On May 31 2019 14:58 oBlade wrote: I'm less offended by people cheating in closed monogamous relationships than people using made-up words to justify their.lifestyle. Like they're the first people in history to discover sleeping around. Some sort of hubris. Or it's a kind of insecurity to need that. Like basically you don't know who you are but you see a "community" all doing the same thing so it makes it okay. In such an important part of life people should be thinking for themselves, stuff like this is the pendulum swinging against sexual repression but it seems to be equally poorly thought out.
All words are made up. Monogamous is a word some people made up at some point. Reality changes and vocabulary changes to accommodate it.
Personally I can't believe people would have problems with honesty in a relationship. As if saying sorry I won't date you if you want to be sexually exclusive is somehow worse than keeping that part of you hidden get married and have kids and then have some secret affair before shit comes out; your marriage explodes because you've been dishonest about your needs and then have traumatized kids that can't build healthy relationships because some people thought monogamous was a real word that is associated with good people.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
Well, for me, I don't like the entire favoring one person over another because I know for a fact there's a dime dozen literally everywhere. Edit: I have to clarify. Obviously there will be more attraction or less depending on the person and you'll have automatic preferences. I just like to believe that there are enough people for me to love and spend time with because I know there are a substantial amount of people that meet my criteria.
I can understand committing to 1 person to turn to, though, but that's just not the way I'm wired.
The concept of a best friend becomes muddied at a certain point. There might be a person you meet that aligns almost perfectly with you, but for me this doesn't necessarily mean you need to commit to that one person. It just means that you can figure out more easily what the person needs when they need it and that that person can help you when you need it. Support becomes easier because you understand each other more easily than you do other people. It's something that seems analogous of the path of least resistance.
Also there's more than one way to look at how you want to 'bond' with other people. For me it's providing emotional support, nurturing personal and financial growth, meeting physical needs, etc. And I feel I can do that for more than one person instead of focusing on that one person.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
Just to present a view: I married my best friend. We got together somewhat randomly, started making out before we even talked to each other much, turned out we are a really great fit (which seems super unlikely, as we are both quite incompatible with majority of people) and we became better friends than I would ever imagine people can be. I had never had sex with anyone else, so it's hard for me to judge, but it would just feel soooo weird having sex with someone who is not as close to me.
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
I'm going to spend so much more time with my spouse than any other person. I'll be sleeping next to her hopefully every night. Sharing multiple meals together, cuddling on the couch watching whatever, going shopping, reading to each other, etc. If that person isn't my best friend, we won't make it. What you described as a happy marriage, isn't one to me. I want to get to know every part of my future wife and I hope she feels the same about me. If I can't let myself be completely vulnerable around her, we aren't ready to get married yet or maybe even shouldn't. We just have different views on marriage is. Which is probably why divorce rates have been steadily climbing.
Well, there are also people who get off by watching their SOs get screwed by other men/women. I could never understand that, it's basically a murder scenario to me.
Humans are weird creatures man. I wish things were as simple as that Rammstein song called Pussy.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
So everything in the bolded is 100% stuff I agree with. This is all stuff you should have in an open, pair bonded relationship. The other people you see are just sex partners, and they are always secondary to your actual girlfriend/pair-bond/wife.
On June 03 2019 04:16 Uldridge wrote: Well, for me, I don't like the entire favoring one person over another because I know for a fact there's a dime dozen literally everywhere. Edit: I have to clarify. Obviously there will be more attraction or less depending on the person and you'll have automatic preferences. I just like to believe that there are enough people for me to love and spend time with because I know there are a substantial amount of people that meet my criteria.
I can understand committing to 1 person to turn to, though, but that's just not the way I'm wired.
The concept of a best friend becomes muddied at a certain point. There might be a person you meet that aligns almost perfectly with you, but for me this doesn't necessarily mean you need to commit to that one person. It just means that you can figure out more easily what the person needs when they need it and that that person can help you when you need it. Support becomes easier because you understand each other more easily than you do other people. It's something that seems analogous of the path of least resistance.
Also there's more than one way to look at how you want to 'bond' with other people. For me it's providing emotional support, nurturing personal and financial growth, meeting physical needs, etc. And I feel I can do that for more than one person instead of focusing on that one person.
