Op again

I don’t think she’s actively pursuing anyone from what I can tell (checking texts, messages, emails, phone bill) but I can’t know if that means she does or doesn’t have someone in mind. I also don’t buy into this hippie new age stuff as someone put it that open marriages or polyamory or whatever you wanna call it is normal or acceptable. At this point I’m just mad. Of all the women out there who just want to marry a man that faithfully commits she isn’t one of them? Really? I’d take vanilla sex over this any day

If she’s as kinky as you describe, then a desire for an open marriage doesn’t necessarily mean she’s cheating. It’s just an extension of her kinky sexuality (if she’s into choking, that’s pretty out there).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you sense that she has exposed her undercarriage to the night air?, i.e., taken up with a paramour, yet?

Answer this, please.

Looks as though he did on page 1.

Wasn't certain OP was indicating the lady's nether regions had been, as the saying goes, exposed to the night air. But maybe that was indeed the point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you sense that she has exposed her undercarriage to the night air?, i.e., taken up with a paramour, yet?

Answer this, please.

Looks as though he did on page 1.

I find there are usually two camps here.

People who believe that lifelong monogamy is a social construct that can be challenged as our society becomes more 'open' and 'tolerant' to the nuances of human sexuality. Also, as modern medicine progresses people are living longer and monogamy can, for some, feel like a daunting/unrealistic expectation.

Then there are those that view monogamy from a moral standpoint. Traditional marriage is a lifelong commitment where a couple is pair-bonded until death do us part. The desire or act of straying from that bond (ethically or non-ethically) is viewed as a sin or moral/character flaw.

Personally, I think it's all just freaking complicated. That said, if she isn't cheating but instead talking through her desires with you, then at least she's being honest and that's worth something.

Anonymous wrote:The problem is now the things wife said can’t be unsaid. If OP clearly lets her know that this is not an option she either argues her point making the situation worse. Or she just lies to OP and cheats behind his back. Either way, this woman isn’t cut out for Monogamy. OP if you do t have kids, you may to chalk this up to a starter marriage. And if you do have you g kids, how in the world does she have time for juggling multiple partners.

Most people aren't which is why the divorce rate is so high and the infidelity rate is higher. But OP's wife was dumb enough to believe this new age nonsense that you can have honest talks about negotiating non-monogamy like it's a car sale. She should do what most people do - hit it up on work travel or a girls trip and take it to the grave.

The problem is now the things wife said can’t be unsaid. If OP clearly lets her know that this is not an option she either argues her point making the situation worse. Or she just lies to OP and cheats behind his back. Either way, this woman isn’t cut out for Monogamy. OP if you do t have kids, you may to chalk this up to a starter marriage. And if you do have you g kids, how in the world does she have time for juggling multiple partners.

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you sense that she has exposed her undercarriage to the night air?, i.e., taken up with a paramour, yet?

Answer this, please.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I agree with others she has someone in mind.

Tough spot, you have three choices: open marriage with some guidelines, keep it closed and she cheats, or keep it closed and she is miserable and resents you

I would choose option 1 so at least I could get mine on the side too

Or she sucks it up and stays for the sake of the kids and is happy enough for now.

OP, I agree with others she has someone in mind.

Tough spot, you have three choices: open marriage with some guidelines, keep it closed and she cheats, or keep it closed and she is miserable and resents you

I would choose option 1 so at least I could get mine on the side too

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't know how you go out and bang someone else only to come home that night to tuck in your kids. How woman can separate sex like this is baffling. It's not just a physical act.

It's not difficult for me. Not that there isn't any emotional component, but I've cared a lot for someone and I've never wanted to blow up my life or my marriage over it. What makes it fun and easy with someone you're seeing casually isn't the person, it's that it's casual.

Men do it all the time. It's compartmentalize and then it's done. I am fond of AP but she's not family

"Today's promiscuous society."

Give me a break. In the past people were just as, or more, promiscuous. It's pervasive and common in every society.

The only thing that varies is how open people can be about it.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't know how you go out and bang someone else only to come home that night to tuck in your kids. How woman can separate sex like this is baffling. It's not just a physical act.

It's not difficult for me. Not that there isn't any emotional component, but I've cared a lot for someone and I've never wanted to blow up my life or my marriage over it. What makes it fun and easy with someone you're seeing casually isn't the person, it's that it's casual.

First, now that she's said this, OP will never forget it and even if they stay married, he will always, always wonder if he's enough to keep her happy. She did forever damage to their marriage by bringing this up.

Second, this is proof that in today's promiscuous society where people bang a lot of people for years until marrying, that marrying young just doesn't work today.

I don't know how you go out and bang someone else only to come home that night to tuck in your kids. How woman can separate sex like this is baffling. It's not just a physical act.

Don't agree to something that doesn't actually work for you (in the hopes of keeping her). That's good for no one.