Open relationships/marriages. Thoughts, experiences? Considering.

>>16865544
lol

>>16865544

people like to say 'those never work'. to which i generally reply 'as opposed to all the monogamous relationships, which always work out and never end in break up or divorce'.

so essentially, you should do waht you want, see what happens, and learn or grow from that. in my case, i cant handle a relationship unless its open. my bf feels the same way. the day we met we had a spontaneous threesome.

and if it wasnt for the fact that we were open to open relationships, we'd probably just be fuckbuddies or whatever. being in an open relationship gave me the courage to actually be in a relationship. something i hadnt done in like 3 years cuz i couldnt handle the pressure of that commitment.

will we last forever? probably not. im 23. hes still in college. even if ew WERE 100% committed, we likely wouldnt last forever.

were just enjoying each other while we last.

>>16865566
Honestly, you're not old enough to give advice on this. I'm sorry. If you haven't seen a couple relationships mature and grow and eventually end you just don't have the life experience to give a qualified opinion.

If you're in an unhappy relationship[ I don't see how making it open could make it into a happy relationship.

You might get an extension till the breakup I guess but if I wanted to sleep around why would I also want a spouse

>>16865566

You are degenerate as fuck and should be gassed

>>16865574
Agreed.

>>16865574

>you're not old enough to give advice on this.

but i am. and i did.

>I'm sorry

you're not.

>if you havent seen a couple relationships mature and grow and eventually end

but i have. sure they may not be mine, but its not like scientists perform studies on themselves. surveys arent done by the people giving the survey. there are objective facts you can look at. relationships end. a large majority of the ones that go a long distance (re: not the entire distance) tend to go south and they just stick together out of convenience.

>you just dont have the life experience to give a qualified opinion

im sure you're a whole 30 years old and wise as can be, but there's a 32 year old reading this thread and laughing about how naive you are.

>>16865583

no.

>>16865580
My spouse and I are very happy in our relationship, we have been together 11 years this year.

We have mutually entertained the idea because we feel secure enough in our relationship to go out and have a few fun nights here and there...

>>16865587
You transposed the digits in your age. Confused me for a second.

I actually am sorry; I don't like to be so dismissive. But you're in college, this is seemingly your first relationship, and it's not even a very long-standing one. You're a child, giving advice.

>>16865544
You're either a woman who wants one or a man who doesn't, right?

>>16865622
>doesn't care about the content of the point, only the age of the person making the point

no, fuck off. That anon's first paragraph is spot on, sometimes people get their shit together the first time out.

The problem with nonmonogamy - the BIG problem - is that we're all socially conditioned to expect a certain relationship progression which involves monogamy. That progression is one part lie, one part historical anachronism, and one part innate human nature. So there's a certain truth to it, but it's hardly the final word on the subject. The problem that poses for nonmonogamists is that there's no socially-understood version of nonmonogamy to present as an alternative. Playboys aren't poly - they're unpartnered; spinsters are fully alone; there's no common example of an open relationship for people to look at and go "that's what it looks like".

Without broader social direction, everyone you meet has a different expectation, differing expectations creates conflict, conflict ruins relationships. To be successfully nonmonogamous you have to be EXCELLENT at being honest, communicating, respectful, and etc to make it work.

If you're monogamous, you just go "well, here's what's socially expected of me" and you don't have to think about it. But, as that other anon pointed out, it's not like the model for monogamy really works out all that well. People who are shit at being honest, communicating, etc make for shit monogamous partners, too - it's just that you can BE shit and still maintain a relationship by relying on the social norms.

Nonmonogamy can work. I've done it before (though the relationship ended for other reasons, the nonmonogamous aspect did not cause any conflict), and given the disruptions that *monogamy* has had on my relationships (expectations, jealousy, aggression towards my friends, etc etc) I see it as a difficult but perfectly viable alternative.

>>16865683
Nice post. You hit all the points I wanted to make.

Seems to me like 'open relationship' is a fancy term for 'fuckbuddies with commitment'.

Open marriages, now that's a doozy.

People are inherently jealous, and that destroys most open relationships. It's doable, but real fuckin' rare.

>>16865566
OP ignore this cuck, he's a liberal fuckface.

The only 'open relationship' that has both partners on equal footing is when the male fucks around while the female stays monogamous to him.

The ability for a woman to quickly branch swing and have 100 suitors waiting for her to be single comletely overshadows any 'but that's sexist' bullshit the bloopies will respond with.

>>16865806
>I pretend that gay people don't exist

Fixed that for you.

>>16865597
Enjoy your STDs.

>>16865544
enjoy raising a kid that is not yours.