First, I do agree with you strongly that you can do support and bond with multiple people. Much of what you say is indeed, something I know you can do as a person. That said...
This sounds like advocating for relationships with multiple people, perhaps even loving multiple people. I question whether or not one can truly love more than one person, I really do. You'll always have one person you like or prefer more than the others and there WILL be other significant people in your life competing for your attention.
That competition for attention always causes problems. When you're close to people and dating them, it's going to bother you when you want to spend time with someone else, but you're second to a different person and don't get to spend the time or closeness you desire. You'd basically have to be perfectly matching everyone's desired closeness and intimacy perfectly, which just isn't realistic.
I'm pretty involved with open relationships and such things, and I've never, ever heard of this working for a long time (let's say 10+ years) and being low drama. I've met a few cases where couples are still "together", but one or both parties are consistently unhappy and very high drama.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
Just to present a view: I married my best friend. We got together somewhat randomly, started making out before we even talked to each other much, turned out we are a really great fit (which seems super unlikely, as we are both quite incompatible with majority of people) and we became better friends than I would ever imagine people can be. I had never had sex with anyone else, so it's hard for me to judge, but it would just feel soooo weird having sex with someone who is not as close to me.
Why?
You've presumably hooked up before and that didn't feel weird at all. Maybe it sucked, maybe it didn't, but most people I know that are attractive enough and social enough to have social experiences have some excellent memories of sexual adventures that rank pretty high up on some of their best/most exciting/most fun life memories. We are wired to enjoy sex as humans. This is obviously in your case since you were being sexual with your wife before you'd even talked much.
Inherently, you have no problems being sexual with someone you don't know well.
So, what's the issue? Probably, it's societal conditioning. I suspect you either can't picture it as an honest thing or you know/suspect in the back of your head your wife wouldn't approve, or that society wouldn't approve, or something similar and it's giving you a weird vibe. This is all your conditioning though, and logically I have yet to hear a solid defense of such thoughts (assuming your wife was okay with such a relationship, lots of obvious reasons why it would be bad if your wife wasn't okay with it).
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
I'm going to spend so much more time with my spouse than any other person. I'll be sleeping next to her hopefully every night. Sharing multiple meals together, cuddling on the couch watching whatever, going shopping, reading to each other, etc. If that person isn't my best friend, we won't make it. What you described as a happy marriage, isn't one to me. I want to get to know every part of my future wife and I hope she feels the same about me. If I can't let myself be completely vulnerable around her, we aren't ready to get married yet or maybe even shouldn't. We just have different views on marriage is. Which is probably why divorce rates have been steadily climbing.
I'm inclined to agree more with you, that holding back things from your partner isn't a good thing, although it's not uncommon either from fear of hurting the relationship, upsetting or angering a partner, or various other reasons.
Of course, all of that can be true for an open relationship or marriage as well, but I do agree those are desirable traits for any committed, pair-bonded relationship.
It's not why the divorce rates are climbing though. Divorce rates are climbing because monogamy is unnatural to humans and very much against or base instincts and biological wiring. They climb because our society is no longer so patriarchical, and women can comfortably divorce a man when she wants. 75 years ago she would have been left with very little, no source of income, and been rather shunned. Nowadays, at worst she is likely to get half of what the man has, and is significantly more likely to be involved in the labor force. Social pressure around divorce is also drastically less, and is occasional encouraged.
On May 30 2019 02:31 mewithoutDrew wrote: A friend of my wife's is going through relationships and she keeps bringing up that every guy she's meeting these days is claiming to be polyamorous. She wants an exclusive relationship so it's been bothersome to her that so many of these dudes are running amok.
I did a little surfing on the internet and found this, indeed, is a trend these days.
Here are my initial thoughts to people that are claiming to be polyamorous.
Disclaimer: This is going to come off as super judgmental and critical. But these are just my unfiltered thoughts and reflections. Feel free to stab back at me in the comments below.
