Open Marriage Article

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I couldn't do it because I know myself and I would a) be crazy jealous and b) probably fall in love with someone else just because new sex chemicals can be so powerful. My goal in marriage is stability and synergy so this would not be for me.

I don't desire my husband sexually, so I wouldn't be jealous if he were with another woman. I have actually been in love with two of my other sex partners during the marriage, but it didn't make me want to leave the marriage. If marriage is for stability and synergy but not sex, why leave just because you are in love with someone else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a country of 320 million, does it work for some people? Of course but usually the exception because of all the emotions involved. Also, for heterosexual couples, women have a tremendous advantage finding sex partners (this seems to be implicitly suggested in the article's examples). This inbalance would appear to create issues in and of itself.

+1. I found it interesting, but probably an overly rosy picture. I bet that for every couple that successfully implements this, there are 10 where it blows up in their faces.
I also think it's kind of funny that progressives are fine with this, but are very judgmental about polygamy. I see a lot of benefits to polygamy (especially considering how women traditionally, and even now, just have a shit-ton of work to do in the home, so you might as well split it up), and also think that polyandry should be equally OK (although, as a woman, I can't really see wanting multiple men around the house to ensure that the sporting events are on 100% of the time and the whole house really does smell like sweat...).

+1. It's all fun and games until someone gets too attached and boom, blows up your household, finances, and kids' lives. This seems like basically propaganda. They cast divorce and cheating as inevitabilities rather than choices or outcomes resulting from predictable factors. They really couldn't find anyone who had a bad outcome and regrets it?

Having been raised by hippies, I know several adults whose parents had open marriages, and they universally hated it. The article gives extremely short shrift to the experiences of children and the impact on them.

And to the first lady, who cheated on her husband, your boyfriend is a LIAR and if he'll cheat with you, he'll cheat on you. But you are ethically challenged too, so you probably don't care.

Here's the thing: divorce would be a certainty if my marriage weren't open; we have at least a 50% chance of staying together with it open. At some point (I am in my early 50s) my sex drive will wane and I'll be happy with the companionship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish that people would figure out what they want, and what they really want, BEFORE stringing someone else along. You KNOW if you can't be faithful, you just know. So find someone who is OK with that. But my sense is that people want it both ways. The thought of entering a marriage as OPEN is off-putting to even the people who don't have the monogamy gene.

No, I had NO IDEA in my 20s and 30s that I wasn't able to be faithful. Why would that even cross my mind if I'd never been unfaithful before? But when it happened, it happened and I went full tilt.

Looking back I can say there were red flags about our relationship, but not about my ability to be monogamous. I seemed perfectly capable of that.

Agree. I didn't even know what sexual satisfaction was when I was in my 20s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a country of 320 million, does it work for some people? Of course but usually the exception because of all the emotions involved. Also, for heterosexual couples, women have a tremendous advantage finding sex partners (this seems to be implicitly suggested in the article's examples). This inbalance would appear to create issues in and of itself.

+1. I found it interesting, but probably an overly rosy picture. I bet that for every couple that successfully implements this, there are 10 where it blows up in their faces.
I also think it's kind of funny that progressives are fine with this, but are very judgmental about polygamy. I see a lot of benefits to polygamy (especially considering how women traditionally, and even now, just have a shit-ton of work to do in the home, so you might as well split it up), and also think that polyandry should be equally OK (although, as a woman, I can't really see wanting multiple men around the house to ensure that the sporting events are on 100% of the time and the whole house really does smell like sweat...).

+1. It's all fun and games until someone gets too attached and boom, blows up your household, finances, and kids' lives. This seems like basically propaganda. They cast divorce and cheating as inevitabilities rather than choices or outcomes resulting from predictable factors. They really couldn't find anyone who had a bad outcome and regrets it?

Having been raised by hippies, I know several adults whose parents had open marriages, and they universally hated it. The article gives extremely short shrift to the experiences of children and the impact on them.

And to the first lady, who cheated on her husband, your boyfriend is a LIAR and if he'll cheat with you, he'll cheat on you. But you are ethically challenged too, so you probably don't care.

Here's the thing: divorce would be a certainty if my marriage weren't open; we have at least a 50% chance of staying together with it open. At some point (I am in my early 50s) my sex drive will wane and I'll be happy with the companionship.

This is very sad, putting your sexual needs above all. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a country of 320 million, does it work for some people? Of course but usually the exception because of all the emotions involved. Also, for heterosexual couples, women have a tremendous advantage finding sex partners (this seems to be implicitly suggested in the article's examples). This inbalance would appear to create issues in and of itself.

+1. I found it interesting, but probably an overly rosy picture. I bet that for every couple that successfully implements this, there are 10 where it blows up in their faces.
I also think it's kind of funny that progressives are fine with this, but are very judgmental about polygamy. I see a lot of benefits to polygamy (especially considering how women traditionally, and even now, just have a shit-ton of work to do in the home, so you might as well split it up), and also think that polyandry should be equally OK (although, as a woman, I can't really see wanting multiple men around the house to ensure that the sporting events are on 100% of the time and the whole house really does smell like sweat...).

