# Open Marriages?whats Your Thoughts...



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

Hello everyone! So I have been thinking about "Open Marriages" I believe in Open marriages, personally. If you have a strong foundation, built with trust,love,lust,respect and common courtesy to one another, of course. Let's face it,.. sex is just,... to put it simply "Great". I believe just cause you get married to the man/ woman of your dreams, it shouldnt mean you go without the variety of sex pleasures , from a variety of people ,that are still out there waiting to be enjoyed. You only live once, and I say go for it all, while you can! 
I understand ,.. a marriage is sacred and all that jazz, I really do. But I think that if you can both enjoy your sexuality to the fullest, within safe guidelines,.. then why not? Being true to one another, keeping a strong open communication, without ridicule,judgment, or reservations about sex and all your sexual desires, I believe is the key!
What do you think? I would love to know!! ".


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 28, 2009)

The closest I came to it was a dabbling with a female threesome partner that my wife chose. It lasted about 4 months and while it was a unique experience, it was obvious after the fact that the wife saw it as a fleeting fantasy fulfillment as opposed to any lifestyle change.

I have some friends who are swingers and I would say not everyone is cut out for it. While swinging takes it a step further, both parties have to be equally committed to being ok with multiple partners, and the inherent emotional, sexual, and physical risks (esp. if someone goes outside the circle and brings an STD into things).

I also don't know if I would consider an instance of a three/moresome to be an open marriage situation, esp. if it's done only a couple of times.

Interesting topic, nevertheless.


----------



## Tooz (Mar 28, 2009)

UGH no, I cannot stand the concept, most likely due to my parental situation. I think it's wrong, though. I guess if other people wanna do it, more power to them, but just no.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Mar 28, 2009)

Open relationship if that's your bag but open _marriage_? What's the point then?!?


----------



## Just_Jen (Mar 28, 2009)

In my opinion i think open relationships, never mind marriages are hard. I think unless you are completely both secure within yourselves and your relationship then it wont work because there could be a whole lotta jealousy or the person running off with another. But then at the moment due to circumstances at home im doubting whether people can be truly faithful anyway, so perhaps this is a way of being faithful by blurring the rules. 
I suppose you always have each other to come back to and all. 
But what if one person partakes and the other doesnt..imbalance?! 

There'd have to be a whole big balancing act going on and i think that may be hard. 
but those that can, great!


----------



## Butterbelly (Mar 28, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Open relationship if that's your bag but open _marriage_? What's the point then?!?




I second that! To each their own, but it's definitely not my cup of tea.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Mar 28, 2009)

And I'm with Ernest and Butterbelly: if I wanted to screw around, I wouldn't have gotten married.


----------



## Tooz (Mar 28, 2009)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> And I'm with Ernest and Butterbelly: if I wanted to screw around, I wouldn't have gotten married.



Exactly.


----------



## Zandoz (Mar 28, 2009)

Personally, I disappoint one woman at a time, I do it very well, then I keep doing it ad nauseam. Your mileage may vary.

The only ones who can decide on what is right in a specific marriage are the two involved in it.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Mar 28, 2009)

I can 100% understand an open marriage, but I could not do it. I do not share well with others.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Mar 28, 2009)

I think the concept of open marriages is a cop-out. Sort of like when you trip and fall down in some spectacularly noticeable manner, jump up and say "It's okay... I _meant_ to do that!"

But hey, if everyone involved is fully aware and consents - knock yourselves out. As long as everyone is copping out, then it doesn't really matter.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

Thank you all for the replies! This is why I wanted to post this thread and get some input! Although my hubby and I have spoke about having an "open marriage" we have not done it. Maybe its the excitement of talking about it? Without actually doing it? Haha who knows,.. but i do value everyone's input on the subject!:bow:


----------



## MsGreenLantern (Mar 28, 2009)

An open marriage seems like it reduces the marriage to a piece of paper and a best friend with benefits. The whole point of marriage straight/gay alike is to choose ONE person who you want to spend the rest of your life with. If you can't be happy with just one, then why get married? 

You can try a plethora of sexual positions and playthings with your spouse. It seems like there is something wrong with a marriage if you look elsewhere to feel fulfilled. 

Clearly just my opinion. I could NEVER share the man I love with someone sexually. Sex with someone you love is not just physical, it's emotional. It's a connection... you can't get that with some swinger you pick up at a bar or website. 

I dunno... it reminds me of college guys who casually date one girl then pick up others at bars on the weekend so they can "play the field" before they settle down, only marriage IS the settle down.

I'm sorry if this comes across as harsh, I'm a tad emotional today and its a subject I feel strongly about.


----------



## AnnMarie (Mar 28, 2009)

If it works for you and your partner, then live it up. 


For me, though - no way. If I'm with someone and want to sleep with another, then I know it's time for me to go. It's just how I work... when I'm with someone and love them, I don't want to be with anyone else. 

And if my partner wants to be with someone else bad enough that it becomes an issue in our marriage/partnership, then it's time for them to move along.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 28, 2009)

Generally? To each their own, as long as neither partner feels coerced or pressured into it. So many people just cheat behind their partners' backs when they want somebody new or different, at least people in open relationships are keeping it honest. 

Personally? I am one of those people who needs the emotional connection along with the physical connection. Polyamory and polyfidelity I can totally wrap my mind around and understand, wheras an open relationship wouldn't appeal to me because of that.

Tracy


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

MsGreenLantern said:


> An open marriage seems like it reduces the marriage to a piece of paper and a best friend with benefits. The whole point of marriage straight/gay alike is to choose ONE person who you want to spend the rest of your life with. If you can't be happy with just one, then why get married?
> 
> You can try a plethora of sexual positions and playthings with your spouse. It seems like there is something wrong with a marriage if you look elsewhere to feel fulfilled.
> 
> ...



There is nothing harsh about your opinion!! Its a great opinion! I am glad to read it.


----------



## Cors (Mar 28, 2009)

Eh, I don't see the difference between an open relationship and an open marriage, unless you are assuming that people in an open relationship are less committed to each other. 

I have had successful open relationships and I know several gay couples who have maintained open relationships for more than ten years. They would have gotten married if they could and I doubt it will change that much. As long as it is something both parties are truly comfortable with, why not? 

Anyway, it is entirely up to the two (or more) people in the relationship to decide. There is little room for compromise here. Forcing someone to stay monogamous against their nature can be as destructive as forcing someone to agree to an open marriage if they are against the idea. 

I personally don't believe in monogamy for the sake of it. If my partner chooses to have sex with me only, I want to know that it is because the experience is special and superior to what he can get elsewhere, not because he mindlessly suscribes to social norms and stifles his urges because he thinks it pleases me.


----------



## mossystate (Mar 28, 2009)

I have never been married. I have been in committed relationships without the paperwork...and I would never be with someone who suggested an open relationship. Now, I certainly would hope a man would be honest and respectful, so I could make my decision...and not sneak, whether in real life...or with online crap.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 28, 2009)

" Eh, I don't see the difference between an open relationship and an open marriage, unless you are assuming that people in an open relationship are less committed to each other. "

To me, it's one and the same, because all kinds of relationships can be deeply committed, even those which do not end in marriage by choice or circumstance.

Tracy


----------



## OzGuy (Mar 28, 2009)

errrr....Honey? Does this mean we have to buy a bigger bed....again!!!!


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

OzGuy said:


> errrr....Honey? Does this mean we have to buy a bigger bed....again!!!!


Too funny! LMAO


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

I am sitting here thinking about all the replies,... and I really hope I am not offending anyone with this poll/thread. It is not my intention at all. 

Although, I have to admit, I definitely think more on the lines of a "college guy" I guess lol. I am madly in love with my husband, and I would never trade him for the world! Sexually, mentally,physically,emotionally and all those other "ally's"haha He is outstanding. I love that "connection and intimacy" we shard during love making. But for me, its not always needed. To me,.. love and sex don't always have to be there to enjoy just some good sex. Sex is sex,.. making love is a whole other ballpark. So please forgive me, just being honest.

(cringing, just thinking about the replies.... please be nice to me LOL)


----------



## NoWayOut (Mar 28, 2009)

I happen to be a college guy and my thoughts on this are no, absolutely not and never. The entire point of marriage is that you are committed to one person, forever. 

While I personally would not engage in such activity myself, I can understand unmarried people electing to have sex with other consenting unmarried people. They haven't committed to anyone yet. But if you're married? No, I can't understand that at all.


----------



## Just_Jen (Mar 28, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> I am sitting here thinking about all the replies,... and I really hope I am not offending anyone with this poll/thread. It is not my intention at all.
> 
> Although, I have to admit, I definitely think more on the lines of a "college guy" I guess lol. I am madly in love with my husband, and I would never trade him for the world! Sexually, mentally,physically,emotionally and all those other "ally's"haha He is outstanding. I love that "connection and intimacy" we shard during love making. But for me, its not always needed. To me,.. love and sex don't always have to be there to enjoy just some good sex. Sex is sex,.. making love is a whole other ballpark. So please forgive me, just being honest.
> 
> (cringing, just thinking about the replies.... please be nice to me LOL)



awww dont be afraid, we wont eat you..unless you want us to 

What you said earlier about it maybe being the excitement of it that's good. Well why dont you try and make things a bit more exciting. I know this couple who pretended to be having an affair, like met up in dodgy places, hid behind the books in the library that sort of thing. Try just spicing it up a little maybe? Id suggest you be ready to add other people in your life before you do it. 
It might be a good idea to talk to some "swingers" because they would be able to tell you the reality of it for them and stuff..whereas here so far, people are more of a one man/woman person it would seem so we don't see the point of view the right way for you..if that makes sense..


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 28, 2009)

Just_Jen said:


> awww dont be afraid, we wont eat you..unless you want us to
> 
> What you said earlier about it maybe being the excitement of it that's good. Well why dont you try and make things a bit more exciting. I know this couple who pretended to be having an affair, like met up in dodgy places, hid behind the books in the library that sort of thing. Try just spicing it up a little maybe? Id suggest you be ready to add other people in your life before you do it.
> It might be a good idea to talk to some "swingers" because they would be able to tell you the reality of it for them and stuff..whereas here so far, people are more of a one man/woman person it would seem so we don't see the point of view the right way for you..if that makes sense..



awww thank you Jen!! ((((hug))) I was getting scared, I am thinking,.. Ok i am a newbie and I post this thread??!1 WTF was i thinking,.. I wanna erase it now lol 

DELETE DELETE DELETE DELETE DELETE DELETE


----------



## mossystate (Mar 28, 2009)

I just have one suggestion. Before you seriously think about doing what you think you might want to be doing?





Slow down on the caffeine.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Mar 28, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Open relationship if that's your bag but open _marriage_? What's the point then?!?





Butterbelly said:


> I second that! To each their own, but it's definitely not my cup of tea.





Dr. Feelgood said:


> And I'm with Ernest and Butterbelly: if I wanted to screw around, I wouldn't have gotten married.



This sums it up for me. I don't judge other people's relationships. Most of my own relationships could have been easily met with some harsh judgments so I just don't go there. 
But....I concur that "open marriage" goes against the ideal of what Marriage Means To Me. 
Marriage is more than a piece of paper....it's a mindset, as well. My mind needs the security of knowing he agreed to be with me only....and I give him the same. I cannot be "open" with a person that does not want to be faithful to our relationship. That's just something that *I* need in a marriage....because when you get down to it, I am a monogamous person. I prefer one sexual partner at a time.....whether we are committed/married/friends/ whatever....and I want the same of him. 



Just_Jen said:


> In my opinion i think open relationships, never mind marriages are hard. I think unless you are completely both secure within yourselves and your relationship then it wont work because there could be a whole lotta jealousy or the person running off with another. But then at the moment due to circumstances at home im doubting whether people can be truly faithful anyway, so perhaps this is a way of being faithful by blurring the rules.
> I suppose you always have each other to come back to and all.
> But what if one person partakes and the other doesnt..imbalance?!
> 
> ...



Yeah, I think open relationships would have to have a solid foundation of security to actually last......





Zandoz said:


> Personally, I disappoint one woman at a time, I do it very well, then I keep doing it ad nauseam. Your mileage may vary.
> 
> The only ones who can decide on what is right in a specific marriage are the two involved in it.



Lol, indeed. I have a hard enough time keeping up with one fellow.....I would be torn to bits by multiples, I'm sure  



BigBellySSBBW said:


> I can 100% understand an open marriage, but I could not do it. *I do not share well with others*.



Yep, that's me. I can share a lot of things....but not my man. 



BarbBBW said:


> Thank you all for the replies! This is why I wanted to post this thread and get some input! Although my hubby and I have spoke about having an "open marriage" we have not done it. Maybe its the excitement of talking about it? Without actually doing it? Haha who knows,.. but i do value everyone's input on the subject!:bow:



It's your marriage/relationship....and they go through phases/changes over the years. Whatever you decide, I hope you end up in a stronger, loving place with your guy  :bow:


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2009)

if someone can manage it and be happy my hats off to them. even regular marriages and relationships are hard. i had always thought the strongest ones seemed to be the ones where people managed to keep other people out of it. i definitely wouldn't want to do it because i know myself well enough to know that wouldn't be able to feel special with a person in a situation like that. i'd love a place to be able to rest have a bond and not have to always keep my guard up and face the very same jealousies and uncertainties like when i was single. it would be great to just focus on the person i love and care about and indulge myself in all that has to offer. otherwise i may as well stay unattached.


----------



## Ash (Mar 28, 2009)

I think that it's perfectly fine if both parties are open and communicate. Open marriages work remarkably well for some people. I don't think there's anything wrong with it when all eyes are open and all parties are happy.


----------



## Risible (Mar 28, 2009)

I'm opposed to it personally, but I understand it works well for many committed couples, if the ground rules are mutually agreed upon and with lots of discussion and disclosure (which seems like a lot of extra work above and beyond the endless discussion and disclosure of a healthy monogamous relationship).

I just can't help thinking about the what-ifs. What if your (the general "you") partner meets someone that knocks his socks off? What if you do? Even the most stable and loving of relationships go through rough patches, and there are no guarantees with relationships. If you have a good thing, why risk that for sex (assuming you and your partner have an active, fulfilling sex life)? 

What if you discover it's not what you want, but your partner wants to continue? Do you let him/her? Do you force yourself to have sex just to keep up with your partner's extramarital activities? Who would compromise?


----------



## ashmamma84 (Mar 28, 2009)

I know a couple who has an open marriage -- and it's one big dysfunctional affair. The wife has even said she never thought it would go this far, but she's in too deep and feels helpless. All I can do is shake my head because while their relationship was never rock solid, I definitely think this whole open marriage was/is the straw that broke the camels back.


----------



## olwen (Mar 28, 2009)

If the people in the marriage can handle it then why not. They'd have to be totally honest and be able to communicate really well.


----------



## D_A_Bunny (Mar 28, 2009)

I do not judge others, so to each his own. But it would never work for me. I am SUPERDUPERCOMPLETELYIWILLKILLYOUDEAD jealous and too many lives would be ruined.


----------



## Spanky (Mar 29, 2009)

When you are married, you are committed for life to one person. When you have children, IMHO, you have now committed for that one person and the other new little persons you have created. 

Cheating on my wife? NEVER. Cheating on my kids? Cut my nuts off right now. 

To deny my children a safe and happy home with a loving mom and dad because all of that is worth plunging my dick in a vagina?? Really? I mean REALLY? 

The stakes are too high, the love and respect for my wife and my children way higher. 

This is my opinion only. I do not judge others' opinions. But hurting another committed adult is terrible, hurting or ruining an innocent's life (a child) is unbelievable. 

:bow:


----------



## Shosh (Mar 29, 2009)

Spanky said:


> When you are married, you are committed for life to one person. When you have children, IMHO, you have now committed for that one person and the other new little persons you have created.
> 
> Cheating on my wife? NEVER. Cheating on my kids? Cut my nuts off right now.
> 
> ...