>>16865590
Not that anon, but yeahhhh

File: 1451033470882.jpg (130KB, 629x619px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 629x619px

>>16865566
>people like to say 'those never work'. to which i generally reply 'as opposed to all the monogamous relationships, which always work out and never end in break up or divorce'.
More that they introduce unprecedented levels of drama. It's hard enough keeping a healthy dialogue between two people, let alone 3 or more.

Every time I've seen one spark up with my friends it always became their most memorable breakup, and not for a good reason.

> i couldnt handle the pressure of that commitment.
Breaking tons of stereotypes tonight I see.

>>16865544
>haven't had one
>probably won't
I'm sure someone could get it to work, but not me

File: MACHO MADNESS COMIN' ATCHYA.jpg (23KB, 360x280px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 360x280px

OP, the thing about polyamory is, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Let me tell you a little story, starring yours truly.
I was once very much infatuated with a girl. I would say "in love with", but that implies she felt the same way. She adored me as a friend and a person and an asset, but couldn't possibly entertain the thought of us together romantically.

She COULD (and DID) however, entertain the idea in regards to a mutual friend; one of the best dudes I've ever known, bigger and stronger and more handsome than me in every way, in addition to just being a real standup guy.

As it became more clear that I was losing the "contest", she not-so-subtly implied the idea of wishing that she didn't have to choose between the two of us.

"Wouldn't it be so easy if all of us were in an open relationship?"

My answer was no.
Because, as I said before, you can't have your cake and eat it too. It doesn't matter how "equally" you love people; whether it's 3 or 4 or a hundred, there's always gonna be a favorite.

If I'd said yes, I'd just be playing second banana (no pun intended) to the dude she REALLY wanted to be with; I'd be the runner-up, but at least the two of us wouldn't have to come to terms with her rejecting me.

If you wanna be fuckbuddies or whatever, fine, have your fun, sow your wild oats while ye may and all that. But you're not gonna get anything permanent or serious out of it.

There's always gonna be one outlier; even though everyone high-fives and goes out for pizza after the game, not everyone gets a trophy, not everyone gets to play in every game, not everyone gets to be the star athlete.

Neil Gaiman married Amanda Palmer, not Stoya, you know?

If you can make it work, then good on you, but I feel like you'd eventually long for something more stable, more real. At least, that's what I would want, but then you're not me, so take everything I've said with however many grains of salt that you please.

>>16867318
>lemme tell you a story about something that I didn't even try because I rejected the possibility before it even happened, and that's why you don't ever do it

is this supposed to be compelling?

>>16867333
The point being it was clear that she just wanted to get out of having to be the one to reject me.
The idea of causing me any degree of pain/heartbreak made her uncomfortable.

So rather than accept my role as "number 2, the one she cares about less", I retained my pride and didn't accept any proverbial table scraps. I was worth more than settling for whatever secondhand affection I could get.

I guess an open relationship would be pretty sweet if you were one of the two people at the top of the pyramid and not the "plus one", but then there's no telling when that position might get mixed up.

I'm not saying don't ever do it, I'm just saying that it takes a unique combination of individuals for it to work out where no one is constantly hurting or feeling inferior.

I have yet to see a single polyamorous relationship that attempted to be anything more than admitted fuckbuddies work out in any positive fashion.

I'm a female dom dating a male sub. Trying to find a third but sub female partner for the dynamic is a real struggle. We're both too normalfag and straight-edge, outside of the kink and polyamory, which a lot of people into polyamory are not like that.

>>16867353
I don't think that's clear from your story at all, in fact it seems extremely unlikely that she would *suggest a relationship* with you in order to avoid rejecting you, which makes no sense. In fact, given that you describe she was making a choice between the two of you it makes it seem even more like the whole thing is a product of your insecurity.

The conclusions you draw from this "experience" are not any more coherent.

>>16867391
I suppose I should have mentioned we were best friends at the time.

So yes, her rejecting me and causing me pain and throwing our friendship into jeopardy is something that totally terrified her until I made it clear that I preferred her being honest to halfheartedly trying to make everyone happy.

She was clearly head-over-heels for the other guy and flat-out told me she wasn't attracted to me; if I'd have agreed, she'd have been accommodating me to make me happy and I'd have been settling for being her second choice so at least I'd have something.

Neither of those are things I want and it became clear later on that she never wanted an open relationship after all; it was just a momentary attempt at making everyone happy while avoiding making the hard decision that would make someone (usually herself) sad.
Which is something she does often and not once has it worked out.

Again, my situation is just an example, anon.
I provided my experience with the subject and gave my two cents; if you disagree as you clearly seem to, that's fine.

Like I said, everyone's different so anything is possible.
I'm just saying, I've never seen it work out in the "serious committed relationship" sense before without it getting ugly.

