relationship cannot be called cheating because both partners understand that they are free to introduce others into the relationship.
A few things here. To answer your first question, Forereel, I don't judge those who are in open relationships, but I know that for me, it would not work, and I have no desire for it. I am monogamous, and in order to be with someone, they would need to be as well. It's like any other set of beliefs or ideas. There are some things that can be worked with, some things that are deal-breakers, and someone wanting an open relationship with me would be a deal-breaker.
Margorp is right in post 38. I've seen the words open relationships and cheating used on this board as if they're synonomous. They are not. Cheating is when any party in the relationship is not aware that someone else is involved. An open relationship is the polar opposite, where all parties are aware of just who is involved, the degree of said involvement, etc. That's the distinction: that everything is above board in an open relationship. Or rather, that should be the distinction. What I just described is the ideal, not always what happens.
Which leads me to Chelsea's statements in post 23. Chelsea, it was very well-written, but described the ideal of how an open relationship is supposed to work. It's what those who are involved in such relationships say to describe why they do what they do. However, I have quite a few friends who are in these types of relationships, and I have had a front-row seat to see that's not actually how it works in real life. There is competition, there is jealousy, and too often one party expects another in the relationship to be the one responsible for fixing it. Those things aren't just limited to monogamous relationships. BTW, people in general should take responsibility for their own issues and feelings, whether monogamous, poly, or otherwise. That's only adult. Monogamy should not be used as an excuse for avoiding taking responsibility for one's own issues and expecting someone else to fix the problem.
Depending on how much I trust the person, I'd say yes. I get paranoid easily though, so if I was okay with it, I may then not be in the future. However, I hope I'd be accepting enough so that they could.
Both Chelsea and Alicia are making a lot of sense here.
Now bear in mind, I'm talking about myself here, and not drawing assumptions
about others.
I don't know if I'm truly monogamous by nature or not. All I know is, the culture
I was raised in trained me for monogamy as a practice. Frat boys and similar
types were the ones with lots of girls at a time. Words like "Commitment
issues," "Peter Pan Syndrome," and other shaming language were the fences
designed to keep young men monogamous and looking for "the one."
All that being said, I'm not out to change the relationship I'm in now. I know
She is definitely monogamous, and I understand that. What would happen if I
was single now, with what I know now? In all honesty, I can't really answer
that.
Like Alicia, I don't think polyamory is some holy grail of relationships. But from
a biological standpoint, we're "set up" for multiple sexual partners. Male homo
sapiens and probably previous hominid species have three types of sperm:
Offensive, defensive and fertilization. The offensive sperm are the ones who
"fight off" competing sperm -- sperm from another male. The defensive sperm
serve as the "honor guard" around the fertilization sperm, who ultimately
fertilize the egg.
This is called "Internal sexual selection" meaning unlike gorillas, we don't fight
with each other and end up with a whole harem of females.
Now in opposition to that, humans tend to "pair off" in relationships designed to
raise young. Some studies of the human brain show that the pair bond initially
worked for around 5 years -- the time period necessary for a human to be old
enough not to need its mother. Seems outlandish to us, where we have such a
long and protracted childhood now, even with millennials being called "emerging
adults" instead of young adults now.
So it seems humans have this tension between a long-term pair bond and
multiple sexual partners. Of course, it's possible that cultures didn't always see
exclusive sex as part of the pair bond. That has come more as a result of states
and civilizations, where everyone is assigned a number, every child a pair of
parents, and every pair of parents responsible for x number of children.
Monogamy is very efficient at creating factory workers, killing machines and
other things necessary to wipe out competing societies. Hence the most
dominant and colonialist of societies are all monogamous.
For that reason, I don't know how well polyamory as a construct will survive.
It's not as efficient at creating killers and conquerors. Even the nuclear model
that conservatives tend to love so much, is largely a product of the industrial
revolution. And one can see just how efficient it actually is: Separate families in
to the smallest cohesive unit possible, so skills can be moved into economically
suitable areas. Son or daughter leaves mom and dad in order to go where the
wark is. Get both parents working, you now pay each parent less money and
tax that money on an individual basis. There are a lot of ways where mixed
families aren't as competitive as the "beloved" nuclear model, merely from a
Prussian efficiency standpoint.