That is so nice. I wish there was more guys who shared that sentiment.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 29, 2009)

Spanky said:


> When you are married, you are committed for life to one person. When you have children, IMHO, you have now committed for that one person and the other new little persons you have created.
> 
> Cheating on my wife? NEVER. Cheating on my kids? Cut my nuts off right now.
> 
> ...


are you kidding me here?? WTF?? LMAO No one said anything about cheating, Its a question,.. thats all about an OPEN SEX MARRIAGE!!!!!!!!!! That means BOTH people agree on it!! Not one person goin to get their F*CK on!! I mean come on now. Kids have nothing to do with it. Its an adult thing that 2 adults chose on their adult time. And Yes there are many factoring issues involved, but the question was relating to a STRONG HEALTHY NON JEALOUS ESTABLISHED MARRIAGE. And Yes I understand it is not the chose of most, completely ok with that. But dont go bashing and getting into cheating and destroying children's lives over it!


----------



## LoveBHMS (Mar 29, 2009)

I once read a comment by Hilary Clinton regarding her husband's adultery. It was something along the lines of having learned that the only two people who matter in a relationship are the people in it. I totally agree.

Anyone can look at an infinite number of situations--be it arranged marriages, sexless marriages, loveless marriages, marriages that are held together only for the children and say "Well I could never do that!"

It sounds oversimplistic, but I really don't think other people's relationships are anyone else's business. I know numerous people in marriages that are predicated on things apart from a 21st century notion of romantic love. I know marriages where one or both partners cheat. I know marriages where people married beneath themselves so they would always have the upper hand and control the other person.

Aaaaaand. So what? It's not my business and it's not my place to have an opinion or say what i would or would not do or what i do or don't think is appropriate.

Again, all that matters is what the parties involved think.


----------



## toni (Mar 29, 2009)

When it comes to sex, I am very uninhibited. However, I will never understand open marriages. If you love someone, how can you knowingly share them with someone else? It doesn't make sense to me. If you want to sleep with other people, don't get married.


----------



## Butterbelly (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> are you kidding me here?? WTF?? LMAO No one said anything about cheating, Its a question,.. thats all about an OPEN SEX MARRIAGE!!!!!!!!!! That means BOTH people agree on it!! Not one person goin to get their F*CK on!! I mean come on now. Kids have nothing to do with it. Its an adult thing that 2 adults chose on their adult time. And Yes there are many factoring issues involved, but the question was relating to a STRONG HEALTHY NON JEALOUS ESTABLISHED MARRIAGE. And Yes I understand it is not the chose of most, completely ok with that. But dont go bashing and getting into cheating and destroying children's lives over it!



I'm sorry, but to me an open marriage represents two people openly "cheating" on each other. Mind you, Spanky is entitled to his opinion even if other people disagree.


----------



## NoWayOut (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> are you kidding me here?? WTF?? LMAO No one said anything about cheating, Its a question,.. thats all about an OPEN SEX MARRIAGE!!!!!!!!!! That means BOTH people agree on it!! Not one person goin to get their F*CK on!! I mean come on now. Kids have nothing to do with it. Its an adult thing that 2 adults chose on their adult time. And Yes there are many factoring issues involved, but the question was relating to a STRONG HEALTHY NON JEALOUS ESTABLISHED MARRIAGE. And Yes I understand it is not the chose of most, completely ok with that. But dont go bashing and getting into cheating and destroying children's lives over it!



He answered the question the way he sees it, which is that it's akin to cheating. He's got every right to that opinion. As do I.


----------



## BBW Betty (Mar 29, 2009)

Spanky said:


> When you are married, you are committed for life to one person. When you have children, IMHO, you have now committed for that one person and the other new little persons you have created.
> 
> Cheating on my wife? NEVER. Cheating on my kids? Cut my nuts off right now.
> 
> ...



This is a great post. Too many people forget that actions we take *do* affect others in our lives. There's so much of a "if it feels good, do it" attitude that human beings as a species are becoming much less than we are meant to be.


----------



## chicken legs (Mar 29, 2009)

if its good for the goose then its good for the gander. The idea of an open relationship has been posed to me but the guy wasn't cool with me even flirting with other dudes...so the open relationship was a no go. 

Looking at the experiences of my loved ones around me, and personal experiences.. I am for open relationships. Of course i am not Christian nor have i ever been so maybe that is why it doesn't bother me. I know sex is just sex sometimes and there is no need to get ones panties in a bunch over it especially when there are financial obligations, children, family ties, etc in the mix...which to me are way more important. On the other hand i feel, the outside affairs need to be controlled. Controlled in a way that doesn't take away from the main relationship, but adds to it....just like any other side interest. 

Another point to, is I am not the horniest person around in person. With life's daily stresses, health problems rearing their ugly head, and what not... my sex drive sometimes takes a dive. So I would rather my partner be sexually satisfied than hound me for things i have no interest in.

But once again..if he plays then I want the freedom to play as well and visa versa, and always... play it safe (mentally and physically).


----------



## Tooz (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> the question was relating to a STRONG HEALTHY NON JEALOUS ESTABLISHED MARRIAGE.



I don't think an open marriage resembles that. Just my opinion. But, again, if people want to do it, I guess they should go for it.

FWIW I think Spanky's post was stellar.


----------



## MsGreenLantern (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> And Yes there are many factoring issues involved, but the question was relating to a STRONG HEALTHY NON JEALOUS ESTABLISHED MARRIAGE.



I think that may be precisely why people don't like the idea. If a marriage is strong and healthy, why are those involved in this "established" [assuming they've been married for several years] marriage looking elsewhere for sexual fulfillment now? Something clearly is amiss if they are not happy with just one _anymore_. Is that really a healthy strong marriage? Or is it something they should be working through instead of finding someone else to bring into it? I also feel like jealousy, to some extent, is a good thing in a relationship. It shows how much the person cares, and that they love and value what you have together, not wanting anyone else to screw that up. [clearly jealousy can be taken way way too far, but in small doses it's very healthy indeed]


----------



## goofy girl (Mar 29, 2009)

I didn't respond to the poll, because there wasn't an appropriate response. Like others have said, I feel that if both parties agree to it, and are comfortable with it and it works for them that's wonderful. 

I had always thought it would be something I could do until I actually got married. I feel that sex is (well, in my opinion* should* be) such a small- although important- part of a marriage or serious relationship that if one would feel the need to go outside of it than there is something other than sex lacking, and the entire relationship really needs to be re-evaluated because there is something more going on. 

But again, if two people are agreeable to it and happy with it, then that's what matters.


----------



## MisticalMisty (Mar 29, 2009)

I would never participate in an open marriage..or a poly relationship for that matter.

I think the biggest plus is that an open marriage offers security and someone to come home to once you've been rejected or when you're in a slump.

I had a friend who was in an open marriage. He spent most of the time watching his wife leave to be with her "bf" and he sat at home wondering if he had made the right choice. It went against his core value system. 

We've lost touch, so I'm not sure what happened. I know he was really staying because of their daughter.

Kids aren't as dumb as you think. Unless you are super secret agent secretive...they'll catch on that something isn't right.

However, it is a person's choice...but it's not one that I would ever, EVER support for myself.


----------



## OzGuy (Mar 29, 2009)

All to often, I think, people totally equate marriage to sex. Being married is not some cast iron guarantee for good sex. I mean people, especially these days, get married for all sorts of reasons. Love, family, children, convenience, companionship, money the list goes on . For this reason you can't always apply the values and reasons of your marriage to everyone elses. Perhaps we should just accept that people need what people need and people will do what people will do. Open marriage is not for everyone of course, but it is for many.
If it works for a married couple and they are happy, I say good on them.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 29, 2009)

I think there are two distinct schools of thought on this topic:

1) Open marriages are cheating, pure and simple. Perhaps not on each other specifically but on the institution.

2) Open marriages are complex situations that might work given the proper frame of mind between both parties and their extended partners.

I know swingers who are perfectly ok with any and all forms of sex among their agreed-upon partners in a swing set. They have dinner parties together, they go out to platonic activities. Their kids sometimes play together. It's a friendly community not unlike what you may see in a subdivision except with one unique attribute: After the kids go to sleep or the sun goes down, all the adults have sex with each other. However, if someone goes outside the swinger circle, has sex with at that point an 'unknown entity,' that constitutes cheating and there can be serious consequences; it's having your cake, eating it too, but then wanting to go out for pie. I don't claim to understand the nuances of why this works, but for some people it does.

I would also say from an objective viewpoint that given current statistics, 60-70% of marriages cannot survive whatever demands finances, monogamy or day-to-day stresses place on the relationship. 

On a note separate from that of open marriage, there is also a matter of argument from experience going on. In my personal opinion (as I often do in topics governing alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.) I have to take with a grain of salt the opinion of unmarrieds or even people who have been in long-term common law situations; from a legal and societal perspective it's still not marriage, and to a degree has no relevance to arguments to that fact.

For people who have had a marriage of near perfection, who are still as in love with their spouse on day 1 as they are in their 15th year, I applaud you, more power to you, and I am curious to know your secret. If that marriage has not involved a death of a parent, health issues, sexual compatibility, job issues, childrearing and various other stresses that challenge couples, I would say that they have never really had to test the strength of that relationship. Again, if they've been through Hell and back and are still madly in love, I applaud your tenacity and your devotion. I for one was absolutely certain once my sister and I were out of the house, my parents would divorce. We both assumed it as a given since we were teens. My dad's eventual cancer and a reexamination of their union made the difference and despite all they've gone through, after 40 years it is still going strong.

I think any topic of this nature is going to elicit strong opinions from both sides and there are never any absolute right or wrong answers, although the poll results seem to suggest that the open system would not work. It's still a very interesting discussion.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Mar 29, 2009)

*OUTSTANDING!!!! *:bow: :bow: :bow:




Spanky said:


> When you are married, you are committed for life to one person. When you have children, IMHO, you have now committed for that one person and the other new little persons you have created.
> 
> Cheating on my wife? NEVER. Cheating on my kids? Cut my nuts off right now.
> 
> ...


----------



## Spanky (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW,

While my opinion stands, and I thought I made it crystal clear that it is my opinion, I want to clarify out of respect to you the OP. 

I think open marriages defeat the purpose of marriage. Unless you changed the vows and are living under those alternative vows, it is cheating on the other partner, cheating on your promise, and YES, with children, it is cheating on them. 

I mean my vows, stated in front of my to be wife and my family and her family, our friends, etc, were a promise to a sacred bond not to be broken, for better or worse, richer or poorer, UNTIL DEATH DO US PART. 

Maybe the vows would have to read, UNTIL WE BOTH AGREE TO ALLOW THE OTHER TO SLEEP WITH ANOTHER. Try saying that in front of your friends and family. Do it first and right now if you plan to live under those promises. Then I would say fine. Consenting adults living under their promises. I would welcome it. I doubt one would do it publicly. 

And make sure the children know, if they are there or when they are old enough to understand. They will not be impressed. They are so wonderfully black and white. 

- spanky


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 29, 2009)

I guess I'm just cynical...

The way I see it, regardless of whether you embrace monogamy or not, you should always be honest and true to your partner(s). I used to be shocked at how many people in self-proclaimed monogamous relationships cheat on their partners. And even people in self-proclaimed non-monogamous relationships cheating on their partner(s). Now, it just makes me kinda sad. 

My personal definition of "cheating" is going behind your partner(s) back to do something with another person that falls outside of the rules you and your partner(s) have agreed upon. And those rules can be as strict or liberal as the people involved in the relationship feel is appropriate. 

If monogamy was *the* way to go, then websites like Craigslist, Backpage, Adult Friend Finder, Married Match, etc... (among MANY, MANY others) would not be flourishing. I can browse the Houston Craigslist personal ads on any given day and find at least a hundred different ads from people looking to cheat on their partners. And that is one message forum for one city. 

I get propositioned by monogamous committed people or by people who know I am in a committed relationship and do not play outside of the confines of it. Most of them give me one of two responses when I say no. "What they don't know won't hurt them" and "who needs to know but us". That really bothers me. Because even if I managed to pull it off without them knowing it, *I* would know it and it would make me feel like dirt to know I broke a promise I made to people I love dearly and who love me dearly in return. 

If partners are being true and honest to each other, even if they do not embrace monogamy, then they are still doing better by each other than all the people who are deceiving and betraying their partners by doing it behind their partners backs or who are trying to get others to do it behind their partners backs. 

IMHO, the honesty is what matters more than the kind of relationship. 
Tracy


----------



## Captain Save (Mar 29, 2009)

Hi, everyone!

A similar subject came up while I was at work, and thus this thread grabbed my attention. I think an open marriage, while not for everyone, can be an effective way to learn new tricks to please a spouse in ways neither ever dreamed, especially if neither spouse can read and execute instructions in a textbook setting. If sex is the only thread holding a couple together, or if withholding is used as a threat or punishment, then they are already in need of counseling, and shouldn't try this at all, as the point is to enjoy and hopefully learn something without damaging the marriage (yes, a marriage really is infinitely more than having an inhouse horizontal mambo partner.)


----------



## toni (Mar 29, 2009)

I disagree with that, Captain. The way to learn "new tricks" to please your spouse is by taking time out and exploring with them. NO WAY is going outside the marriage OK to experiment. Who ever came up with that EXCUSE is really reaching. 

If sex is so boring that two people need to venture out then I think there are major problems in the marriage. 

Have your fun and do your "research" before you say "I do".


----------



## Captain Save (Mar 29, 2009)

I understand and respect your right to disagree, toni; however, what do we tell those who got married very young, to their first love, and the idea didn't occur to them to learn all they could to have a happy sex life as well as a happy and healthy marriage? So many people get married with no idea of the depth of such a commitment, and I believe that with the general lack of understanding of what it means to be married, along with the glamourization of adultery in the general media, a great deal of these couples need every incentive not to attempt to get what they want while putting their marriage at risk.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 29, 2009)

Spanky,
I was just clarifying some info, thats all  I listed this thread to see what people thought about this thread. Either way, your opinion is appreciated . I am not trying to argue or press an idea on to you at all. Live and let live I still adore you

As for everyone one else..... Thank you all. Its been an interesting thread to say the least. For my second thread on DIMS, not too shabby  

BUT , next time I am sticking to something like what color eyes do you prefer!! LMAO


----------



## goofy girl (Mar 29, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Spanky,
> I was just clarifying some info, thats all  I listed this thread to see what people thought about this thread. Either way, your opinion is appreciated . I am not trying to argue or press an idea on to you at all. Live and let live I still adore you
> 
> As for everyone one else..... Thank you all. Its been an interesting thread to say the least. For my second thread on DIMS, not too shabby
> ...




More than likely, that would cause just as much drama


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Mar 29, 2009)

toni said:


> *The way to learn "new tricks" to please your spouse is by taking time out and exploring with them.*



I agree with this....I always liked trying new things with my trusted spouse. It's much harder for me to be "open" with men I don't know like I did my spouse.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Mar 29, 2009)

I don't think I could do it. I'd get too jealous.


----------



## Spanky (Mar 30, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Spanky,
> I was just clarifying some info, thats all  I listed this thread to see what people thought about this thread. Either way, your opinion is appreciated . I am not trying to argue or press an idea on to you at all. Live and let live I still adore you
> 
> As for everyone one else..... Thank you all. Its been an interesting thread to say the least. For my second thread on DIMS, not too shabby
> ...



You are doing fine. We are fine. We are all in this together. :bow:

:blush: on the "adore".


----------



## frankman (Mar 30, 2009)

I'm in the "why marry if you want to do other people" group. to me, an open marriage very much seems like going to the movies together but seeing different films.