+1. It's all fun and games until someone gets too attached and boom, blows up your household, finances, and kids' lives. This seems like basically propaganda. They cast divorce and cheating as inevitabilities rather than choices or outcomes resulting from predictable factors. They really couldn't find anyone who had a bad outcome and regrets it?

Having been raised by hippies, I know several adults whose parents had open marriages, and they universally hated it. The article gives extremely short shrift to the experiences of children and the impact on them.

And to the first lady, who cheated on her husband, your boyfriend is a LIAR and if he'll cheat with you, he'll cheat on you. But you are ethically challenged too, so you probably don't care.

Here's the thing: divorce would be a certainty if my marriage weren't open; we have at least a 50% chance of staying together with it open. At some point (I am in my early 50s) my sex drive will wane and I'll be happy with the companionship.

This is very sad, putting your sexual needs above all. What a mess.

There is nothing sad about this.
All of us, including you, have some "needs above all" that would be a dealbreaker in your marriage.

For example, if your spouse treated you with disrespect, blew the kids college fund on a new Tesla, went out partying every Friday until 2am, is that a dealbreaker?
As another example, if your spouse cheated all the time, is that a dealbreaker for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was interesting. I feel certain that it would not be a good choice for DH and I, but a friend of mine and her husband have had an open marriage for over 13 years, so clearly it works for at least some others.

Is it a big secret? When did she tell you? Does her husband hit on you? Are her partners mostly married?

None of your business.

[Anonymous]

It's a weird societal pressure where people want to refer to their legally recognized partnerships as "marriage".

In reality, the marriage devolves into a glorified roommate relationship. What these people really want is to treat privilege like a buffet line while ignoring the hard work and responsibility that comes with it. Sure, they want the stability (especially economic) that comes with "marriage" but they don't want to put in the hard work to create intimacy and passion. Rather than work hard to achieve sexual and emotional intimacy, they throw their hands up, declare their wedding vows to be the problem and satisfy themselves with the endorphin release of "excitement" from a new "partner". All the while they still want to call it "marriage".

[Anonymous]

My first wife asked to have an open marriage. I'm not sure why she asked - she was already cheating.

[Anonymous]

Open marriage works for some people and it doesn't work for others. It's like having separate or joint finances. There's no capital "R" right way to go about this. There's only what's right for couple in question. The most important thing is that both partners are on the same page.

[Anonymous]

Married man, 44:

I loved the article. Very detailed. Intellectually, I like the idea.

But for me, kids take priority. There's no way I would leave home to fool around with someone else, nor would I tolerate my wife doing so.

However, kids grow up. Ours are. And in a few years, I am seriously considering early retirement. At that point, my wife and I will probably have a discussion. The "ethical" aspect of non-monogamy is very important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Married man, 44:

I loved the article. Very detailed. Intellectually, I like the idea.

But for me, kids take priority. There's no way I would leave home to fool around with someone else, nor would I tolerate my wife doing so.

However, kids grow up. Ours are. And in a few years, I am seriously considering early retirement. At that point, my wife and I will probably have a discussion. The "ethical" aspect of non-monogamy is very important.

And what if your wife balks, as most would?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish that people would figure out what they want, and what they really want, BEFORE stringing someone else along. You KNOW if you can't be faithful, you just know. So find someone who is OK with that. But my sense is that people want it both ways. The thought of entering a marriage as OPEN is off-putting to even the people who don't have the monogamy gene.

In many cases, this "monogamy gene" is directly proportional to their partner's libido. I wish that people would figure out BEFORE stringing someone else into marriage and kids that they will constantly be "too tired" for sex. One who frequently rejects sex loses the right to veto an Open Marriage.

Nope. You are making huge assumptions about everyone's marriages based on what you feel is the biggest priority. It is foolish to make such a blanket statement

[Anonymous]

So many shady ass characters in that article. The wife for unilaterally announcing to her DH that she was having a relationship on the side. Her AP cheating on his wife who was not informed about the "open" nature of her relationship with him.

I don't give a shit that she/he "got sick" and somehow that justified treating their spouses like garbage. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Married man, 44:

I loved the article. Very detailed. Intellectually, I like the idea.

But for me, kids take priority. There's no way I would leave home to fool around with someone else, nor would I tolerate my wife doing so.

However, kids grow up. Ours are. And in a few years, I am seriously considering early retirement. At that point, my wife and I will probably have a discussion. The "ethical" aspect of non-monogamy is very important.

And what if your wife balks, as most would?

Then I would drop the issue. And I'm fully aware, as the article explains, that wives usually have an easier time finding outside partners than husbands. In our case neither of us had much experience with others At a certain point you can only say, you only live once.

[Anonymous]

Monogamy is hard, it is preached to death but rarely practiced successfully.

My bet is that discreet affairs are far more "successful" than open marriages. By successful, I mean the marriage stays together because the affair is never revealed. Just do your thing and be smart enough not to get caught. Flaunting sex with others in front of your spouse is rarely going to end well. But kudos to those who can pull this off successfully. I am envious.