>>16867353

It sounds like you're very insecure and you just couldn't handle a relationship where you aren't the center of attention. I'm not saying polyamory works for everyone that has good self-esteem, I'm just saying that your "story" has fucking nothing to do with polyamory. This is a story where someone half-heartedly suggested the notion of an open relationship and you decided it wasn't for you

>>16867400
>>16867399
>It sounds like you're very insecure and you just couldn't handle a relationship where you aren't the center of attention. I'm not saying polyamory works for everyone that has good self-esteem, I'm just saying that your "story" has fucking nothing to do with polyamory. This is a story where someone half-heartedly suggested the notion of an open relationship and you decided it wasn't for you


this. I wasn't even disagreeing - there's nothing to disagree with. I was just pointing out that you're an insecure moron.

>>16867400
>This is a story where someone half-heartedly suggested the notion of an open relationship and you decided it wasn't for you
Fair enough, that is exactly what my story is about.

I guess, OP, make sure you're fine with not necessarily being someone's first choice.

Whatever floats your boat, man, but it's something to consider.

>>16867400
How does someone who hints at an open relationship not considered an act of polyamory? Someone obviously stating for one and he, decided no. In a way it is an attempt at an open relationship, yet it never happened on his end because the girl wanted to dick around still and he didn't even want to begin on that. Cut ties and move on,

>>16867444

I think it was more the fact that he basically opened the story as "here's why polyamory is a bad idea" and the story ends up being "I never even tried it but I'm pretty sure it would've made me feel bad"

>>16867465
No, more or less what he's talking about is what basically happens in an open relationship. One person who was originally in the relationship before its opened, gets those feelings of abandonment, and usually leaves the other. He just foresaw the potential shit-storm and left.

First off I'm sort of a huge slut but still, open relationships make me feel uneasy. I don't see how you can actually be in a RELATIONSHIP and grow with someone and share your life with them while you both go off and spread your love amongst other people. I feel there is always someone out there who you will want to give all your love to. Open relationship screams 'settling' to me. However, there is only one couple i think could work in an open relationship. They're both super eccentric genius people but their love is really logical, so

That being said, \ long term fuckbuddies, which I think is a more accurate term for what most people are trying to do with their polyamory shig nowadays

Sure if your relationships have the intimacy and depth of a teen crush and both parties are promiscuous

>>16865566
I'm happy for you that you are in a comfortable situation and are being realistic about its potential longevity.

For me personally its important to have balance and boundaries in a relationship. I'm more comfortable with things being well defined because I know what to expect then.

My mindset was bolstered recently when a woman I was very close friends with was in an open relationship with her boyfriend. She would fool around quite often and I assumed he would as well, although the few times I asked him out for a rub tug (massage/handjob) and even offered to pay for him, he would refuse. I found out later on that her promiscuity and use of pussy power over him had enough leverage to convince him that she should ask for money from the guys she was sleeping with. This went on behind the back of the people she was living with and started involving heavier drug use and a vicious cycle of needing more and more money while losing more and more of her friends. When I spoke to her boyfriend about it, he admitted that he didn't agree with the way she was initially but she talked him into being okay with it. So they got kicked out of where they were living and have to spend a lot more money living by themselves. Which is just gonna make the cycle even more vicious.
Sure, not everyone would go down this path, but it's an example of how being open AND not setting boundaries can get someone to keep pushing limits and lose themselves.

I was monogamous and had these feelings for al my life, because I had only been with one woman (for full on sex) and that was my high school sweetheart. We both had a normal sex drive, it was good. Not fantastic, she was always too vanilla... Not open to exploring and I just sorta went with it.

After marriage (or even slightly before that) things cooled off, sex was less frequent and I was struggling with it a bit. I never thought about infidelity because I didn't want to ruin my life. Then her lust for children came (we were both ready both financially and mature enough) and so we got to work. The best months of my sexual life came out of this. Sadly, it stopped. After the first child was born there was a period of no sex, understandable. Then the lust came back, she wanted number 2. It was so frustrating to go back through all of that again. We truly enjoyed sex and we looked forward to it.. It was only afterwards that I realized she didn't enjoy it for the sex, but for the prospect of being pregnant.

After the second child things went to a full stop all together. The need for a third was not there. It was just me trying to initiate and getting shot down.

I struggled with it for ages until I finally ventured out. Yes, I am now a cheater.. Because I am weak, because I need sex in my life. Not because I don't want to be with my wife, but because things change. People change. I changed, I wanted more sex... She changed, she wanted less sex.

That's why I cheat. I feel sick to my stomach for cheating, but I still do it. Once every few months I search that release.. I don't want sexual death, I want to experience it to the fullest!