I do however now visualize couples saying the until-we-both-agree vows Spanky wrote. The video's and pictures of those weddings would be stellar.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 30, 2009)

goofy girl said:


> More than likely, that would cause just as much drama


Yeah, the Internets are serious business.


----------



## largenlovely (Mar 30, 2009)

live and let live..if two people are happy having an open relationship then good for them. As long as they're open and honest with every party involved.

Me personally..not my thang.


----------



## Keb (Mar 30, 2009)

I'm not married yet, but I believe for myself that 100% monogamy is the healthiest sort of relationship, and makes for the strongest marriages. 

Even the idea of having all the sex one can before one settles down baffles me, and doesn't seem that healthy to me, emotionally or physically. Besides, I'm in the "jealous" camp--once I find someone, I don't think I could stand sharing. (And why should I, if I've been waiting so long for him?) I am now trying to decide whether my POV is more or less selfish than an open relationship would be.

On the other hand, I don't really expect everyone else to live by the same values I have. I guess people could make an open relationship work for them, but it's not an easy idea for me to wrap my head around.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 30, 2009)

I might be amenable to a "free pass" situation. If I know my husband is into janet jackson for example and he meets JJ and she wants to bang, he could very well call me up and say, "Honey I won't be home. JJ wants to to f*&k." Once in a lifetime opportunity sex probably wouldn't bother me, especially if there's money involved. If she'll pay I say go for it, I'll pimp him out for a night. I want roses though and I want to be told s/he wasn't as good as me.


----------



## benzdiesel (Mar 30, 2009)

I'm not going to sit back and criticize something that everybody involved is comfortable with... but for me personally, it'd never happen. A marriage isn't just an agreement saying that two people want to live together and have a joint checking account; to me, it's a binding commitment between two people to devote the rest of their lives to one another, exclusively. Now, while there may be a reason to legitimately end the marriage in divorce due to violence, cheating, etc (and I have no criticism when it's necessary) - setting up a marriage to allow for deliberate, pre-planned adultery that everybody's cheerfully happy about seems rather pointless. Like I said, in my mind, the concept of marriage is a binding and exclusive agreement between two people (and, in many cases, also involves their religion) and it seems that the exclusivity factor is a major part of what makes a marriage more than just "living together" in the first place. Why get married if you _aren't_ dedicated to that person only?

Again, if everybody involved is comfortable with it, I'm not going to stand back and point fingers. But... personally, in my life, I see it as cheating whether both parties consented to allow it or not. Sorry.


----------



## pjbbwlvr (Mar 30, 2009)

As I dabbled in 3 somes and swinging, I do have a considerable amount of experience in this subject. But I have to say that an open marriage is wrong! As someone earlier said, open relationship yes, open marriage why bother to be married. If a couples's marriage desires openess then we should look deep as to what is missing in our own marriage and try to fix it. If you can't fix it then do whatever you need to be happy. But to have an open marriage I don't belive in it. 
I hope that I didn't offend anyone but this is my opinion and I don't try to impart my opinion on anyone!
Thank you, Paul






BarbBBW said:


> Hello everyone! So I have been thinking about "Open Marriages" I believe in Open marriages, personally. If you have a strong foundation, built with trust,love,lust,respect and common courtesy to one another, of course. Let's face it,.. sex is just,... to put it simply "Great". I believe just cause you get married to the man/ woman of your dreams, it shouldnt mean you go without the variety of sex pleasures , from a variety of people ,that are still out there waiting to be enjoyed. You only live once, and I say go for it all, while you can!
> I understand ,.. a marriage is sacred and all that jazz, I really do. But I think that if you can both enjoy your sexuality to the fullest, within safe guidelines,.. then why not? Being true to one another, keeping a strong open communication, without ridicule,judgment, or reservations about sex and all your sexual desires, I believe is the key!
> What do you think? I would love to know!! ".


----------



## Rowan (Mar 30, 2009)

personally.....if you want someone other than your spouse in bed...you have no business getting married in the first place. Marriage is a commitment to one another. It's not....oh hey...lets have other people in the bed in a few months. If you cant be committed to the person you've married....you shouldnt be married at all.

I guess this is a bit of a sore spot for me...but figured id share my two cents


----------



## chicken legs (Mar 30, 2009)

lol I think the question is ...If you are Christian based person, what do you think of open marriages.


----------



## Just_Jen (Mar 30, 2009)

maybe more marriages should be less monogamous, they could last longer...thinking about the amount of people that cheat or want to in one way, shape or form


----------



## Just_Jen (Mar 30, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> lol I think the question is ...If you are Christian based person, what do you think of open marriages.



haha that question technically throws me out, i'm not christian, Doh!:doh:


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 30, 2009)

pjbbwlvr said:


> As I dabbled in 3 somes and swinging, I do have a considerable amount of experience in this subject. But I have to say that an open marriage is wrong! As someone earlier said, open relationship yes, open marriage why bother to be married. If a couples's marriage desires openess then we should look deep as to what is missing in our own marriage and try to fix it. If you can't fix it then do whatever you need to be happy. But to have an open marriage I don't belive in it.
> I hope that I didn't offend anyone but this is my opinion and I don't try to impart my opinion on anyone!
> Thank you, Paul


I don't think any couple goes into a marriage expecting it to become open. I have never known (and perhaps Paul can shed some wisdom on this) of any couple who started out as swingers but then got married and kept up with that lifestyle all through their relationship. The four that I know all agree it had to do with reaching the limits of their personal creativity and wanting to explore other partners; they were secure in their household, family, lifestyle but wanted the excitement of adult activities of a carnal nature with other partners. I have heard in one or two instances where a member of the marriage wasn't able to perform for their partner anymore, so a swinging/open style was a sort of 'hail mary pass' to find someone to take care of their needs. This in itself is a huge issue subjectively, but again, it's hard to castigate it until someone has been there.

Given the success of swinger clubs across the nation, I would gather this is becoming more and more an option in some marriages in lieu of divorce; the love is still there but the passion for whatever reason has fizzled and so you go to other partners to take care of that need. I don't see how one morality can be used to judge whether it's right or wrong--it's based on the individual relationship. From a slightly different perspective, the option of divorce may not be there for either financial or child reasons. There was just an article on Yahoo a while back (which I can't find) where couples were technically divorced from each other but still lived together, dated other people and essentially were roomies. Of course a divorce lawyer was on hand saying this was an ultra bad move, but considering some experts are saying it's becoming too expensive to divorce, who is to say?


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Mar 30, 2009)

I'm just gonna say that for me I really don't think marriage is defined by fidelity so much as integrity and respect. I choose to honor someone by saying "my word to you means more to me than anything else in the world". I acknowledge that when we're apart in whatever ways for whatever reasons I may be tempted to indulge emotional needs and physical urges with someone else but I won't. It's not a sacrifice. It's a gift freely given of commitment. Yes, I hope my partner will reciprocate but even if she doesn't my word to her is my bond. I cherish my spouses trust and never want to jeopardize or dishonor it. To cheat on her is to sell out on myself. 

My faithfulness is as much an article of self-respect as it is love. To be married is, in a very real sense to me, to put your soul at stake. It isn't like a trade - fidelity for love, but an investment in yourself. It signifies our willingness to be completely accountable for our actions at the risk of losing what we hold most dear. An "open" marriage requires no such courage and therefore does not warrant the sanctity of that term. JMO. Thanks to the OP for making me think that through and the opportunity to say it publicly. :bow:

In the interest of full disclosure I am compelled to acknowledge I am a 3 time loser (married the first wife twice but still, 3 strikes). Many happy years in there before the wheels came off each time. I won't say "no regrets" but I can say I never strayed, no matter how much I may have wanted to. Small satisfaction perhaps, but I wouldn't trade it for anything.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 30, 2009)

" maybe more marriages should be less monogamous, they could last longer...thinking about the amount of people that cheat or want to in one way, shape or form" 

I have to say I feel the same way. And also, there are two sides to the coin that really don't balance each other.

On one side, most people feel very strongly that there is no difference between honest non-monogamy and deceptive non-monogamy. It doesn't matter if it is a couple that mutually agrees to allow for casual lovers or who get involved in the swinging lifestyle together. Doesn't even matter if one or both partners forms a committed serious polyamorous relationship based on love, trust and caring. It's still cheating and wrong and means that it is not a real, true, strong, healthy, committed, or otherwise "good as mine" relationship. 

But, here is the other side of that coin. Non-monogamy of both kinds is glorified in so many books, movies, and television shows. And all it takes is a few clicks of the mouse and you can find swinger clubs in your area, as well as thousands and thousands of people to cheat on your partner with if you choose the behind the back sneaking around option. Not to mention all the people getting off to cybersex and phone sex without their partner. Some people consider their partner masturbating to porn as cheating. But the porn industry is flourishing. And it's not just lonely single people and couples who like to spice up their relationships with a little naughty-naughty now and then who are buying millions and millions of dollars worth of dvds, arcade booth admissions, paysite memberships, etc... every single year. The sex industry is thriving too. There are a LOT of prostitutes out there earning a living out of the wallets of married and otherwise committed men. Again, it's not just lonely singles and mutually consenting couples purchasing their services. 

It just doesn't add up, you know? If monogamy is THE way to go, then why the cultural obsession with non-monogamy and the vast number of people actually engaging in it? I mean the people who are happily and openly non-monogamous are usually getting together with people of like mind. All these monogamous people aren't really acting all that monogamous when you think about it...

If monogamy works for you as a person and couple, then that's great. As long as you can practice what you preach. More power to you for setting your personal standards and living up to them. That is a very commendable thing. But don't think that monogamy is superior to honest and consensual non-monogamy *in general* because if it was it wouldn't have such a high failure rate. 

IMHO, do right by your partners, regardless of what the rules you choose to live your lives together by. 

Tracy


----------



## HottiMegan (Mar 30, 2009)

My husband and I have talked about bringing other people into our relationship. Most of our friends are swingers so the topic came up between the two of us. I have very little experience outside of him. Well non actually. He was my first kiss, love, lover. We came to the conclusion that it's not for us. I've got too many insecurities to want to share him with another person. Plus, he's my fantasy. He's the only person i WANT to be with. 
I am not against that sort of relationship because my dear friends have very happy loving marriages that have "dates" to play with others. I see them as having very strong relationships with eachother that just happen to dabble in some of their fantasies by bringing other couples in. One of my friends is bi and has a girlfriend most of the time. Her husband happens to be a voyeur so he enjoys the watching aspect. That might be more of a polyamorous than open marriage though. They all have children that are happy and well adjusted.
I'm a sort of "whatever floats your boat" kind of girl.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 30, 2009)

I really appreciate all the replies....wow! I understand many of you are "opposed" to an open sex marriage" I completely understand. And thats why I wanted to put this post out there for everyone!

Just some info, from where this thought came from. I have been with my hubby for 9 years,..married for 4 years. Before him for 2 years prior,I had several open relationships, mostly dating, just havin fun. Some sexual ones. But I love the sexual independence of it. 
I am not in the least a jealous person. I have a strong faith in my husband, thats why I married him, he is just the best man alive, to me. We have a great friendship, a fantastic sex life and always have fun together. We have done everything from A-Z. Minus a 3some and swinging. We are just sexually charged people. And he knows full well, if he has an opportunity to get some oral, handjob whatever from some hot chick in some hot situation then he better go for it lol. See this is where alot of you,...say to me,... Ughhhh Shame on you! And thats ok,..its all good to me. I say be honest, be true and go for it!! Although, he has never taken advantage of this,.. he knows how I feel about it. 

So, although we will probably never do the "open marriage" thing , I think its still a Hot subject,.. to me anyways hahha, and a great topic to see how everyone feels about it. Thanks again for your time


----------



## toni (Mar 30, 2009)

Just_Jen said:


> maybe more marriages should be less monogamous, they could last longer...thinking about the amount of people that cheat or want to in one way, shape or form



Maybe people need to stop getting married. If you want to cheat, you shouldn't be married. It is that simple. Now if you both want to cheat, then you REALLY REALLY shouldn't be married. What is so hard about that? What is wrong with two people living together and testing it out? People jump into marriage too quickly, that is where the problem lies. 

I know that I can not get up in front of my family and friends to recite marriage vows because I do not believe I could stick to them. I have never met anyone I can picture saying those words to and truly mean them. That is why I am not married and probably never will be.

IMHO, sex is never just physical, it is mind and body. The longing to be with your lover, the passion that is expressed between two people, it is very deep. Why would you allow your spouse to experience that with someone else? I just don't get it.


----------



## Shosh (Mar 30, 2009)

Why bother being married? If you want to have multiple partners stay single. I am not a fan of open relationships.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 30, 2009)

toni said:


> Maybe people need to stop getting married. If you want to cheat, you shouldn't be married. It is that simple. Now if you both want to cheat, then you REALLY REALLY shouldn't be married. What is so hard about that? What is wrong with two people living together and testing it out? People jump into marriage too quickly, that is where the problem lies.
> 
> I know that I can not get up in front of my family and friends to recite marriage vows because I do not believe I could stick to them. I have never met anyone I can picture saying those words to and truly mean them. That is why I am not married and probably never will be.
> 
> IMHO, sex is never just physical, it is mind and body. The longing to be with your lover, the passion that is expressed between two people, it is very deep. Why would you allow your spouse to experience that with someone else? I just don't get it.



People getting married isnt the problem, It is insecure poeple getting married for reassurance of themselves, or getting married for money, status, pregnant, pressure from parents, cant be by themselves, always needing a man etc. I married for LOVE, pure love and good sex of course. Or getting divorced all the time cause the wife wont stop her bitching, from her own insecurities and thinking her man is always wanting another woman, not bothering to talk about things in the open with their partner, divorcing over stupid shit now a days. Put work into what you love, is what I say, anyways, I am getting off the subject,.. big surprise lol. 
You opinion is noted


----------



## toni (Mar 30, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> People getting married isnt the problem, It is insecure poeple getting married for reassurance of themselves, or getting married for money, status, pregnant, pressure from parents, cant be by themselves, always needing a man etc. I married for LOVE, pure love and good sex of course. Or getting divorced all the time cause the wife wont stop her bitching, from her own insecurities and thinking her man is always wanting another woman, not bothering to talk about things in the open with their partner, divorcing over stupid shit now a days. Put work into what you love, is what I say, anyways, I am getting off the subject,.. big surprise lol.
> You opinion is noted



It is the same thing. Getting married for those reasons are WRONG. That's what leads people to cheat and be unhappy. If they didn't get married to begin with, there wouldn't be two miserable people looking to cheat, would there be?

It is great that you have such a "unique" relationship with your husband. If you don't mind him getting blow jobs from other chicks that is fine. Whatever makes you happy. 

If someone does not want their spouse sleeping around, that has nothing to do with insecurity. Most married people (not in open relationships) who sleep around continue to return home to their spouse every night. So, I do not really see the insecurity issue there. 

Insecurity comes into play when you know something is lacking in yourself or your marriage. That doesn't come out of the blue. It always existed. So maybe people need to get themselves together BEFORE giving themselves to another person. STOP getting married too soon.

Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. 

Now truly think about your husband having an open relationship with someone else. This woman, who is not you is the person he dreams of at night. This woman might be the person he is thinking of when he is having sex with you. This woman is the person he can't wait to see when he gets off of work some days. This is the woman he shares intimate moments with. You know that cute little look he has when he climaxes? Yeah, she knows it too. WHY do you want to share that? It boggles my mind.


----------



## Tooz (Mar 30, 2009)

toni said:


> Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me.



Haha! This is how I feel.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 30, 2009)

" Originally Posted by toni 
Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. "

You know, I am all for people disagreeing with the way others choose to live their lives. We all can't be the same, and we can't all make the same choices. But, that being said, it really gets my hackles up when women start slinging slurs like "skank" around, directed at other women whose only offense is to choose not to live their life the same way. Especially when they are doing so in the presence of those women. We're not just speaking hypothetically here, there are women who read this board who are involved in non-monogamous relationships. 