1. You're a sexual shit head with a great excuse now for your noncommittal ways
2. You're afraid of commitment, that's all. You're probably not polyamorous
3. It'll be awesome when your heart is broken again by a woman/man also in many relationships; and that's when you'll learn you're not actually polyamorous. This will be awesome because the pain should kickstart your emotions to consider other options, and show you the value of commitment and 1-1 relationships
4. You probably don't want kids. And you probably don't want marriage. So if that's the case, I guess your relational state will work for you if you find like-minded people
5. You should never have kids because children greatly benefit from dedicated parents to raise them
6. If you were raised by individuals preferring exclusive relationships, you will undoubtedly be in much turmoil as your current behaviors contradict the way you were raised, thus increasing the chances for volatility in your own relationships, thus perpetuating a fucked up relational track record, thus you need many partners to sustain any type of connection with the people around you as all of your relationships are shit/shallow
7. You probably come from a broken family and have some relationship trauma in your life
8. You're probably not ugly, so you can actually attract many partners. But you're relying on your attractiveness as your social currency and not learning how to dive deep with your emotions and character as your social currency
9. Deep, committed relationships are a key part of our maturity/transformation. Our committed partners are a mirror reflecting back to us our character. Yes, we can find these things in our friends and family too but so much of our efforts will go into our lovers and by not achieving deep connection it's a missed opportunity to change for the better
Edit: removed 1 thought/reflection as the judgement made was too harsh. added a disclaimer.
As a recently married man who has a transgender woman friend who says she's polyamorous, here's my hot take on these 9 points with a conclusion at the end.
1. What is a "sexual shit head"? Are you a prude? people do what they want. Maybe they're polyamorous, maybe they like to fuck and they don't want to commit, either way you're being needlessly judgmental, go back to worrying about your business.
2. Maybe? Either way, their call.
3. You wish harm to come people's way because you dislike the way in which they label their noncommital "issues"? Good man.
4. So not wanting marriage is a bad thing. Noted.
5. You should never have kids because the speed at which you decided that it'd be great for people to have their hearts broken because they're not committed to someone like you are (or aren't currently planning to) makes me feel like you're an angry person unfit to be a dad. Also if your kids turned out to be sexually atypical that might be shitty for them.
6. Lots of people have a lot of sexual partners, this is not 1850, man.
7. My trans friend comes from a good loving family. She plays videogames with her dad. She's very close to her mom. But I guess it kinda feels good to hope they're fucked up. Fuck those people who won't have a steady relationship with your wife's friend, right? They're shit. Right?
8. A lot of people have a lot of sexual partners. They're often shallow relationships. That's their choice.
9. Deep relationships are the choice you and I have made. But being incredibly patronizing to people who haven't followed in your glorious, superior footsteps. My Lord.
You are incredibly judgmental and I would use very harsh language if it was allowed. Grow up.
On June 02 2019 00:31 Uldridge wrote: Why do you want to necessarily share yourself with just one person? You'd feel yourself too diluted? Just trying to understand where that sentiment comes from. As I feel like I can give much more of myself to more than one person. My only conflict would be to find time lol. Intimacy is also relative. Some people are open books and intimacy is as casual as riding a bike. I can wholeheartedly understand that you can't bear to be intimate with more than 1 person at the same time, because that's the way you are, which culminates in monogamy. But other people are wired differently, so I guess that's a way for you to understand how polyamory can work?
To me it's just always been the end goal. The person I'd marry would be my best friend. The first person I want to tell anything about where good, bad or just boring. Someone who will be there no matter what. Someone who will just know how I'm feeling without even having to ask. They'd be the person who I can just be myself around and not be judged. Eventually they'll just know everything about me. Which is a very tedious thing and time consuming.
A lot of what I listed can only be applied to one person. You can truly only have one best friend. Whether you like it or not, someone will always come to mind first when you want to share something. It's the core reason why I don't understand people who are polyamorous. I can't see how people can be wired differently in this or why wouldn't you just tell that stranger on the street what is it that's on your mind. I just can't think that this can work with more than two people. There will always be a person I turn to first and I'd feel horrible for the other person who didn't. I'd feel like I was cheating them.
But why would that best friend necessarily have to be a sexual partner? Different people fulfill different roles in your life. It seems a lot of pressure to put on a single person to be all things in one. I think even in happy marriages often times the partners spend time apart with friends and share parts of themselves that they wouldn't with their spouse.