Clever were the propagandists who ever made it out to be something admirable
and lovey dove, as opposed to the efficient creator of GDP and military power.
But on an individual level, to be honest, I actually don't know what I would be in
other circumstances. I find topics like this interesting, because we humans have
this propensity to say: "I would never!" to the unfamiliar. For me at least,
anymore I more often say that I really don't know.
Alicia, I'm sorry to hear that you've only seen the ugly side of open relationships and are therefore making inaccurate judgments based off what you've seen. However, what you've seen by no means indicates that that's everyone's reality. Clearly, that's what some of your friends experience, and that's fine. However, to say that what I was describing is only ideal, is simply untrue. Because, as I've said, the reality is that most people are jealous--that is a fact; you and others have admitted it. That's the key word though: most--I know it's hard to imagine/believe, for those of you whose nature is to be jealous, but not everyone experiences the same thing. As I've said, I'm not a jealous person, by any means.
Another thing is, I find it interesting in how people identify themselves; some use the term poly, and others use the term open relationship, as I do. For me personally, using the term open relationship is best, because it's the best description of how I view things should be in all relationships. Because, not everyone is totally honest about how they feel with their mother, brother, whoever they can be, as it relates to this particular discussion. I'm not saying that everyone should scream from rooftops about their relationship style, cause there are many situations where it would do nothing but harm those involved. What I am saying though, is simply this: having discussions like this opens more doors for people than does any other relationship style. It allows people to be free, and to not feel any kind of negative emotion that society tells us we should, when we love more than one person. And here is yet another thing: if people let go of those negative feelings/insecurities of jealousy more easily, those things in themselves would allow for more freedom, and relaxation as a whole.
I mean, take Remy, for example. He says that he's suffered for years about having dated two women in the past...and there is just no reason for that. It doesn't have to be that way, is all I'm saying. However, I understand it's thanks to religion--that's one reason the older I get, the more I realize I'm not the kind of Christian most Christians would welcome into their circle, because I'm not deeply religious the way most are. In fact, I'm always quick to tell people that I believe in God, but in a more loose term than the majority of society does. However, I'm not trying to derail the topic; I just wanted to say that cause I feel it's part of the discussion, for me.
Once again.
Thank you all that are posting.
I’d like to do a little interjecting.
I’m not referring to polyamory.
My reason for saying this, is I think of polyamory as a relationship were all share in a house, or among all the partners.
Open on the other hand doesn’t necessarily mean you share your partner’s other relationship, whatever that may be.
Your partner is free to have another one without you, and has the choice to share the person or not.
But, that person never invades your home, such as in a marriage were a man has several wives, or a relationship were two men might share one woman between themselves.
What if we took sex out of the mix, but left the rest intact?
Margorp, you wrongly characterize my comment. I did not equate cheating with open relationships. My point was that even in societies where monnogomy is the norm and is expected behavior, cheating takes place. This has always been true historically. So, no matter what the prohibitions, no matter what the punishment, even death in some times and places, it still goes on. It seems that human nature asserts itself and the more repressed the individual, the harder the fall. How many big time famous church leaders and conservative politicians who aggressively push monogamy have fallen off the wagon? Almost all I know of. This says to me that, as another person stated here, human nature tends towards multiple partners if not at the same time, then serially. Knowing this intelectually though does not dictate how I will personally feel about it. We all are influenced more or less by our up bringing, and our belief system, regardless of what is biologically natural.
Wayne, thank you for clarifying what I was just coming here to post.
To elaborate on what you last wrote though, if I do use the term poly to identify myself, I'd put the word "solo" in front of the word "poly." Meaning, I'm solo poly, which means that I don't share a place with anyone, nor do I intend to. I value my alone time, my space, managing my own grocery shopping, managing my own finances, ETC. Whereas, when people think of poly by itself, there's an assumption that those involved share these things with others.
Another thing solo poly means to me is that I don't need nor want to have a primary partner--that is yet another thing people think of when poly by itself is discussed. I just want to date people, and allow those relationships to develop authentically, without pressure or the usual expectations most have when they're dating someone (they wanna settle down with a person, be exclusive, ETC).