I know non-monogamy is a serious emotional trigger for a lot of people. Some have infidelity and betrayal baggage from previous relationships, some are afraid that their partner will mess around behind their back, some are just so sure that their way is the right way that they cannot accept the fact that others do not agree, Some are raised with strong religious and cultural conditioning and react strongly against people who break their rules. 

But triggering as it may be, there is still no reason for name-calling. 

Tracy


----------



## Adrian (Mar 30, 2009)

To me, on the surface an open marriage sounds nice but, I seriously doubt my marriage would have lasted forty-three plus years, if I was in an open relationship. There simply is to many times when my "little head" would over rule my "big head" (the one on my shoulders) and I wouldn't be able to distinguish the difference between lust and love. Especially if the marriage is going through a 'rough time'.
Having more frequent sexual intimacy with multiple people sounds great, but the HBO program, "Big Love" has kinda killed my desire for polygamy. Not that my wife would go for that, in that respect she is very narrow minded!!

I find it difficult enough constantly reading postings from the many young ladies and getting the impression that I know something about them. I see their pretty faces and I have to remember, I am married. I can not start up another relationship. Playing around with them in person and remain in love with my wife as number one.... it simply not possible for me.

Adrian


----------



## toni (Mar 30, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " Originally Posted by toni
> Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. "
> 
> You know, I am all for people disagreeing with the way others choose to live their lives. We all can't be the same, and we can't all make the same choices. But, that being said, it really gets my hackles up when women start slinging slurs like "skank" around, directed at other women whose only offense is to choose not to live their life the same way. Especially when they are doing so in the presence of those women. We're not just speaking hypothetically here, there are women who read this board who are involved in non-monogamous relationships.
> ...



The word skank was used for emphasis. It was not directed at anyone specifically. If someone was offended or think the word fits them, sorry they feel that way about themselves.


----------



## DeniseW (Mar 30, 2009)

yeah, I have a pass if Blair Underwood should ever want to do me....lol. 






LillyBBBW said:


> I might be amenable to a "free pass" situation. If I know my husband is into janet jackson for example and he meets JJ and she wants to bang, he could very well call me up and say, "Honey I won't be home. JJ wants to to f*&k." Once in a lifetime opportunity sex probably wouldn't bother me, especially if there's money involved. If she'll pay I say go for it, I'll pimp him out for a night. I want roses though and I want to be told s/he wasn't as good as me.


----------



## chicken legs (Mar 30, 2009)

*Toni..


Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. *

LOL ..Considering your view point...I doubt he would tell you if someone did do the dew, and then you would still end up sucking him off. Now that would suck.

Ignorance can be bliss. I, however, would rather keep lines of communication open regardless of the situation. To me that is the point of an "open marriage". I want it to be open regarding sex, child rearing techniques, money, vacation spots, retirement, etc.


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 30, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> *Toni..
> 
> 
> Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. *
> ...



Honestly, I would definately give my husband head after he "stuck it in some skank" earlier in the week!! I would give him head if he did that and she was sitting next to me and he turned twords me,..LMAO ,.. I know,.. gross and a shame and OMG and all that!!,.. Its all good!


----------



## Your Plump Princess (Mar 30, 2009)

It's just like any other sort of relationship.
It Apparently works for some people, and doesn't for others.
Whatever makes married folk happy, I suppose. :3


----------



## toni (Mar 30, 2009)

I see your point chicken legs. 

I can't see an open relationship not turning ugly. 

I have a limited view of one from afar at work. 4 coworkers, all great people, in their 40's were involved in an open relationship. One of the woman came up pregnant. OOPPS! Guess what, they didn't know who the father was. CRAZY!!!! Unfortunately the pregnancy ended in a miscarriage but do you see all the possibilities for problems? This woman already had a ten year old child. How is she going to explain all this to him?

Like I said, they are all great people and I am not passing judgement on them. But it turned into a total mess. Everyone was whispering (which isn't right either but people are people). 

Say pregnancy wasn't the issue, what about STD's? I know there would be some sort of precautions taken but after a while people get careless and mistakes happen. IMHO, it just isn't a great place to be. Kind of like playing Russian roulette.


----------



## chicken legs (Mar 30, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Honestly, I would definately give my husband head after he "stuck it in some skank" earlier in the week!! I would give him head if he did that and she was sitting next to me and he turned twords me,..LMAO ,.. I know,.. gross and a shame and OMG and all that!!,.. Its all good!



hehehehe....I take it you usually come out at night...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRzSc8Mkr8c


Man its all about the OLD SCHOOL...****breaks out cardboard****


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 30, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> hehehehe....I take it you usually come out at night...
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRzSc8Mkr8c
> ...



LMAO i am sorry,.. too much?? hahaha
Yes I am a freak!!
Usually at night, i get worse, man its been a long day !!
And thank you for noticing! I am sure most of the replies to that comment will not be so light hearted and fun!! Muahhhh


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 31, 2009)

toni said:


> Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me.


Well, if the 'skank' was a woman you trusted, who was also within a limited circle of friends who received regular STD tests and was confined to that group of people, who is to say?

I would say the guy should at least take a shower in between. 

I keep going back to that old joke:

_What is a slut: A woman who sleeps with everyone._
_What is a bitch: A woman who sleeps with everyone but YOU._


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

I completely believe for some people an ooen marriage could never work. For me being with anyone who wanted to own me (as in me only loving them, physically and emotionally) would never - ever work. I married Wayne because he respected my independance and my need of freedom. It only works for me that way. And we both are very happy.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

Susannah said:


> Why bother being married? If you want to have multiple partners stay single. I am not a fan of open relationships.



Because while you may want to marry because he/she is the one you want to grow old with and come home to every night - he/she may not be the only person you love and want to have sex with. Sex and love are 2 seperate things at least for me.  

Whenever anyone asks why I got married? I say because he is the man I want to live with and create a life with, but I also feel love and attraction for others. 

I do not believe in the Judeo/Christian idea of marriage, I never have. So that in and of itself makes me *wrong* in most peoples eyes. I live my life for me, no one else.


----------



## NoWayOut (Mar 31, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> Well, if the 'skank' was a woman you trusted, who was also within a limited circle of friends who received regular STD tests and was confined to that group of people, who is to say?
> 
> I would say the guy should at least take a shower in between.
> 
> ...



No, actually, they're both sluts.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 31, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> No, actually, they're both sluts.


Then I suppose a guy in the same situation would be called legend. Isn't that the distinction?


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Mar 31, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Because while you may want to marry because he/she is the one you want to grow old with and come home to every night - he/she may not be the only person you love and want to have sex with. Sex and love are 2 seperate things at least for me.
> 
> Whenever anyone asks why I got married? I say because he is the man I want to live with and create a life with, but I also feel love and attraction for others.
> 
> *I do not believe in the Judeo/Christian idea of marriage, *I never have. So that in and of itself makes me *wrong* in most peoples eyes. I live my life for me, no one else.



Just for the record I don't think most of the posts here have been supporting marriage as a religious institution. Fidelity (the topic at hand), if not monogamy, is hardly exclusive to the Judeo/Christian tradition though. I make no judgment of those who choose something other than monogamy but most widely pervasive traditions have some functional reason for persistence. The fact that "exclusive" marriage is a multi-cultural norm does not immediately disqualify it from being both satisfying and healthy on a personal level. Quite the opposite I should think.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

OH but marriage - the way it is today in this country - is a product of the church.

I never said others could not be happy in a monogamous marriage - I said I couldn't. 




Ernest Nagel said:


> Just for the record I don't think most of the posts here have been supporting marriage as a religious institution. Fidelity (the topic at hand), if not monogamy, is hardly exclusive to the Judeo/Christian tradition though. I make no judgment of those who choose something other than monogamy but most widely pervasive traditions have some functional reason for persistence. The fact that "exclusive" marriage is a multi-cultural norm does not immediately disqualify it from being both satisfying and healthy on a personal level. Quite the opposite I should think.


----------



## snuggletiger (Mar 31, 2009)

Just not something I could do. If the lady wants multiple lovers, fine go out be happy, I just don't crave at being a piece of meat or some notch on a bedpost. There's that whole concept of self worth and personal dignity that seem to creep in now and then.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 31, 2009)

" I just don't crave at being a piece of meat or some notch on a bedpost. 
There's that whole concept of self worth and personal dignity that seem to creep in now and then."

Not everybody bases their self worth and personal dignity on their genitalia, what they chose to do with it, and with whom. Some people base their self worth and personal dignity on things like how well they treat others, how well they use their gifts and talents, and how much they give instead of take through the course of their lives. 

Tracy


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Mar 31, 2009)

A man whose upbringing/culture/religion allows for polygamy has five wives. Is he a legend? 

If this same man copulates with Wife-A on Monday, Wife-D on Tuesday, Wife-B on Wednesday etc. are the respective wives skanks to each other? 

A married couple of thirteen years with an active sex life is in an accident. After three years of trying near everything to work around it, they have conceded that the accident has rendered the husband completely, irrevocably impotent. He could not please her if he wanted to, but he has absolutely no desire to do so. They still very much love each other and she has been completely faithful to him all this time, but the husband knows she has needs. He gives permission for her to take lovers under the agreement that while he will not be there during the act itself, he must at least meet and approve potential partners. This arrangement has gone on for three years now. She has had sex a total of seven times, each with a different lover, is she a slut?


I am a single woman, I like sex. I have three or four "friends with benefits" whom I can turn to when I need to scratch that particular itch. I have been very honest and each of my "friends" know he is not the only person I turn to. Am I a slut?


----------



## MsGreenLantern (Mar 31, 2009)

I feel like the word "skank" when used originally in this post, was more like, random bar-hopping easy as pie girl who the married man was into enough to get a feebie, not an agreed upon partner, not a confident woman who is careful and out for any sort of friendship or otherwise... etc etc. 

The point is, a lot of woman would consider a woman knowingly going down on a married man to be a skank. They are the essential part of cheating, and all it takes is looking at the ring on the finger for them to know. I've never met a single woman who would go out and have any kind of sex with a man they knew was married if the wife was nowhere to be seen. It's skanky. It's likely hurting someone else for a moment's pleasure. It was nothing about single ladies loving responsible sex, or anything like that.

Also, Christianity has nothing to do with this. I don't go to church. My sister was married in front of a judge... its about a vow being made, and consequently broken whether with consent or not.

Also, you guys said stuff about why is polygamy and open marriage so bad when it could save a marriage from divorce? Well, maybe they need one. I'd rather see a higher divorce rate than kids growing up not sure which guy mommy is sleeping with is their dad, or having to watch daddy go out on a date with someone else from their house, or seeing couples who are simply unable to make each other happy stay together as friends just to say they aren't divorced. I work with kids, kids of divorce, kids with unstable parents, kids with single moms, and the kids with a nuclear family. They pick up on this stuff. It's confusing to them, and they're too little to understand the concept. They want a mom and a dad who they feel like they can count on, and when you add more people into the mix, it really throws them for a loop. Even a divorced parent dating messes with their heads let alone a married mom and dad. [clearly not everyone will have kids but with sex/marriage comes babies often, especially if you're having a lot]


----------



## mossystate (Mar 31, 2009)

If I hear about a woman going down on ( or whatever ) a man who is known to be in a committed relationship...married or not...my first thought is that he is the biggest ' skank '. Some skank who decided to leave the house that night and go looking for any woman, who was not his wife/partner. The woman he finds might, or might not, have been looking for a ' taken ' man...but the man knows for sure what _his_ situation is.


----------



## NoWayOut (Mar 31, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> Then I suppose a guy in the same situation would be called legend. Isn't that the distinction?



No, he'd be a man-whore. Definitely not a legend.


----------



## mossystate (Mar 31, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> No, he'd be a man-whore. Definitely not a legend.



He'd be a whore. No need to add the man. That makes it seem that woman as whore is the norm. Carry on.


for those who feel a burning need to throw the labels around...at least they should be the right labels...yay, labels


----------



## BarbBBW (Mar 31, 2009)

OneWickedAngel said:


> A man whose upbringing/culture/religion allows for polygamy has five wives. Is he a legend?
> 
> If this same man copulates with Wife-A on Monday, Wife-D on Tuesday, Wife-B on Wednesday etc. are the respective wives skanks to each other?
> 
> ...



Well you should know my answer to this,...But for the record,.. No way you are a slut!! Good for you! A strong independent woman, enjoys sex and are being honest to the men involved. Do your thang you sexy ass woman!! woohoo!


----------



## NoWayOut (Mar 31, 2009)

mossystate said:


> He'd be a whore. No need to add the man. That makes it seem that woman as whore is the norm. Carry on.
> 
> 
> for those who feel a burning need to throw the labels around...at least they should be the right labels...yay, labels



Fair enough. We'll go with that.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Mar 31, 2009)

MsGreenLantern said:


> I feel like the word "skank" when used originally in this post, was more like, random bar-hopping easy as pie girl who the married man was into enough to get a feebie, not an agreed upon partner, not a confident woman who is careful and out for any sort of friendship or otherwise... etc etc.


I guess the solution here is to refrain from labels. There has been a lot of focus on the open marriage issue and a lot of the heat put in the hands of the hypothetical husband who wants an open marriage, when in fact it was the original poster (woman) who suggested it. If the woman initiates the desire for an open marriage, and certainly could find willing (and safe) men to partner with, I wonder if the tone would change? I won't even get into the imbalance argument, i.e., men have been predominantly cheaters far longer and prouder than women have, but as one poster said, we're living in a culture that seems to glorify infidelity (or at the very least, make it something to not even bat an eye over). Hollywood starlets and male actors go from partner to partner weekly, marriages begin and end on a whim, kids and adults alike pattern their behaviors in some cases accordingly.



> The point is, a lot of woman would consider a woman knowingly going down on a married man to be a skank. They are the essential part of cheating, and all it takes is looking at the ring on the finger for them to know. I've never met a single woman who would go out and have any kind of sex with a man they knew was married if the wife was nowhere to be seen. It's skanky. It's likely hurting someone else for a moment's pleasure. It was nothing about single ladies loving responsible sex, or anything like that.


 But again to get back to the OP, the point is that BOTH partners agree to take on a third or fourth member in an open situation. I know several women who were happy with screwing the hubby behind the scenes in a threesome situation if the wife didn't know, simply because the man was either a good lay or was relatively (we hope) stable and clean. I would say that violates any sort of trust issues about openness or alternative lifestyles. To me the goal of an open situation MUST involve the agreement that all partners are screened, tested and (groan), 'interviewed' to ensure they're safe on all counts. I am sure somewhere out there is an eHarmony for swingers to help match as much compatibility as possible.



> Also, Christianity has nothing to do with this. I don't go to church. My sister was married in front of a judge... its about a vow being made, and consequently broken whether with consent or not.


 I agree. Infidelity is infidelity, the question if whether it still IS infidelity of the man and wife agree on a new partner is the issue.



> Also, you guys said stuff about why is polygamy and open marriage so bad when it could save a marriage from divorce? Well, maybe they need one. I'd rather see a higher divorce rate than kids growing up not sure which guy mommy is sleeping with is their dad, or having to watch daddy go out on a date with someone else from their house, or seeing couples who are simply unable to make each other happy stay together as friends just to say they aren't divorced. I work with kids, kids of divorce, kids with unstable parents, kids with single moms, and the kids with a nuclear family. They pick up on this stuff. It's confusing to them, and they're too little to understand the concept. They want a mom and a dad who they feel like they can count on, and when you add more people into the mix, it really throws them for a loop. Even a divorced parent dating messes with their heads let alone a married mom and dad. [clearly not everyone will have kids but with sex/marriage comes babies often, especially if you're having a lot]


This is such a messy situation that it's hard to categorize. If all marriages could be happy, stable, sexually satisfying and familially supportive, life would be gravy. 60+% of the population seems to think otherwise within the first 2-7 years of marriage. Do you divorce when the kids are young, when they're in school, when they're old enough to be forming their own relationships...from what I've read and seen among friends and family is that there is NEVER a good time; the only one was a close in-law whose family (even the kids) literally begged her to divorce this asshole.