Just to present a view: I married my best friend. We got together somewhat randomly, started making out before we even talked to each other much, turned out we are a really great fit (which seems super unlikely, as we are both quite incompatible with majority of people) and we became better friends than I would ever imagine people can be. I had never had sex with anyone else, so it's hard for me to judge, but it would just feel soooo weird having sex with someone who is not as close to me.
Why?
You've presumably hooked up before and that didn't feel weird at all. Maybe it sucked, maybe it didn't, but most people I know that are attractive enough and social enough to have social experiences have some excellent memories of sexual adventures that rank pretty high up on some of their best/most exciting/most fun life memories. We are wired to enjoy sex as humans. This is obviously in your case since you were being sexual with your wife before you'd even talked much.
Inherently, you have no problems being sexual with someone you don't know well.
I mean, given that he's said he hasn't had sex with anyone but his wife, you have something solid to go on here, clearly explaining why he feels the way he does. When all of your sexual experience is colored by it being with the most important person in your whole life, that kinda changes things, doesn't it? Plus, I would say conflating making out with "being sexual" to be kind of a leap. You're making a lot of assumptions here, in basically trying to debunk someone's experience.
On June 09 2019 09:08 L_Master wrote: So, what's the issue? Probably, it's societal conditioning. I suspect you either can't picture it as an honest thing or you know/suspect in the back of your head your wife wouldn't approve, or that society wouldn't approve, or something similar and it's giving you a weird vibe. This is all your conditioning though, and logically I have yet to hear a solid defense of such thoughts (assuming your wife was okay with such a relationship, lots of obvious reasons why it would be bad if your wife wasn't okay with it).
Societal conditioning surely can't explain all of it. Some animals mate for life. Others mate more freely. Others even practice non-binary sexuality, including polyamory, like we do. You can't exactly point at penguins and give them crap for not challenging their societal conditioning, when they pair up in a long-term one-on-one bond.
I guess my point is, humans have proven they're capable of a great many things, but ultimately what someone chooses is what they're happiest with. I haven't personally seen a poly relationship that's panned out super healthily, in my experience. It's a relatively recent thing as far as I can tell for it to be this accepted, as I've only heard of it a couple years back, so there's still a pretty small sample size of people willing to brave those waters. Plus you have shitty people who will try to claim they're poly to justify being a shitty human being who can't respect their relationships properly(I say this because my GF has told me of at least one such person). It's very difficult to maintain a healthy poly relationship. Exponentially more so than a monogamous relationship. It isn't an easy fix for anything, quite the opposite. It requires everyone involved to be honest and open and respectful to everyone else involved, and to establish and respect very important boundaries. But I think, given those fledgling problems, it could be worse for those who think polyamory is for them. Ultimately, it's different strokes for different folks. Not everyone is gonna eventually be poly, it just won't work that way. And that's fine.
hi, after reading the whole thread, i feel like it should have its own glossy poster and we should all be wearing little name tags (something like + Show Spoiler +
) and the posts should all start their "testimonies" with something like:
"hi i'm françois, and i'm a typing addict"
then u guys would retort "hi françois" and feeling accepted and in the company of a collective i feel safe with .. i would continue from there:
"i got 2 kids and married my wife 15 years ago, we are happy and non judgemental people who live and let live.. and yes, i'm a pig that would like nothing more than to climb on every single girl/guy/group that i fancy .. but i don't i'm also so passionate that i could show/share my all to many more than one other human, .. and my mate/wife is not as open (or more like: she was bullied into not being able to trust anyone.. and i too often turn off all my "social filters" or even am not able to turn them back on ..etc) and i feel fine accepting her terms at the cost of mine! while she does (presumably) the same"
.. at this point i would break down and crumble in a pit of sudden uncalled for depression, trying to encompass all the ins and outs of what i have just said and ask the audience:
"Does that make me crazy or just a closeted polyamorous dude?
.. is my relationship doomed from either? will it have to fail just because we (my wife and i) checked the wrong "arrangement" of boxes?
i think we agree that we don't think so, we are not doomed.. we just think we got lucky"
then it would cue the tldr: (any type of) freedom is a thing you struggle/fight for forever.. never something you win (and get to keep forever.. no no! no such thing as forever, ever!) .. .. life is also choice and the struggle is as much the goal than the end, we get lucky is all we get... <3
That competition for attention always causes problems. When you're close to people and dating them, it's going to bother you when you want to spend time with someone else, but you're second to a different person and don't get to spend the time or closeness you desire. You'd basically have to be perfectly matching everyone's desired closeness and intimacy perfectly, which just isn't realistic.
