Anonymous wrote:I lived in a Muslim country for two years. Men, like my landlord, could have up to four wives. They all seemed to get along. Anyways, if this works for some couples, why criticize it?

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

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 wrote:I just saw a stat that said in 70 percent of marriages, one person has been unfaithful, so even though you think you might be in a monogamous relationship, good chances, you're not.

Anonymous wrote:I lived in a Muslim country for two years. Men, like my landlord, could have up to four wives. They all seemed to get along. Anyways, if this works for some couples, why criticize it?

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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".

To be what you call a "marriage," BOTH partners have to be willing to put in the hard work. If only one of them is, where does that leave the other one?

Anonymous wrote: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.

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

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.