Plus, and perhaps this is my ignorance of swinging, I always thought this was an under-the-table situation from a family sense. Any swinger/open couple who would bring a partner into the home with the kids around is begging for trouble. Every situation I've heard of involves either a swinger club or a kid-free residence where the adults can play.

Kids are the ones always hurt most in a divorce, but they can be hurt in a marriage that is just 'for show' as well when they get old enough to sense it. The alternative is for couples to be forcibly prevented from having children together until they can cohabitate happily, but this speaks nothing of the family that operated fine for 10-20 years and then, bang, the wife or hubby met someone new, lifestyles were changed and love fell apart. As one poster said, you can never generalize these situations and as OneWickedAngel indicated, sometimes it's done out of love or a need to take care of tne needs of the one you love. I know if I were ever crippled, incapacitated and my wife needed that outlet in a way i was incapable of providing, I would see to it her needs were met. I would never expect or demand she remain faithful out of some vow of fidelity; spouses are still human.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

snuggletiger said:


> Just not something I could do.



Then guess what - don't do it.




> If the lady wants multiple lovers, fine go out be happy,




On behalf of all women who have more than one lover let me just say - THANK YOU. Thank you for permission.


I just don't crave at being a piece of meat or some notch on a bedpost.




> I'll have to check my bedpost, but I'm pretty sure I don't have any notches there. Now, underwear of guys I've fucked? Oh yeah I have a whole room of them.[/quote]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## snuggletiger (Mar 31, 2009)

Everybody else got to air their opinions and I so I aired mine. But Sandie is right it is a matter of choice and I am so glad that I will not share my bed with someone with that loose or that easy. I am blessed and rich in the fact that I don't choose to compartmentalize people or be unwilling to accept all of a person.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

LOL 




snuggletiger said:


> Everybody else got to air their opinions and I so I aired mine. But Sandie is right it is a matter of choice and I am so glad that I will not share my bed with someone with that loose or that easy. I am blessed and rich in the fact that I don't choose to compartmentalize people or be unwilling to accept all of a person.


----------



## snuggletiger (Mar 31, 2009)

Thats why its great to be me, and i am so glad Sandie that I don't encounter folks like you in Real Life. Its nice to know the Lord blesses and the Goddess loves me so.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

snuggletiger said:


> Thats why its great to be me, and i am so glad Sandie that I don't encounter folks like you in Real Life. Its nice to know the Lord blesses and the Goddess loves me so.



People like me??? Oh this I gotta here.
 
And what makes you think you DON'T encounter folks like me everyday??


----------



## chicken legs (Mar 31, 2009)

I used to hang at various clubs and one was a really popular male oriented gay bar and you would not believe how many men from out of town came to Vegas to release the Homoerotic fantasies. I mean we would hang at the Hard Rock and then go the the Fruit Loop (bunch of gay bars/clubs) and see the same guys. You go to the bathroom and it was like walking into a orgy room. That is just the tip of the iceberg that goes on out here. That is what I worry about...not being aware of my significant others sexual desires and needs. I guess i have seen worse situations play out than a "open marriage" so to me as long as communication is open then I feel i could make better judgment calls on situations...


----------



## SamanthaNY (Mar 31, 2009)

fruit loop... lol. 

teh funneh!


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Mar 31, 2009)

*@ Snuggletiger:* You are definitely entitled to your opinion and no one here faults you that. Had you simply stated "Just not something I could do. If the lady wants multiple lovers, fine go out be happy" and left it at that everything would have been fine. It is with the bedpost notch line and the insinuation that those who do not follow the same path as you are lacking self-worth/dignity that it became insulting. 

You state that you don't compartmentalize people. Then what was going on when such negative catch-phrases as "loose" "easy" and "pieces of meat" were tossed-out? And are you 100% sure you do not encounter folks like Sandie and I? The term "down-low" exists for reasons more than just hetero vs homo sexualities whom are in the closet. "What happens in Vegas..." doesn't only happen in Vegas. (Very good point about secrets and communication ChickenLegs.)

As for who gets blessings: As I recall the Lord and Goddess that blesses you so also has open arms and blessings for the rest of us "folks" regardless. 

*@ Admiral_Snackbar and MsGreenLantern:* I agree with your overall points. As for the swinger scene "responsible" adults do use swinger clubs or adult only parties with no children in the house. Unfortunately, not every swinger is a responsible human being and there can indeed be some serious consequences of such. Very well stated. And yes, I was a little off topic by including myself in this, but responsible sexually-active single women often get dumped into the same categories as say aforementioned skanks and sluts. It was more of questioning where the socially acceptable lines of distinction are drawn between the levels. When does responsible merge into slut and slut into skank if you will for both sexes.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Mar 31, 2009)

Thank you for this post it's exactly my point.

I live my life for me - it's not my responsability to police the people I may be intimate with nor those who think I'm a skank. If monogamy was so wonderful then why is the divorce rate over 50%. And why are so many people cheating on their SO'S?? The problem is I'm up front about it - there is no lying or cheating in my marriage, because we each know who's doing what. Most people prefer to lie because then they can say, "It just happened!" or "I was drunk!" and not "Honey I met someone we need to talk about."

IMO - there are no monogamous relationships in the world today. There are only those who sleep with others and are honest and those who sleep with others and aren't honest. 




OneWickedAngel said:


> *@ Snuggletiger:* You are definitely entitled to your opinion and no one here faults you that. Had you simply stated "Just not something I could do. If the lady wants multiple lovers, fine go out be happy" and left it at that everything would have been fine. It is with the bedpost notch line and the insinuation that those who do not follow the same path as you are lacking self-worth/dignity that it became insulting.
> 
> You state that you don't compartmentalize people. Then what was going on when such negative catch-phrases as "loose" "easy" and "pieces of meat" were tossed-out? And are you 100% sure you do not encounter folks like Sandie and I? The term "down-low" exists for reasons more than just hetero vs homo sexualities whom are in the closet. "What happens in Vegas..." doesn't only happen in Vegas. (Very good point about secrets and communication ChickenLegs.)
> 
> ...


----------



## LoveBHMS (Mar 31, 2009)

mossystate said:


> If I hear about a woman going down on ( or whatever ) a man who is known to be in a committed relationship...married or not...my first thought is that he is the biggest ' skank '. Some skank who decided to leave the house that night and go looking for any woman, who was not his wife/partner. The woman he finds might, or might not, have been looking for a ' taken ' man...but the man knows for sure what _his_ situation is.



Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Yes yes yes yes yes.

Uh huh.
right on.

YES.

Iow, GREAT POST.


----------



## Tooz (Mar 31, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> If monogamy was so wonderful then why is the divorce rate over 50%. And why are so many people cheating on their SO'S?? The problem is I'm up front about it - there is no lying or cheating in my marriage, because we each know who's doing what. Most people prefer to lie because then they can say, "It just happened!" or "I was drunk!" and not "Honey I met someone we need to talk about."
> 
> IMO - there are no monogamous relationships in the world today. There are only those who sleep with others and are honest and those who sleep with others and aren't honest.




How fucking depressing. I didn't know you knew every couple to ever exist and that you knew every detail of their sex lives.

If you live your life for you, then myob and I'll mind mine.


----------



## Keb (Mar 31, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> T
> IMO - there are no monogamous relationships in the world today. There are only those who sleep with others and are honest and those who sleep with others and aren't honest.



That's...such a depressing opinion, Sandie. I agree with you that people should be honest, especially with their spouses, even when it's not easy. But I know many people who do take their vows seriously, and I do believe that it is possible to be truly monogamous. It's rare, but it's not impossible, and some of the best, long-lasting relationships I've seen were (to the best of my knowledge--you're right that it's virtually impossible to know for sure, but it's equally impossible to prove any positive) monogamous. 

I'm very certain that I'll be happiest in a monogamous marriage, so I'm working towards that even now. (IE, not having sex, which, like not maxing out the credit card, sucks a bit today but may pay off nicely in the future.)


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Tooz said:


> How fucking depressing. I didn't know you knew every couple to ever exist and that you knew every detail of their sex lives.
> 
> If you live your life for you, then myob and I'll mind mine.



Depressing??? More like honest. And I do mind my own relationship. Very well thank you. 

I'm a very happy and contented person in my relationship. I don't care what others do.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Depressing??? More like honest. And I do mind my own relationship. Very well thank you.
> 
> I'm a very happy and contented person in my relationship. I don't care what others do.



Sandy??? I LOVE YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUu ehhehehehhe


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Sex is natural and if not for religious constraints that we are fed from infants, more people would probably (notice I did not say for sure) be in healthy sexual relationships.

I'm not the least bit concerned with how you or anyone else lives their lives. I just tend to not get involved with what others do.

Your choice - none of my business. I just wish people would afford me the same courtesy. 




Keb said:


> That's...such a depressing opinion, Sandie. I agree with you that people should be honest, especially with their spouses, even when it's not easy. But I know many people who do take their vows seriously, and I do believe that it is possible to be truly monogamous. It's rare, but it's not impossible, and some of the best, long-lasting relationships I've seen were (to the best of my knowledge--you're right that it's virtually impossible to know for sure, but it's equally impossible to prove any positive) monogamous.
> 
> I'm very certain that I'll be happiest in a monogamous marriage, so I'm working towards that even now. (IE, not having sex, which, like not maxing out the credit card, sucks a bit today but may pay off nicely in the future.)


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Sandy??? I LOVE YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUu ehhehehehhe



Why thank you Barb.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Tooz said:


> How fucking depressing. I didn't know you knew every couple to ever exist and that you knew every detail of their sex lives.
> 
> If you live your life for you, then myob and I'll mind mine.




I'm not the one who had a hissy fit. I do mind my own business - I wasn't talking about you - I was talking in general. If you choose to take it personal - be my guest.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

So, the men I have been with have messed around behind my back.

I am glad I now know.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Could very well be. How would you know??





mossystate said:


> So, the men I have been with have messed around behind my back.
> 
> I am glad I now know.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> I don't care what others do.


Apparently you do, because you've decided that you know what the rest of us are all doing. 


Sandie_Zitkus said:


> IMO - there are no monogamous relationships in the world today. There are only those who sleep with others and are honest and those who sleep with others and aren't honest.


Is that because everyone is bisexual, or what? I think you said that too - that everyone is bisexual, whether they know it, or admit it, or don't. They just ARE. 

It's all nonsense. Why is it always the grand and sweeping pronouncements about other people's personal lives from you? To justify what... your own choices? It hasn't gone unnoticed that you choose to proclaim that everyone else is doing (and lying about) the very things _you've_ chosen as a lifestyle. You're bisexual, so you believe *everyone* is. You're not monogamous, so NO one is. Why is it impossible to believe that other people want - and have - different lives? But no - it can't be possible to you - they must be lying about it. 



Keb said:


> It's rare, but it's not impossible, and some of the best, long-lasting relationships I've seen were (to the best of my knowledge--you're right that it's virtually impossible to know for sure, but it's equally impossible to prove any positive) monogamous.



I don't think it's that rare at all. It's just a different choice that some people make. It may not be as common as it was decades ago, but it does happen. It's just another choice, like having an open relationship. There's no need for anyone to demonize one or the other just because it's the opposite of what they might choose.



Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Your choice - none of my business. I just wish people would afford me the same courtesy.


Love to. No one's said boo about your choices - you're the one claiming that everyone else is lying about theirs. The 'opinion' thing is just a cop-out.


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 1, 2009)

Now this stuff is getting interesting - I'm waiting for the thread to move to Hyde Park - so the real fun can begin


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Could very well be. How would you know??



And how would you know if your husband is not messing around behind your back? Of course no person can be certain, but you seem to think that if people are talking about something...they will always honor the conversation...and ' you '. Eh... I just think it is silly to think there are no monogamous relationships. I do think it is laughable to believe that those who talk about what they want will always do the right thing. I guess we should all knock on wood ( no pun intended )?


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

You see what's really funny here is people who are in monogamous relationships are OK to post it here but those of us who are not are noy OK to post here.

Do I believe most people are bisexual - yes I do. That is not to say anyone else believes that. Do I think most people sleep around even in committed relationships - yes I do. But if you are so secure in your choices why does anything I say bother you at all??

I don't need to justify my choices. I live my choices and am very comfortable with them.

Usually, in these kinds of discussions the prople who scream the loudest are the ones scared to death I'm right.

I don't claim to be right 100% of the time. But you know it's hard to think otherwise with all the married men and women I have met over the years who may say they are single but eventually admit the are not.







SamanthaNY said:


> Apparently you do, because you've decided that you know what the rest of us are all doing.
> 
> Is that because everyone is bisexual, or what? I think you said that too - that everyone is bisexual, whether they know it, or admit it, or don't. They just ARE.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

I don't know - that's my point. No matter what the rules are sometimes partners do what they want regardless. The thing is, in my marriage, honesty works for us, but I may be the only one being 100% honest - I know that too.

See, I don't care. If it makes him happy to be with another woman - I'm OK with that. I want him to be happy. And if it makes me happy to be with another man or woman, he wants me to be happy.

NO this is not what others think is normal - but it works for us. That's all that matters. And after being together for 17 years, it works well. 





mossystate said:


> And how would you know if your husband is not messing around behind your back? Of course no person can be certain, but you seem to think that if people are talking about something...they will always honor the conversation...and ' you '. Eh... I just think it is silly to think there are no monogamous relationships. I do think it is laughable to believe that those who talk about what they want will always do the right thing. I guess we should all knock on wood ( no pun intended )?


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> I don't know - that's my point. No matter what the rules are sometimes partners do what they want regardless. The thing is, in my marriage, honesty works for us, but I may be the only one being 100% honest - I know that too.
> 
> See, I don't care. If it makes him happy to be with another woman - I'm OK with that. I want him to be happy. And if it makes me happy to be with another man or woman, he wants me to be happy.
> 
> NO this is not what others think is normal - but it works for us. That's all that matters. And after being together for 17 years, it works well.



But, if someone is not being honest, in an ' honest ' relationship....then it is, by defintion....a crap relationship. I am not talking about people who decide to define their relationship the way it works for them. 

But, maybe you are saying you would be ok with your husband lying to you...as long as he is happy. That lying can happen within a supposed open relationship.


I am now officially dizzy.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 1, 2009)

SPREADING LOVE DUST................EVERYONE PLEASE BE NICE............. SPRINKLE SPRINKLE SPRINKLE


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

People lie - that's life. My point was I don't care, I can't control him.

I'm tired, I'm not going to answer any more questions. I'm not on trial here. 

So that's that. 







mossystate said:


> But, if someone is not being honest, in an ' honest ' relationship....then it is, by defintion....a crap relationship. I am not talking about people who decide to define their relationship the way it works for them.
> 
> But, maybe you are saying you would be ok with your husband lying to you...as long as he is happy. That lying can happen within a supposed open relationship.
> 
> ...


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> People lie - that's life. My point was I don't care, I can't control him.
> 
> I'm tired, I'm not going to answer any more questions. I'm not on trial here.
> 
> So that's that.



*L*

Nobody is putting you on trial. You are kind of all over the road here...that's all.

I'm tired seems to be the last shot fired in these situations.


----------



## Wild Zero (Apr 1, 2009)

I hate when babies force feed me the Ten Commandments, throwin' all sorts of wrenches in my healthy sex game they are.


----------



## Keb (Apr 1, 2009)

Wild Zero said:


> I hate when babies force feed me the Ten Commandments, throwin' all sorts of wrenches in my healthy sex game they are.