I'm pretty involved with open relationships and such things, and I've never, ever heard of this working for a long time (let's say 10+ years) and being low drama. I've met a few cases where couples are still "together", but one or both parties are consistently unhappy and very high drama.
Wait. I'm confused. Isn't this evidence that open relationships don't really work- contrary to your position?
Because that second paragraph is exactly what I would predict. I'm sure polys can run the experiment, but I wouldn't at all be surprised if my hypothesis would be proved correct that it is an inherently unstable relationship because of the following premise: humans are, by nature, jealous. I've heard enough stories where a couple might think they can handle an open relationship- but one partner is far more successful at getting additional action, leading the less successful one to resent the whole thing. Or alternatively, where the couple is supposed to sign off on each others extra-marital partners, but where, let's say the wife, gets her action, but refuses to sign off on anyone for her husband because none of them are 'good enough for him'.
Y'all can run the experiment for yourselves, but I predict once you introduce that third wheel (or fourth or fifth), the relationship is a ticking time bomb (unless one of the partners is a pushover and instead lives in resentment).
Well, let me give you an example from practice, specifically my own fucking marriage. We never claimed to be "polyamorous", but my wife's sex drive was always bigger than mine, so she started seeing another guy and fucking him intermittently. Eventually, this evolved to a stable thing, when she would live with me, but occasionally spend time with him. At first I didn't like it so much, but looking back, that was mainly because I was conditioned by the society. I obviously really disliked seeing them together, because it was kinda gross, but anything happening in my absence turned into not being a problem after all.
I knew the guy right off the start (we were all classmates in college) but during time, I started to like him more. The fun thing is that eventually, they sort of "broke up", but I remained good friends with the guy and now he works for me part time and I stay at his place when I am in Prague. My wife still talks to him, but she lives 600 kms away and they don't really see each other (the main reason for the "breakup" was that he wasn't interested enough to do the journey once in a while).
Anyway, the point is that human relationships may work out in any shape or form, as long as people are willing to step outside the constantly repeated bullshit we are being shoveled with 24/7. You do not have to get batshit crazy when your partner has sex with another person. I personally found out that it really isn't the sex what I care about the most, but the everyday attention and availability and this was, during the years of the parallel relations, always given to me in priority by my wife and that's really what mattered.
We seem to assume here that the longevity of a relationship is an indicator of its quality, and a corollary to that assumption is that polyamorous relationships don't last and therefore it's a lesser experience for people who have that kind of sexual practice.
Isn't the assumption flawed in the first place? There are a lot of people who prefer non-commital relationships, polyamorous or not. Some people prefer short and sweet and they enjoy life better with partner sexual partners that come and go, no pun intended.
That competition for attention always causes problems. When you're close to people and dating them, it's going to bother you when you want to spend time with someone else, but you're second to a different person and don't get to spend the time or closeness you desire. You'd basically have to be perfectly matching everyone's desired closeness and intimacy perfectly, which just isn't realistic.
I'm pretty involved with open relationships and such things, and I've never, ever heard of this working for a long time (let's say 10+ years) and being low drama. I've met a few cases where couples are still "together", but one or both parties are consistently unhappy and very high drama.
Wait. I'm confused. Isn't this evidence that open relationships don't really work- contrary to your position?
Because that second paragraph is exactly what I would predict. I'm sure polys can run the experiment, but I wouldn't at all be surprised if my hypothesis would be proved correct that it is an inherently unstable relationship because of the following premise: humans are, by nature, jealous. I've heard enough stories where a couple might think they can handle an open relationship- but one partner is far more successful at getting additional action, leading the less successful one to resent the whole thing. Or alternatively, where the couple is supposed to sign off on each others extra-marital partners, but where, let's say the wife, gets her action, but refuses to sign off on anyone for her husband because none of them are 'good enough for him'.
Y'all can run the experiment for yourselves, but I predict once you introduce that third wheel (or fourth or fifth), the relationship is a ticking time bomb (unless one of the partners is a pushover and instead lives in resentment).