Wayne, not all who call themselves poly live with their partners, or are married, etc. So I guess I'm a little confused by the point you were trying to make in post 43. Not trying to oppose what you said, just trying to understand it.
Hi, this is a rather interesting discussion. I would love to find someone that I can share the rest of my life with. but, I don't honestly think I would be happy to share my partner. I agree with Rdfreak on the jellous side. and I've always had a fassenation with the name jim for a relationship with a man. I just love the name jim
I unfortunately at this point in time, very sadly don't have a partner in my life. I would love a man with the name jim to share the rest of my life with. but I wouldn't be willing to share my jim with anyone else. I also agree with rdfreak about being jellous if I was to go down the path of sharing.
Alicia, what Wayne says in post 43 is correct. People who identify as poly do share their house, finances, ETC, with their partners. That is why I went out of my way to clarify that I don't identify as such myself, because I don't want people having the wrong idea about how I live.
From my time experiencing and researching this subject, a group that identifies as poly in the technical terms sense, means a group of people that share a life.
That means they are a group that are either married, live under one roof, or share expenses, children, if they have some, family.
Sometimes in places, a male that is head of his group much provide each wife her own house, but they are still a family.
Now, in an open relationship, you have no family.
You don’t share your expenses, or even your life with all your partners, only the main partner.
The extras, or occasionals are for pleasure, a change of pace, or just a casual interest.
Maybe the extra in my first example fulfills the partners other sexual nature, in that she or he is bisexual, so require a same sex partner.
Open relationships are open so that the people involved in the main relationship can experience others without losing, or having to share family, and what I call their living.
The main couple is a unit, the others are extras.
Thanks again for all your post.
Thanks Wayne, that was eloquently put.
Hell no. I can barely cope as it is.
I don't judge people in open relationships.
See while I'm single I have no issues sleeping around, and my many partners sleeping around. At the end of it all, I do not love them, and we are only looking for pleasure. There are no strings attached.
Once I'm in a relationship it's locked down for me. When I love someone, I really love them. It makes me sick to my stomach to think of my boyfriend going off to sleep with another woman. I'm a very jealous woman. And before people jump the gun, I have no issues with the friends he keeps, lots of them are women. I talk to a lot of men, but straying is a no no.
I also understand that people will always find someone attractive, I just don't wanna know about it. I just want to be number one, that's it. So definitely can not handle a open relationship.
I don't feel this makes me immature, I think it has to do with me as a person. If I stray from my relationship, it's because I'm not really in love, the person I do care for, but them as a partner does not do a thing for me. That means bad business and I have no reason to remain a couple with that person.
So if my lover strays, they can go on their way.
Again, thanks for all your post.
Your thoughts and views are interesting.
I want to say straight up, I don't share nicely or easily. I am just too insecure and selfish, and I give all of myself to whoever I'm with and don't want less from him. Long ago I tried to give that to someone--he was hetero as well--and it just wasn't comfortable for me.
At least in my generation, society trained us that, when you fell in love with someone, that was it. I am a product of that training, and I expect to ride off into the sunset and live happily ever after. A lot would depend on how we handled things together, whether he was honest with me about it. If I felt betrayed by him, then the trust issue comes up, and I don't know if I could trust him anymore.
I have been in several relationships, and I never want to share! I don't care if it's selfish, and it really hasn't got much to do with insecurity, it's like going to a live concert and having a damper on the music, yuck!
Good analogy.
Thanks for all the post.
Any more ideas on this, post them.
I don't blame people for not sharing. I couldn't do it but that's just me.
Seems to be the norm.
Honestly, good for those who are ok with an open relationship, but I couldn't
do it. The idea of my partner being with somebody kills me. What ever
happened before me and after me us fine but not while we are together. Nah,
nope, can't do it.