Um. Huh?

Anyway, Sandie, I didn't mean to make you feel like everyone was attacking you...I don't have to agree with other people for their choices to be right for them, so long as they respect my right to follow my own concious.


----------



## butch (Apr 1, 2009)

I have no opinion on the morality of open relationships, and I haven't read all the posts in depth, but I had to point out the disconnect I see in the fact there are so many lofty attributes placed on marriage in this thread, and yet most of the posters come from a country with a very high divorce rate.

There's a good possibility my parents have an open relationship of sorts, and while it isn't something I feel warm and fuzzy about, I see how it may be the best option for them both. To each their own, and I will say I do applaud anyone who recognizes that few things in life are black and white and still make decisions that are mindful of everyone involved and try to minimize selfishness and hurtfulness. Sometimes, that might be an open marriage, and sometimes, that may not.


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 1, 2009)

WOW!

What the heck happened after I signed off?!?! Retract that - rhetorical question.

Sandie made a grand generalization based her opinion and it was just that HER opinion. I don't believe everyone is bisexual (whether they know it our not), I don't believe everyone cheats, I don't believe open marriages work for everyone, but I also do not negate her right to believe (and voice opinion of) such just because I don't. 

I'm sorry folks but coming in to this fresh this morning (for me), and reading the exchanges, it very much looked like Sandie was been ganged-up on here. It obviously was not the intent, but it is how it looks. If I were also a complete believer in open marriages coming into this thread right now I would not necessarily feel welcomed to discuss my thoughts here. And that is what this was supposed to be a discussion. Right now it looks like Sandie vs nearly everyone else.

And Sandie by no means is this a pat on the back for you. You are now in the same position Snuggletiger was in previously. You made a general sweeping statement that you had to know was going to ruffle feathers. Tooz, Keb etc have the same right to disagree with you in equally bold statements as you had in making them. 

We are all tossing out lit matches and then getting up in arms because OMG there's a fire! Isn't there some way to state our respective opinions without somehow making nearly everyone else feel as though there is something wrong with them personally if they don't agree?

And when the fuck did I turn into a damned diplomat? :doh: Crap! I must really need coffee!

Here's my bold sweeping statement and then I'm coffee bound: 
I'm with BarbBBW sprinkling wubus ...
*
:wubu::wubu::wubu::wubu::wubu::wubu::wubu::wubu:
EVERYONE CHILL THE HECK OUT*​


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 1, 2009)

OneWickedAngel said:


> WOW!
> 
> What the heck happened after I signed off?!?! Retract that - rhetorical question.
> 
> ...



OWA?? Yeah , It was crazy lastnight. I felt like I was watching Court TV!! Amazingly awesome though!! So intense, yet with logic posed on both sides. It was getting alittle bit "not nice",.. BUT I sprinkled LOVE DUST around and,....IT WORKED!! hehehe


----------



## frankman (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> IMO - there are no monogamous relationships in the world today. There are only those who sleep with others and are honest and those who sleep with others and aren't honest.



Dude, I just found out I cheat. Not because I actually had sex with another person than my girlfriend, but because _Sandy said I did_. How weird is that?

At first I was a little surprized that I did this without my knowledge, but then I looked at Sandy's rep-bar and saw it _had_ to be true.

I showed my girlfriend the reason I was apparently fucking other people and she had sort of the same reaction: shock, anger, bargaining, and ultimately, because she too saw not just anybody made this accusation, acceptance.

Sometimes she wakes me up at night, and asks "who are you fucking now? Be honest!" And then I turn on the computer, read Sandy's post again, and give her the same answer as the night before: "I don't know. Others I guess. Go Ask Sandy."

Oh yeah, my girlfriend wishes to know: do I enjoy myself when I'm doing others?

PS.: You're ridiculous.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Does anyone read the letters *IMO* ?????????????????

Your post is ridiculous. 





frankman said:


> Dude, I just found out I cheat. Not because I actually had sex with another person than my girlfriend, but because _Sandy said I did_. How weird is that?
> 
> At first I was a little surprized that I did this without my knowledge, but then I looked at Sandy's rep-bar and saw it _had_ to be true.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

OneWickedAngel said:


> And Sandie by no means is this a pat on the back for you. You are now in the same position Snuggletiger was in previously. You made a general sweeping statement that you had to know was going to ruffle feathers. Tooz, Keb etc have the same right to disagree with you in equally bold statements as you had in making them.




Well maybe its a sweeping statement, but, it's my* opinion*. Do you see me being insulting and name calling? No. But it sure is easy to fling shit at me. Funny thing is my statement about bi-sexuality wasn't made in this thread. lol

My beliefs are unusual, but for some reason they threaten quite a few people. I don't know why, but they are mine and that won't change. 

I'm off to run my business and live my life.  I have candles, lotions and soaps to make. And orders to fill. See ya.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

frankman said:


> Oh yeah, my girlfriend wishes to know: do I enjoy myself when I'm doing others?




Do you??


----------



## mergirl (Apr 1, 2009)

I have met some people who are totally monogomous, by which i mean they only want to be with one person at a time. I have met people who say they are monogomous because they try to adhere to social norms and might end up cheating because they dont _actually_ have monogomous values. I have also met people who are poly amourous and also people who are in love with polyamourous people and just pretend so they are too so they can be with the person they love.
At the end of the day, what people do or dont do is really up to them. Personally, i have never cheated on anyone because i think the dishonesty sucks. I have however (when i was younger) decided i wanted to be with someone else so broke up with my partner at the time. To be honest, i just wouldnt have been able to live with the guilt if i had cheated, it wasnt actually anything to do with me having a 'higher' moral code or anything.
I'm actually not so sure humans are even ment to mate for life or exclusivly from a biological standpoint. You hear of the 'seven year itch' which is ment to represent the amount of time it would take two adults to raise a child so that it could support itself..in the wild! lol. Who knows.. I dont even think primates mate for life with one partner, though i know they have close family bonds.. would need to google that to make sure though..
At the moment, i know that i dont love anyone more than my partner and that i couldnt imagine spending my life with anyone else.. i have no idea what i will feel like in seven years (though i think this is slightly different for lesbians *see lesbian bed death*) I do know that perhaps we feel different at different stages in our lives and things that are important when we are younger are less so as we get older and vica versa. I know that for me, there isnt anything i dont get from my partner that i could get from anyone else..so i want to only be with her..
The only reason i can see for people being in an open marrage is to experience different things sexually and without trying to sound like a slut i have tried/done everything with all the different types of people i have wanted to, so dont ever feel that urge to be with anyone else sexually than my partner. hmmm anyway.. these are just my musing. Its just another one of those 'if you are both consenting' kinna things really though isnt it?


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Spanky said:


> BarbBBW,
> 
> While my opinion stands, and I thought I made it crystal clear that it is my opinion, I want to clarify out of respect to you the OP.
> 
> ...



This. This. This. A million times, this. A zillion times, even. Especially the highlighted part.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " Originally Posted by toni
> Do I want to give my husband a blow job after he stuck it into some skank earlier in the week? UMMMM, no thanks. I wouldn't stand for it but that is me. "
> 
> You know, I am all for people disagreeing with the way others choose to live their lives. We all can't be the same, and we can't all make the same choices. But, that being said, it really gets my hackles up when women start slinging slurs like "skank" around, directed at other women whose only offense is to choose not to live their life the same way. Especially when they are doing so in the presence of those women. We're not just speaking hypothetically here, there are women who read this board who are involved in non-monogamous relationships.
> ...



Sorry, Tracy ... but if my husband was sticking it in the Virgin Mary reincarnate before coming home to me ... and I found out about it, she'd automatically become some "skank" to me. He wouldn't get a free pass, either (in fact, it would cost him his son and more than 50% of our marital assets) but the first thing that comes to my mind isn't about respecting and acknowledging some skank's belief that because *she* thinks it's OK to indulge herself with a married man, I should acknowledge and respect that belief. Nope. She'd just be some skank. Categorized and dismissed.


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 1, 2009)

" And make sure the children know, if they are there or when they are old enough to understand."

Just curious...

Why should a child need to know anything about their parents' sex life? That strikes me as awfully bizarre. If children should be told that their parents swing or have lovers on the side, should they also be told that their parents engage in kinky sex? Or that their parents have a sexual dysfunction? 

I don't have kids, so I really don't have a clue how the parenting thingie actually works. But is this really something people actually think is an appropriate thing to do? Involving their children in their sex lives? I have no idea whatsoever about what my parents did behind closed doors. They kept it behind closed doors and saw no need to involve me in it. For all I know, they could have been the kinkiest and most depraved perverts in the city. Or they could not have had a sex life at all. It just simply was not my business and not something they chose to include me in.

Is it done differently nowadays? 
Tracy


----------



## mergirl (Apr 1, 2009)

I have to admit to being a 'skank' in the past. I have been with women who have been in relationships/married to men. This isnt something i am proud of and a couple of times the women never actually told me about their boyfrends/husbands. This is all when i was a lot younger and more stupid and didnt really have all that much respect for myself on many levels..so being with someone who could never _really 'have' me suited me fine. It is usually the 'skanks' who end up hurt in the end though, whether it is by their own doing or someone elses. (i mean if its not found out about btw)
I am not proud of this..in any way.. though in my defence, every time it would be the 'relationship person' who told the sob stories, i'm not happy, we are 'really' broken up, etc etc.. and i bought it. 
To the person who is being cheated on.. a skank is a skank.. I would TOTALLY feel the same though I can understand some of the reasons people get sookered in to being with people who have made commitments to another person and they usually have to do with a low self esteme and sense of self. The biggest arsehole i feel is the cheater.. and if it were a race, close second would be the skank. 
I do have a friend though who is gay and married to a guy..i think she is fucking nuts..BUT she has two kids and wants them to have a father. She has affairs with woman (not me in this instance btw! lol) and i'm not sure how i feel about it. I kinna feel that no-one can be happy in this sort of situation..but in a sense i can see that she is trying to do what is best for her kids for now. I think people have their reasons for skanking sometimes..they might not be good ones though, granted.._


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 1, 2009)

" but the first thing that comes to my mind isn't about respecting and acknowledging some skank's belief that because *she* thinks it's OK to indulge herself with a married man, I should acknowledge and respect that belief. Nope. She'd just be some skank. Categorized and dismissed. "

I thought the discussion was about people who engage in honest and mutually consensual non-monogamy? Not about people who go behind their partners' backs to cheat on them or who cheat with other people behind their partners' backs.

So, with your logic above, let's follow this through. 

We'll assume that the "skank" is single or in an open relationship/marriage where her partner knows about and consents to her having other lovers. 

That being established, if the "skank" thinks it's okay to indulge herself with a married man, and if the married man thinks it's okay to indulge himself with the "skank", AND the wife of the married man thinks it's okay for him and the "skank" to mutually indugle in each other, is the "skank" still a "skank"? Is the husband a "skank", and is the wife a "skank"...

Is it just one big happy horny bundle of skankdom?

Tracy


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " And make sure the children know, if they are there or when they are old enough to understand."
> 
> Just curious...
> 
> ...



Tracy, if people had to involve their children before they made lousy, selfish choices (and couldn't, therefore, enjoy privacy while doing so) ... how many would still willingly choose to make those same destructive choices?

I'm not convinced that most people can choose a swinging lifestyle and live happily ever after, because I do not believe that this is human nature. We're jealous, and we're petty, and we don't like to share ... anymore than we did when the object in dispute was a toy in the communal sandbox. I understand that there are people who are able to make a successful go of this lifestyle, but that's far more the exception than the norm. What usually happens is something that unfortunately *does* involve the children ... at the point when mommy and daddy decide that they can no longer live together, and every bit of security that the child ever knew is suddenly just ... gone.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " but the first thing that comes to my mind isn't about respecting and acknowledging some skank's belief that because *she* thinks it's OK to indulge herself with a married man, I should acknowledge and respect that belief. Nope. She'd just be some skank. Categorized and dismissed. "
> 
> I thought the discussion was about people who engage in honest and mutually consensual non-monogamy? Not about people who go behind their partners' backs to cheat on them or who cheat with other people behind their partners' backs.
> 
> ...



No, what I'm saying is that in *my* mind, she's a skank. I don't owe it to her, my husband, or anyone else to try to understand what motives her. She didn't break my marriage vows, and she doesn't owe anything to me. I don't think I'd invest a lot of time trying to understand her *or* fight with her. She's a non-entity. The skank who slept with my husband. She's free to reinterpret that, as is my husband, and you, and everyone else with or without a stake in this discussion.


----------



## JiminOR (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Well maybe its a sweeping statement, but, it's my* opinion*.


 
Well, what facts and evidence do you have to back up your opinion? Anecdotal evidence that you have observed and heard about? Tell you what, you go personally observe the billions of couples in the world cheating, every one of them, and I'll respect your opinion on the subject. However, I'm more likely to believe that there is at least one couple out there among the billions of couples that are at least monogamous. There's always exceptions to the rules, including yours. And that goes for bisexuality too, many people may be, maybe even most, but there's no way every single person on the planet could possibly be, human sexuality is a spectrum, because the people are scattered from one end to the other and everywhere in between.

If you think that came off as insulting for some reason, didn't mean that way, just making a point about something that somebody brought up for discussion. 

As for open marriage. Whatever floats your boat. Doesn't do anything for me. Sex is just too intimate for me, and I tried the whole casual thing when I was younger and not in any relationships, and it's just not me. I'm much happier with being able to really enjoy the intimacy with someone I really care about. I'm a big romantic softy. 

As for what others do, none of my business, unless they bring it up I guess, then I'll share my opinion. I do think that some people could honestly pull an open marriage off quite successfully, both partners being equally secure and happy with the arrangement. However, I don't think most couples could pull this off. I would think that in most couples at least one of the partners would be insecure and jealous and it could lead to a lot of heartache.

So yeah, it's probably cool for some folks, but I would imagine they are the minority.


----------



## JiminOR (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> You see what's really funny here is people who are in monogamous relationships are OK to post it here but those of us who are not are noy OK to post here.


 
Where did you get this from? I don't believe anybody in this thread is marching upon the OP with pitchforks and torches, she asked for opinions, she got them. Nobody told her to shut up and that she couldn't post anymore. Maybe people got a bit incredulous at your generalization, but I don't think anybody was personally attacking you, just pointing out why they don't think you're right.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 1, 2009)

JiminOR said:


> Where did you get this from? I don't believe anybody in this thread is marching upon the OP with pitchforks and torches, she asked for opinions, she got them. Nobody told her to shut up and that she couldn't post anymore. Maybe people got a bit incredulous at your generalization, but I don't think anybody was personally attacking you, just pointing out why they don't think you're right.


Look! Stop hassling her!! Cant you see she has soaps to make!! lmao 
Btw, sandie.. i am soapen minded about all this so dont let it bother you!!
lmao.sadly at my own pun!! Fuck! I'm my dad!


----------



## SamanthaNY (Apr 1, 2009)

JiminOR said:


> Where did you get this from? I don't believe anybody in this thread is marching upon the OP with pitchforks and torches, she asked for opinions, she got them. Nobody told her to shut up and that she couldn't post anymore. Maybe people got a bit incredulous at your generalization, but I don't think anybody was personally attacking you, just pointing out why they don't think you're right.



She's the Rosa Parks of polyamory.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

SamanthaNY said:


> She's the Rosa Parks of polyamory.



I prefer the Rosa Parks of swing, myself. Has a catchier catch to it


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Actually I do have tons of things to make including soaps as I am doing a big faire this weekend. 

As far as name calling - well skank is actuallt tame compared to some things I've been called.  