Depends on what you mean by definition. I stated strongly that open relationships, in which people try to have deep pair-bonded relationships with more than one person absolutely DO NOT work, in so far as I've observed and heard about.
What does work, and very well, IF you have the right mindset, is an open relationship with multiple partners but only one pair bond. This is what I've been discussing and explaining the entire time.
I've heard enough stories where a couple might think they can handle an open relationship- but one partner is far more successful at getting additional action, leading the less successful one to resent the whole thing. Or alternatively, where the couple is supposed to sign off on each others extra-marital partners, but where, let's say the wife, gets her action, but refuses to sign off on anyone for her husband because none of them are 'good enough for him'.
Y'all can run the experiment for yourselves, but I predict once you introduce that third wheel (or fourth or fifth), the relationship is a ticking time bomb (unless one of the partners is a pushover and instead lives in resentment)
None of this is what I'm talking about. Whoever is getting more "action" doesn't matter. Neither of you care. It's not about getting more or less, and if you're worried about something like that, you're not the type of person that would be suited for an open relationship. You're having occasional extra partners to fill the natural human urge for variety, and to alleviate sex pressure in the relationship. It's not about having "more", it's about being satisfied. Resenting my girlfriend if she was more successful at finding sexual partners than me would be as ridiculous as resenting my guy friend because he was better with woman than me, or because he was better than running at me, or anything else. If that's causing any issue in the relationship, the problem is your own feelings.
If you have issues with jealousy...open relationships are NOT for you.
"Signing off" on partners is beyond ridiculous and just doomed to fail.
As someone who dates and has dated open, it's not remotely a ticking time bomb whatsoever. It's a low drama relationship done right, that in my experience alleviated some of the major issues with monogamy.
On June 14 2019 19:28 Djzapz wrote: We seem to assume here that the longevity of a relationship is an indicator of its quality, and a corollary to that assumption is that polyamorous relationships don't last and therefore it's a lesser experience for people who have that kind of sexual practice.
Isn't the assumption flawed in the first place? There are a lot of people who prefer non-commital relationships, polyamorous or not. Some people prefer short and sweet and they enjoy life better with partner sexual partners that come and go, no pun intended.
I do like your thinking, but I think most people generally prefer or express to prefer a deep pair bonded relationship. For those that don't, that's perfectly fine in my mind if you're honest and upfront, but I think most people are looking for that deep relationship as well.
But the key point is that open relationship are 100% compatible with longevity and stability.
That competition for attention always causes problems. When you're close to people and dating them, it's going to bother you when you want to spend time with someone else, but you're second to a different person and don't get to spend the time or closeness you desire. You'd basically have to be perfectly matching everyone's desired closeness and intimacy perfectly, which just isn't realistic.
I'm pretty involved with open relationships and such things, and I've never, ever heard of this working for a long time (let's say 10+ years) and being low drama. I've met a few cases where couples are still "together", but one or both parties are consistently unhappy and very high drama.
Wait. I'm confused. Isn't this evidence that open relationships don't really work- contrary to your position?
Because that second paragraph is exactly what I would predict. I'm sure polys can run the experiment, but I wouldn't at all be surprised if my hypothesis would be proved correct that it is an inherently unstable relationship because of the following premise: humans are, by nature, jealous. I've heard enough stories where a couple might think they can handle an open relationship- but one partner is far more successful at getting additional action, leading the less successful one to resent the whole thing. Or alternatively, where the couple is supposed to sign off on each others extra-marital partners, but where, let's say the wife, gets her action, but refuses to sign off on anyone for her husband because none of them are 'good enough for him'.
Y'all can run the experiment for yourselves, but I predict once you introduce that third wheel (or fourth or fifth), the relationship is a ticking time bomb (unless one of the partners is a pushover and instead lives in resentment).
Yeah it really is a ticking time bomb. My brother was hooking up with a married chick and her husband knew about it and didn't do anything about it. But as you would expect, he hates my brother and it caused a lot of friction in their marriage. He stopped seeing her but they still talk from time to time and they don't really talk anymore due to it. Doubt that marriage will last much longer.
I guarantee that for every one relationship you find that this works fine, thousands (probably more) don't. Most humans can't handle it.
EPT![[image loading]](https://heathere.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot-2016-08-21-at-11.04.21-AM.png)