Interesting discussion. I am actually reminded a little of the society portrayed in Aldis Huxley's utopian novel Brave New World, in which "everyone belongs to everyone else." He said when he wrote this book in the thirties, he believed it was possible something similar to his world could happen in a a couple hundred years. When revisiting that idea in the fifties, at the way society was changing, he believed it could happen a lot sooner. Granted, in this novel, relationships as we understand them are considered "bad", and it's really all about having sex and having fun. But it is interesting to see how one character who is favoring spending quite a bit more time with one partner than is socially acceptable is treated. You can indeed see how society has changed and grown far more tolerant of casual sexual encounters. Now to some people, commitment and loyalty is not held in nearly the same regard as it was in Huxley's time.
Interesting post. Thanks for it.
That's interesting! I always wanted to find characters in books who would have a relationship like this but I never found it! Which maybe means how closed the society is about such issues!
I've read Brave New World now as an adult several times. It's a bit myopic in
some ways.
Huxley presents only an unrealistic Shakespearian romantic ideal in John the
Savage, an ideal Shakespeare himself didn't believe in but thought made great
theater. Shakespeare himself got his girlfriend pregnant before they were
married, among many other things.
And that comparison with the extreme opposite end. I think people who are
afraid of changes are quick to jump to this very simplistic view, while even the
Shakespeare part was described in an extremely inaccurate portrayal. In fact,
the works chosen to quote from fit the 19th-century Victorian ideal, when there
were plenty of other, rather racy quotes. Even in Othello! I believe it was that
work where a suitor asks to lay with his head in the lady's lap and she rebuffs
him. He then recounts how wonderful it is to lay with the head between a
maiden's legs.
Your Victorian propagandists deliberately left a lot of things out from prior eras.
I don't understand this "not wanting to share" business. When I eat a food I like, I wanna share it with others so that they may taste the greatness too--the same applies to having relationships with people. I'm not likening relationships to food, but simply using that as a way to explain my thinking. I'm sure others think differently, and I did too at one point. For me, having the chronic health issues and life-threatening conditions I have, are what have shown me that the ultimate act of love is to recognize when you cannot provide for someone and allow them to find fulfillment elsewhere. I don't wanna tie anyone down, nor do I wanna be tied down myself--if we can't enjoy ourselves for the beautiful and complex human beings that we are, as we're able to be in the here and now, then there's a huge problem.
You compare people to food? Lol I couldn't resist that one. I just don't understand why you would bother getting into a relationship only to share that person. It's that same line of thinking that gives us such stupid phrases as "it is what it is" and "that's how it goes." We've completely stopped caring about anything and we just la dee da our way through life.
I agree with you Margort. It just doesn't make sense to me to get into a good relationship that has taken time to develop only to bring in another person that hasn't spent the time or effort to grow the relationship. As a matter of fact, it is possible that bringing in another person could create problems that could break up the original two. I believe that it would require very unique personalities of all three involved for there to be any hope of success.
I could never do that, but I do appreciate some others can. but the moment that my lover would be with someone else sexually, is the moment I would stop wanting them sexually. I only want one lover, so they should only want me too.
And that's what this really boils down to. Everyone deserves happiness in human relationships. So if like-minded individuals find that it works for them, then they will be happy with it. But that's the real issue, making sure the people involved are indeed like-minded and open to "sharing". I'd venture the vast majority of people are not willing to share their partners for a variety of reasons. Others are. So, seek out thy own and live thy life I suppose.
Oh yes, and don't have double standars. If you're not going to be someone's one and only, don't expect to be a persons, either.
Thanks for all the recent post.
Yes, Remy. You said it much better than I did. I agree with your comments entirely.
Every one of you all who posted after my last post on this topic, loves more than one person, right? You love your wives or girlfriends, your mother, father, siblings if you have them, ETC. So you do love more than one person, just in different ways. Well, that's what being in a relationship with more than one person is about--we're willing to admit that we love more than one person in our lives. We respect ourselves and humanity as a whole, enough to know that human attraction to other people is just a part of life and embrace that wholeheartedly.
Not in the way I love a significant other. There is more than one type of love. I
love my guide dog, but that doesn't mean I love my grandmother, or future wife
any less. They're different types of affection. I simply can't share the romantic
kind of affection with more than one person.
Yeah there are different types of relationships. You don't love your iPhone or computer in the same way you love your Mom, Dad, family in general or significant other, right?