When I said I don't believe there are any monogamous relationships anymore - I still stand by that as my opinion. There are lots of ways to cheat - not just a fuck. And from experience I can say with total confidence, for me, an emotional affair is MUCH MUCH harder to end and goes much deeper and can he hell to end. 





mergirl said:


> Look! Stop hassling her!! Cant you see she has soaps to make!! lmao
> Btw, sandie.. i am soapen minded about all this so dont let it bother you!!
> lmao.sadly at my own pun!! Fuck! I'm my dad!


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

SamanthaNY said:


> She's the Rosa Parks of polyamory.



Sam - grow up. I never said anything about polyamory, I'm not involved in that right now. Don't put words in my mouth. If you have a monogamous, faithful relationship - bully for you. It's not my cup of tea. 

And if you have something to say to me - say it. This aside bullshit is just that.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

JiminOR said:


> Where did you get this from? I don't believe anybody in this thread is marching upon the OP with pitchforks and torches, she asked for opinions, she got them. Nobody told her to shut up and that she couldn't post anymore. Maybe people got a bit incredulous at your generalization, but I don't think anybody was personally attacking you, just pointing out why they don't think you're right.



No no Jim - what you and others are doing is not just saying you all don't think I'm right, and you know it. I'm smart like that. We all know what's going on here dont we *wink wink*


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 1, 2009)

" What usually happens is something that unfortunately *does* involve the children ... at the point when mommy and daddy decide that they can no longer live together, and every bit of security that the child ever knew is suddenly just ... gone. "

Unfortunately, that happens way too often in general. Be the parents monogamous or not. That must be a very hard decision to make. Leave and be happy or stay and be miserable. And if you choose to stay, can you bury your true feelings deep enough that the kids don't pick up on the negativity and stress and wind up being affected by it. But if you choose to leave, can you manage being civil with your ex instead of one or both of you using the kids as weapons to try and get back at each other. I'm gonna be totally honest and say that is one of the big reasons why I am glad I never wanted to have kids. 

Relationships and families are hard. It doesn't just fall into place and stay that way. Every time you add some kind of complicating factor (by choice or circumstance), it makes it all the more difficult. 

I don't think most people are suited for non-monogamous relationships. It's a BIG complicating factor. As has been stated, people are jealous. Even people in poly relationships and open relationships get jealous. Yes, it's true, shocking I know... But it's human nature. Some people have a better handle on it than others, and they are the ones who are more suited for non-monogamy. 

I don't think either way is better than the other. Both are hard. Both fail all the time. ANY relationship starts out with the cards stacked against it. Depressing maybe, but statistically true. If you can make it work, no matter how you make it work, then you are ahead of the game. 

I just don't think it's fair to say that non-monogamous relationships are inferior or wrong when monogamy doesn't have a spectacular track record, you know? 

Tracy


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 1, 2009)

" She's the Rosa Parks of polyamory. "

Naaah, that would be more up my alley.


----------



## exile in thighville (Apr 1, 2009)

with all due respect to the o.p.'s intent, this thread nearly offends me as much as a "thoughts on gay marriage" thread. if it's not for you, don't have one. if you think open marriage doesn't work, there are people in happy ones who will disagree. and there are people in unhappy ones.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " I don't think either way is better than the other. Both are hard. Both fail all the time. ANY relationship starts out with the cards stacked against it. Depressing maybe, but statistically true. If you can make it work, no matter how you make it work, then you are ahead of the game.
> 
> I just don't think it's fair to say that non-monogamous relationships are inferior or wrong when monogamy doesn't have a spectacular track record, you know?
> 
> Tracy




But if it's not normal (what is normal is what the majority say is normal) it must be wrong or bad. Monogamy is not the be all and end all. But what do I know, I'm a skank.

We have no kids, we answer only to ourselves, and yet somehow that's wrong too. People who will tell you they are open minded and liberal will freak out on you if you bring up open relationships. I find that very interesting to watch.

What 2 (or more) adults do in the privacy of a bedroom is no ones business.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie, I really don't care what you do in your relationship....reaaaally. If you and your husband have an agreement, that is between the two of you. You said that you don't think there are any monogamous relationships...which does seem like you are using your marriage as the barometer. Weird. Nobody was calling you a skank. From the outside, it almost seems that you are trying to convince yourself of something.


----------



## snuggletiger (Apr 1, 2009)

It is what you make it. I know I couldn't do an open marriage. Why split half my stuff with someone that doesn't make me happy. Its not fair to me or the other person. If folks are happy doing that, great, I just know I can't treat someone else like that.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

You can psychoanalyze me all you want - I'm happy. No more no less.

I'm not interested in anyone knowing what goes on in my marriage either. reeeeeeeelly.






mossystate said:


> Sandie, I really don't care what you do in your relationship....reaaaally. If you and your husband have an agreement, that is between the two of you. You said that you don't think there are any monogamous relationships...which does seem like you are using your marriage as the barometer. Weird. Nobody was calling you a skank. From the outside, it almost seems that you are trying to convince yourself of something.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

snuggletiger said:


> I just know I can't treat someone else like that.




Ok...see...I think this kind of thing is a problem. If two people are in an ' open ' relationship...they are not treating their main man/woman in a bad way. For them, it is something they have both *agreed* on. It would only be " treating someone else like that ", if it was one-sided.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Actually I do have tons of things to make including soaps as I am doing a big faire this weekend.
> 
> As far as name calling - well skank is actuallt tame compared to some things I've been called.
> 
> When I said I don't believe there are any monogamous relationships anymore - I still stand by that as my opinion. There are lots of ways to cheat - not just a fuck. And from experience I can say with total confidence, for me, an emotional affair is MUCH MUCH harder to end and goes much deeper and can he hell to end.


Ahh.. see..me n gd were discussing what counts as cheating.. and we kinna have different views.
She thinks is you even 'think' about someone else in a sexual way..and you persue a friendship with them.. then that is a form of cheating.
I just think its if you are sneeky unfaithful in any way..this could be investment of energies in a flirting and continous way.. or something physical.
I guess the point of an open relationship would be that you never cheated/got cheated on.. hmmm..
good luck with your soap faire  Now..that wink does NOT constitute cheating GD!!! lmao


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> You can psychoanalyze me all you want - I'm happy. No more no less.
> 
> I'm not interested in anyone knowing what goes on in my marriage either. reeeeeeeelly.



It was pretty, ummm, obvious...by the words you chose..." there are no monogamous relationships ". That gem was what had people say...whooooa...not " oh, Sandie has an open relationship...she is bad ".

And, while we didn't get the details...you certainly did share a bit about your relationship. 

Calgon, take me away.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

And to the repper. No, they would not then be ' roomies '. You are viewing it through your eyes...not the eyes of the people actually in the open relationship.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " What usually happens is something that unfortunately *does* involve the children ... at the point when mommy and daddy decide that they can no longer live together, and every bit of security that the child ever knew is suddenly just ... gone. "
> 
> Unfortunately, that happens way too often in general. Be the parents monogamous or not. That must be a very hard decision to make. Leave and be happy or stay and be miserable. And if you choose to stay, can you bury your true feelings deep enough that the kids don't pick up on the negativity and stress and wind up being affected by it. But if you choose to leave, can you manage being civil with your ex instead of one or both of you using the kids as weapons to try and get back at each other. I'm gonna be totally honest and say that is one of the big reasons why I am glad I never wanted to have kids.
> 
> ...



I hope that I haven't conveyed that I think any one type of relationship is "inferior", because I don't believe that. I agree with your rather pessimistic assessment that any relationship starts out with the cards stacked against it, and I have a lot of respect for people who are able to make it work long-term, and to raise healthy & happy children in the process (at least, for those who choose to have them). I can't pretend that I have a lot, or even ANY, experience in this regard. I've been with my husband for more than half of my adult life. I can count on one hand the number of relationships that I had prior to meeting him. My opinion on the matter is more anecdotal, and yes, I am biased towards the concept of monogamy. But if it works for you, or Tom, or Dick and Harry (plus Jane ) and everyone is happy ... or, hell, even if you're all freakin' miserable ... who am I to judge? 

The nature of the topic has changed, as it is apt to do at Dims. As for the actual question posed -- if all adults are consenting, there's no secrecy involved, parameters are set, and all parties acknowledge that human nature being what it is ... things can change tomorrow, and then all bets are off -- then nobody is being harmed. But I keep coming back to what you said about the inherent difficulty of sustaining ANY kind of relationship, longer term, and I think ... adding a few more people into that mix is likely going to complicate matters even further, you know? How likely is it, for the average couple, to make things better ... especially if the relationship is already rocky? But then again ... talking in circles here. I do know that the original discussion was about consensually open relationships. 

The only real issue for me is when people have children. At that point, their lives change, and becomes more about the child. I wouldn't want to do anything that I know could harm my little boy. Right now, I feel like a complete failure when my husband and I can't refrain from any kind of disagreement -- even a mild one -- in front of him. I can't even imagine adding another man or woman to the mix, and then being unable to contain my jealousy and resentment because hubby got a little too cozy with his lady friend. That is an experience that is just beyond my frame of reference.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> You can psychoanalyze me all you want - I'm happy. No more no less.
> 
> I'm not interested in anyone knowing what goes on in my marriage either. reeeeeeeelly.



Sandie, I didn't like your choice of words. I thought that it was a rather bleak outlook, to say the least (that nobody is inherently monogamous).

Having said that, though ... it's obvious that there is a lot of love between you and Wayne. You've been married for a long time, and whatever you've agreed on ... it works for the two of you. Nobody has the right to judge the choices that you've made. Also, please don't think that I've referred to you (or anyone else here), in some kind of underhanded way, as a 'skank'. That's a label that I reserve for a woman who would sleep with *my* man. Any other man? Hell, you're just exercising your free choice


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

LOL - that was funny. I don't see it as a bleak outlook or I never would have said it. I believe we are all animals by nature. As such most animals are not monogamous (yes some are). For me it was a matter of fact statement. Like I said what I believe is very different from main stream america, and I never said anyone had to agree. 

Thank you for explaining how you felt instead of going for my jugular. I am sorry if what I said bothered you or was depressing - it was not my intention. 




TraciJo67 said:


> Sandie, I didn't like your choice of words. I thought that it was a rather bleak outlook, to say the least (that nobody is inherently monogamous).
> 
> Having said that, though ... it's obvious that there is a lot of love between you and Wayne. You've been married for a long time, and whatever you've agreed on ... it works for the two of you. Nobody has the right to judge the choices that you've made. Also, please don't think that I've referred to you (or anyone else here), in some kind of underhanded way, as a 'skank'. That's a label that I reserve for a woman who would sleep with *my* man. Any other man? Hell, you're just exercising your free choice


----------



## Victim (Apr 1, 2009)

I don't know about anyone else, but if I'm in a room and someone brings in a huge bucket of shit with a lit stick of dynamite in it, I'm not going to hang around when it goes off.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

This is the thing. I don't believe in shame or in hiding anything, I'm as honest as the day is long and I don't know how to be any different.

Let me give you an example. We were with a group of friends having dinner out. Someone told a joke about anal sex and without skipping a beat I said "Oh I've had anal sex, it's not as bad as people think." Then I realized there was dead silence at our table. I loooked up and everyone was staring at me with this look of surprise on their faces, forks in mid air. I then said "What? we were talking about anal sex weren't we?" Everyone laughed and dinner went on. It never accured to me that saying that was not cool.

So if you think I've given too much info here - this is nuthin'. 





mossystate said:


> It was pretty, ummm, obvious...by the words you chose..." there are no monogamous relationships ". That gem was what had people say...whooooa...not " oh, Sandie has an open relationship...she is bad ".
> 
> And, while we didn't get the details...you certainly did share a bit about your relationship.
> 
> Calgon, take me away.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Never said you gave too much information. You said you were not interested in people knowing what goes on in your marriage, and I simply stated that you have let us know a little of what goes on, or at least some of your ground rules.....etc....etc...etc.. 

etc


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> LOL - that was funny. I don't see it as a bleak outlook or I never would have said it. I believe we are all animals by nature. As such most animals are not monogamous (yes some are). For me it was a matter of fact statement. Like I said what I believe is very different from main stream america, and I never said anyone had to agree.
> 
> Thank you for explaining how you felt instead of going for my jugular. I am sorry if what I said bothered you or was depressing - it was not my intention.



OK, I understand where you are coming from. Now, we're going to quibble about semantics 

Let's say, tomorrow I'm told that I can sleep with any man that I want to be with ... and not only does my husband not mind, he encourages it! I know that it will not result in any negative consequences. It's all about the fun, with none of the possible risks. Would I be all over that? You betcha. Of course I am attracted to other men. I'm married, not dead. I've made a conscious choice to not act on that attraction (or to remove myself from situations that could have led to ... uh, action ). I'm not perfect, and there's nothing noble behind my decision to remain monogamous. It is mostly fear-based: I think about what I could lose, which is everything that matters to me (including my self-respect). So yes, I agree with you, that people are basically animals. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that we're probably only a hairs breadth removed from our tree-swinging, bug-eating, shit-slinging brethren. But I think that many people CHOOSE to be monogamous, and that *is* what separates us from the singular, purely instinct-based definition of animals. You've read many posts that already attest to this. I think that you got some angry reactions from people who feel that you haven't acknowledged this.


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 1, 2009)

I was in a committed monogamous relationship with my husband for twenty years. Other than the occasional "did you ever" or "remember when" conversations it did not come up. We had swinger friends who would invite us out now and again, but we happened to be very happy with just each other. Sharing simply was never a consideration. 

Post-marriage a partner and I were the "invited" party of a married couple with an open relationship whom I know well. And yes, we had a grand time. I would happily repeat the experience; but only under the same circumstances (both committed partners are involved). I agree, knowingly having an affair with a cheating partner is skanky. Even pre-marriage, when I was young and swinging, I immediately dumped a partner when I discovered there was a significant other involved. I certainly would not do such to another person now.

This not to say that should I be in a committed relationship again, that it would be the same as before (completely monogamous). It would be a different relationship and have it's own rules. If I vow to be with that person AND ONLY that person, that is what it will be. If however, my new committed relationship is more open then that's what it will be. In the interim, I'm just having fun.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Never said you gave too much information. You said you were not interested in people knowing what goes on in your marriage, and I simply stated that you have let us know a little of what goes on, or at least some of your ground rules.....etc....etc...etc..
> 
> etc



As usual Mossy I have no idea what you are talking about - so see ya.


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 1, 2009)

I would like to know how many of you posters's parents cheated during their marriage. Now think why they cheated and think of a way to better that situation with your relationships.


WAIT ONE SECOND HERE>>>>

OneWickedAngel...you were married for 20 years??....HUH...you look like your in your 20's..lol


----------



## mergirl (Apr 1, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> I would like to know how many of you posters's parents cheated during their marriage. Now think why they cheated and think of a way to better that situation with your relationships.


Hmm.. i'm wondering how many people actually have the details of why their parents cheated though..??


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> As usual Mossy I have no idea what you are talking about - so see ya.



You must have talented animals in the house, cuz they are using your Dims ID and typing things when you are not looking.

Bye!


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Being as I don't believe we are that close to being 100% pure animals - I do still think we can be with multiple partners and have no big problem come from it. Why does it have to end in heartbreak or end a relationship? Why can't it be fun, and a good thing. We are told sex should be between a man and a woman in the confines of marriage so if I take that thought even farther, no one should be having sex with anyone until marriage and there is no divorce because if you divorce (according the the church) you are committing adultery if you not only have sex with another person but if you marry them as well.

I mean hey - if you are gonna call the pot black then lets call the frying pan black too. People make their own rules and then decide others who do different are wrong. That's the way it is. If you are going to live by the social norms that were gotten from the Christian bible then, follow it to the letter, not just until it's too hard for you. Finding someone you think is doing something bad, dirty and wrong does not negate your hedging the bet about how to live a truly monogamous life.