That's why, if I had to start over again... I would most definitely opt for an open marriage.

>>16868127
>Rushing into a marriage with your highschool sweetheart when the one thing you disagree with is a big enough deal for you to resort to infidelity
>Implying that an open relationship is as uncomplicated as "just like a regular marriage, but there's sex all the time, it definitely doesn't get messy or fucked up"
>Cheating when you've got kids

Kinda sound like a scummy idiot, man.

>>16868127
>That's why, if I had to start over again... I would most definitely opt for an open marriage.

what's stopping you from negotiating it with your wife right now? If she doesn't fuck you anyways, she shouldn't have any claim on stopping you from fucking other people (so long as you don't waste too many resources on it, etc)

I've been in three open relationship. 1 of them "worked." By worked I mean the open relationship isn't wasn't the thing that killed it.

>>16868127
>Yes, I am now a cheater.. Because I am weak, because I need sex in my life.
Wat. Well buddy I don't appreciate what your doing but don't talk like you're 100% at fault.
Mother of three kids speaking here. If she doesn't want you to cheat, she has to sync with you. Maintaining relationships takes efforts.. How many times I wasn't in the mood but you have to get your shit together and stop being lazy. Just like how you have to get your shit together and tell her how much it hurts to be rejected when trying to initiate sex.

Communication is 50% of a healthy relationship, other 50% are getting your shit together.

File: 1422732587623.jpg (39KB, 1157x772px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1157x772px

>>16865683

>The problem with nonmonogamy - the BIG problem - is that we're all socially conditioned to expect a certain relationship progression which involves monogamy.

Monogamy is not a form of "social-conditioning", but rather a biological-standard that provides a good environment for families to advance and thrive in (if upheld). You can't develop that within a "non-monogamous" relationship, since it neither gives or provides stability and the breakdown of monogamous relationships is due to "non-monogamous" deviation (i.e infidelity).

>The problem that poses for nonmonogamists is that there's no socially-understood version of nonmonogamy to present as an alternative.

Nor will there be. The fact that you define yourselves as "non-monogamists" is fluid and cannot be compartmentalized into a fixed social structure that determines the ACTUAL meaning/style of relationship that you're proposing; since it's due to the personal/emotional interpretation (e.g whim) of the individual. On the otherhand monogamous couples are solidly termed, due to the nature and behaviour of their 'observed' relationships.

>Without broader social direction, everyone you meet has a different expectation

That's due to innate individuality of every human being; also by "broader social direction", you want society to be brainwashed into a collective-hivemind to avoid conflict?

>differing expectations creates conflict

It produces REJECTION. Not conflict.

>conflict ruins relationships.

Internally or Externally?

>Nonmonogamy can work. I've done it before (though the relationship ended for other reasons, the nonmonogamous aspect did not cause any conflict)

Kek. Totally.

>given the disruptions that *monogamy* has had on my relationships (expectations, jealousy, aggression towards my friends)

Don't you realize that YOU are the cause and the trigger of these problems? By your actions you've actually created more conflict and social division to satisfy your personal lifestyle.

>>16870568
No, monogamy is social conditioning. This isn't to say that there should be no monogamous couples, but if it was the biological standard your claim it to be, we would all be monogamous. It's a purely social construct -one That works well in many situations- but nothing more

>>16865683

>the relationship fell apart(for reasons other than nonmonogomy)
Top kek. If I cut your brake line do you say "wow it was the brake lines fault" or do you say" wow you cut the line, its your fault"

>>16868127

>instead of admitting I'm a limp-dick faggot who can't speak my mind and rushes into things and meekly goes "y-y-yes honey" I instead blame monogomy and that an open relationship would somehow fix my litany of problems and lieing!

This is why non-monogamy faggots are the worst. They take all their personal mental and emotional problems/baggage and blame it all on monogamy.

>>16865544
Tried it, and it sucked. My first ever relationship was with a much older woman. I was 17 she was 33. When I was around 18.5 she suggested we become poly, and she started bringing other guys over and doing them. But I was an awkward 18 year old, so it's not like I can go out to a bar and get laid too. It was super one sided and sucked.

>>16865544
Generally not a good idea if you're the man and not the woman.

Contrary to popular belief, women don't actually like fucking married guys even if it's an open marriage. At least with a married guy, despite all his bitching and moaning about keeping it "discrete", there's that slight chance that maybe he will leave his shitty unloving wife and pick the woman he's cheating with instead. With an openly married guy, he is basically saying he doesn't give a fuck about his wife but is too much of a bitch to leave, which makes him look pathetic.

However, if you're the wife and your husband is totally into cucking, you're in luck because many men do not give a damn about fucking a married woman. Free pussy is free pussy as far as they see it.