And, I'm also going to say that very, very few of us today are truly monoganous in a marriage or out. Define monogamy first. For me, I go with a very traditional idea of monogamy - 2 virgins marrying and never having sex with anyone else until the day they die. THAT is monogamy to me - everything else is not. So that's why I say, no one is monogamous anymore. In my definition of monogamy very very few people would fit that bill. Why is my definition so narrow? Because society has tweaked, hedged, re-vamped, re-styled and redone monogamy so many times so that how people live is open - yet not, that I go back to the original meaning of monogamy.

Now remember not too long ago, a girl who was not a virgin was a whore. A divorced woman was loose. And men never got questioned about this stuff. Now a days a girl who sleeps around is a tramp, a divorced woman is hot to trot or an easy lay if you're a virgin there is something wrong with you. And if you were promiscuous as a young woman ALL that is supposed to stop after marriage. 's all so damn confusing so guess what - I do what I want.

And men still get to do what they want and not get called names. Nothing changes.




TraciJo67 said:


> OK, I understand where you are coming from. Now, we're going to quibble about semantics
> 
> Let's say, tomorrow I'm told that I can sleep with any man that I want to be with ... and not only does my husband not mind, he encourages it! I know that it will not result in any negative consequences. It's all about the fun, with none of the possible risks. Would I be all over that? You betcha. Of course I am attracted to other men. I'm married, not dead. I've made a conscious choice to not act on that attraction (or to remove myself from situations that could have led to ... uh, action ). I'm not perfect, and there's nothing noble behind my decision to remain monogamous. It is mostly fear-based: I think about what I could lose, which is everything that matters to me (including my self-respect). So yes, I agree with you, that people are basically animals. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that we're probably only a hairs breadth removed from our tree-swinging, bug-eating, shit-slinging brethren. But I think that many people CHOOSE to be monogamous, and that *is* what separates us from the singular, purely instinct-based definition of animals. You've read many posts that already attest to this. I think that you got some angry reactions from people who feel that you haven't acknowledged this.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

mossystate said:


> You must have talented animals in the house, cuz they are using your Dims ID and typing things when you are not looking.
> 
> Bye!




BITE ME.:bow:


----------



## mossystate (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> BITE ME.:bow:



See ya 

dotdot


----------



## AnnMarie (Apr 1, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> OWA?? Yeah , It was crazy lastnight. I felt like I was watching Court TV!! Amazingly awesome though!! So intense, yet with logic posed on both sides. It was getting alittle bit "not nice",.. BUT I sprinkled LOVE DUST around and,....IT WORKED!! hehehe




hahah. Silly newbies.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 1, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I guess the point of an open relationship would be that you never cheated/got cheated on.. hmmm..
> good luck with your soap faire  Now..that wink does NOT constitute cheating GD!!! lmao



Just chiming in to say that you can be in an open relationship and still get cheated on.


----------



## frankman (Apr 1, 2009)

What I like about the previous poster is... Oh, wrong thread.

Actually, for those who believe in the inner animal residing deep within the mono-/poly-/different-gamous person, a list of animals that mate for life:

Trumpeter swans
Wild pigs
Humpback anglerfish 
Black vultures
Shingleback skink 
Gibbon apes
Gray wolves
Coyotes
Red foxes
Silver-backed jackals
Barn owls
Bald eagles
Sandhill cranes
Pigeons
Turtle doves
Red-tailed hawks
Parrots 
Emperor penguins 
Emus
Titi monkeys
Snow leopards
Otters
Beavers
Termites
Prairie voles 
Chinchillas
Bats
White rhinoceros
French angel fish
Seahorses
Lobsters
Wolf Eels

Not a complete list, but you get the point. Even nature has it's monogamous freaks


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 1, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Being as I don't believe we are that close to being 100% pure animals - I do still think we can be with multiple partners and have no big problem come from it. Why does it have to end in heartbreak or end a relationship? Why can't it be fun, and a good thing. We are told sex should be between a man and a woman in the confines of marriage so if I take that thought even farther, no one should be having sex with anyone until marriage and there is no divorce because if you divorce (according the the church) you are committing adultery if you not only have sex with another person but if you marry them as well.
> 
> I mean hey - if you are gonna call the pot black then lets call the frying pan black too. People make their own rules and then decide others who do different are wrong. That's the way it is. If you are going to live by the social norms that were gotten from the Christian bible then, follow it to the letter, not just until it's too hard for you. Finding someone you think is doing something bad, dirty and wrong does not negate your hedging the bet about how to live a truly monogamous life.
> 
> ...



Well, it certainly can't be that nobody is monogamous anymore, because I know for a fact that I am. Heck, I once broke up with a girl because of the *possibility* of sex. Every description of true monogamy is how I live my life, so there's at least one truly monogamous person in the world.


----------



## escapist (Apr 1, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Hmm.. i'm wondering how many people actually have the details of why their parents cheated though..??



Some of us have more details than we would like! None of it shocks or surprises me and I agree with what Chicken Legs is saying.

An interesting article said:

"The fair thing to do is to tell your mate that you are interested in seeking an intimate relationship with another person. This frees up your mate to determine whether or not they want to continue in a relationship with you and if so, use protection. This may not be the popular thing to do-but it is definitely the honorable, civilized thing to do that shows respect for yourself and others. Just like you wouldn't choose to use the bathroom in the middle of someone's living room floor; sexual infidelity is like crapping in the middle of someone's heart."

I really couldn't agree more. I don't know how many people are prepared to deal with the reality of a relationship that may be temporary. Its not always so, but it is always a possibility. Once you accept the fact that things may change its much easier to deal with the reality of such changes when they happen.


----------



## olwen (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " What usually happens is something that unfortunately *does* involve the children ... at the point when mommy and daddy decide that they can no longer live together, and every bit of security that the child ever knew is suddenly just ... gone. "
> 
> Unfortunately, that happens way too often in general. Be the parents monogamous or not. That must be a very hard decision to make. Leave and be happy or stay and be miserable. And if you choose to stay, can you bury your true feelings deep enough that the kids don't pick up on the negativity and stress and wind up being affected by it. But if you choose to leave, can you manage being civil with your ex instead of one or both of you using the kids as weapons to try and get back at each other. I'm gonna be totally honest and say that is one of the big reasons why I am glad I never wanted to have kids.
> 
> ...



I agree with this Tracy. Makes total sense to me.




TraciJo67 said:


> ...(snipped)
> The only real issue for me is when people have children. At that point, their lives change, and becomes more about the child. I wouldn't want to do anything that I know could harm my little boy. Right now, I feel like a complete failure when my husband and I can't refrain from any kind of disagreement -- even a mild one -- in front of him. I can't even imagine adding another man or woman to the mix, and then being unable to contain my jealousy and resentment because hubby got a little too cozy with his lady friend. That is an experience that is just beyond my frame of reference.



I don't think you're a failure if you argue in front of your kid. It's hard to avoid sometimes. Anyway, kids are smart, you know. I think even if you say nothing and avoid arguing in front of the kids they can still tell something is wrong, and they might ask what's up or say nothing and then watch you both like a hawk to try to suss it out.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 1, 2009)

frankman said:


> What I like about the previous poster is... Oh, wrong thread.
> 
> Actually, for those who believe in the inner animal residing deep within the mono-/poly-/different-gamous person, a list of animals that mate for life:
> 
> ...



I love this post!! Interesting, amzing and not arguing!! Beautiful!!


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

Oh and I was hoping we could be best friends. Darn!
And I still don't believe in monogamy. And compared to the millions of species on this planet I'd say monogamy isn't as big a deal as you think.




frankman said:


> What I like about the previous poster is... Oh, wrong thread.
> 
> Actually, for those who believe in the inner animal residing deep within the mono-/poly-/different-gamous person, a list of animals that mate for life:
> 
> ...


----------



## Keb (Apr 1, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> Well, it certainly can't be that nobody is monogamous anymore, because I know for a fact that I am. Heck, I once broke up with a girl because of the *possibility* of sex. Every description of true monogamy is how I live my life, so there's at least one truly monogamous person in the world.



Make that two, unless we're going to insist on the most strict version: Jesus's statement that to look at a woman (or presumably a man as well) lustfully was to commit adultery in one's heart. By that standard, Sandie just might win her point. But by a more human standard--things we can make choices about (I don't know anyone who can entirely stop their mind going places they wish it hadn't)--yes, there are really monogamous people around. I have absolutely no reason to believe my parents are not. (Again, it's not likely they would tell me if not...but they've been my parents for 29 years; I know them pretty well.) 

It is a choice, one that I believe has desirable consequences. It's not really my business who does what in other people's relationships (though I might make it my business if someone hurt, say, one of my siblings).


----------



## Tooz (Apr 1, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> I would like to know how many of you posters's parents cheated during their marriage. Now think why they cheated and think of a way to better that situation with your relationships.



By saying, "oh, hun, I'm gonna bone these meaningless bitches?"

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? No? Jesus h.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 1, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> Well, it certainly can't be that nobody is monogamous anymore, because I know for a fact that I am. Heck, I once broke up with a girl because of the *possibility* of sex. Every description of true monogamy is how I live my life, so there's at least one truly monogamous person in the world.



Well, um, I'm going to say this. If you have been with more than one sexual partner, you are not monogamous. Not by the standards set forth by the Christian church - and that's who set these rules, right? So serial monogamy - yeah sure, which still means you are having multiple sexual partners. But truly monogamous - nope.


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 1, 2009)

Tooz said:


> By saying, "oh, hun, I'm gonna bone these meaningless bitches?"
> 
> DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? No? Jesus h.



do you even know how to answer to the question i posted. Oh wait you were created in a test tube and raised by......what .....so just either answer the question or let it go.


Polyamory: Ethical Non-Monogamy

http://www.alternet.org/story/11808?page=entire

"Of course we are not weaker. The difference between our culture and others is community. Industrialization, globalization and incorporation have utterly destroyed the tribal milieu and isolated modern man. We are an uprooted population without home, land or fellowship. Our relationships to family and friends have become disposable in the pursuit of a higher standard of living. Monogamy provides stability and meaning within the context of a fragmented culture that has lost its sense of community. We attach ourselves exclusively to others in response to an emptiness created by our lack of tribal fellowship. This is not to say that our love for our beloved is negated or even diminished, but other powerful influences have come to bear on our behavior from the culture around us that should be acknowledged. Within a society of isolation people are especially vulnerable to separation anxiety. Consequently, we suffer from all sorts of neuroses and depressions? We particularly fear being alone in the absence of a social network. This apprehension feeds into jealousy when threatened by loss of a lover and we tighten our control and possession over them. We are caught in the clutches of private despair parading as erotic reverence."


----------



## escapist (Apr 1, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " Eh, I don't see the difference between an open relationship and an open marriage, unless you are assuming that people in an open relationship are less committed to each other. "
> 
> To me, it's one and the same, because all kinds of relationships can be deeply committed, even those which do not end in marriage by choice or circumstance.
> 
> Tracy



Uhh I think the one with the term Marriage carry's legal ramifications especially depending in the state you live in if your in the US. It also means fun things like Tax breaks and all that


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 1, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> _...snip..._
> 
> WAIT ONE SECOND HERE>>>>
> 
> OneWickedAngel...you were married for 20 years??....HUH...you look like your in your 20's..lol


 
*HAHAHAHA! Thanks CL, but my baby (the one I gave birth to - not the one I'm friending ) is 6'3" and 25 years old. It's safe to say I'm just a liiiitle bit older than that. *



AnnMarie said:


> hahah. Silly newbies.


*Can't even lie about it, AnnMarie - guilty as charged . But man am I learning fast!*



escapist said:


> _...snip..._
> 
> "The fair thing to do is to tell your mate that you are interested in seeking an intimate relationship with another person. This frees up your mate to determine whether or not they want to continue in a relationship with you and if so, use protection. This may not be the popular thing to do-but it is definitely the honorable, civilized thing to do that shows respect for yourself and others. Just like you wouldn't choose to use the bathroom in the middle of someone's living room floor; sexual infidelity is like crapping in the middle of someone's heart."
> 
> ...snip...


 
*During one of our "what if" conversations I remember saying to my husband once, that if he ever reached a point he did not want me anymore (hah!) that I hoped he would let me know and let me decide how I wanted to handle it. Not blind side me with an affair because I deserved better respect than that and I agreed to the same with him. So I completely agree with this.*


----------



## frankman (Apr 2, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> ***snip***And compared to the millions of species on this planet I'd say monogamy isn't as big a deal as you think.



That's where we differ in our views. Because I'd say defeating those overwhelming odds of millions to some is kind of a big deal.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

Ella Bella said:


> Just chiming in to say that you can be in an open relationship and still get cheated on.


If you got cheated on..surely that would mean that your relationship wasn't open though? hmm.. i'm mixed up. I dont see why people would both be allowed to sleep with other people if they told their partners about it and then sleep behind their partners back..why would they do that except maby because they had exhausted all other forms of excitement for themselves??


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

escapist said:


> Some of us have more details than we would like! None of it shocks or surprises me and I agree with what Chicken Legs is saying.
> 
> An interesting article said:
> 
> ...


Lmao.. who wrote this 'interesting article'? It talks metaphorically about taking a shit on someones heart! I'm not sure whoever wrote this is a brilliant mouthpiece for polygamy. Anyway..i still think polygamy is ok as long as its consentual, same goes for monogomy. I just didnt get what chickenlegs was saying about finding out why peoples parents divorced and learning from it..I think divorce is too complicated a matter to bring it into an argument 'for' polyamorous relationships. Also, i think my parents should have divorced..but they didn't ..they are monogomous but i never want to have a relationship like theirs but still i want to be in a monogomous relationship.


----------



## frankman (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> If you got cheated on..surely that would mean that your relationship wasn't open though? hmm.. i'm mixed up. I dont see why people would both be allowed to sleep with other people if they told their partners about it and then sleep behind their partners back..why would they do that except maby because they had exhausted all other forms of excitement for themselves??



People lay down a set of ground rules. break them, and it's cheating. Kind of like when a prostitute says "no kissing, that's too intimate", I could understand that someone doesn't want their partner doing certain stuff to other people. As to what, or why; that's different for everyone.

And why someone would still cheat in an open relationship? Beats me...


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Lmao.. who wrote this 'interesting article'? It talks metaphorically about taking a shit on someones heart! I'm not sure whoever wrote this is a brilliant mouthpiece for polygamy. Anyway..i still think polygamy is ok as long as its consentual, same goes for monogomy. I just didnt get what chickenlegs was saying about finding out why peoples parents divorced and learning from it..I think divorce is too complicated a matter to bring it into an argument 'for' polyamorous relationships. Also, i think my parents should have divorced..but they didn't ..they are monogomous but i never want to have a relationship like theirs but still i want to be in a monogomous relationship.



People have a tendency to follow their parents example in relationships. In my life, my father cheated throughout my parents 40 yr plus relationship. However, they stayed together because of family and finances. Plus I have family memebers and friends who have married and divorced several times over sex or lack there off. So my view of open marriages has been shaped by my parents example and that of the people around me. That being said the only thing I saw missing was the lack of open communication in most of those relationships. 

Personally, i did talk with my parents about their relationships in and outside of marriage and even asked my mom why they didn't get a divorce. I am just glad they were cool enough to talk about it with me. My mom and dad had different view points on sexual things and didn't pressure one another with their fantasies. Plus, they understood family came first and i feel the same way.

Basically what i am saying is one's past shapes one's future and you can't control another persons actions with threats, culture, or responsiblities. 

The U.S.A. and Great Britain has gone through some major culture changes in the 1900's with televison telling us that the only way to go is the "Leave it to Beaver" way. 


I myself subscribe to genetic monogamy..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> People have a tendency to follow their parents example in relationships. In my life, my father cheated throughout my parents 40 yr plus relationship. *SNIP* ..................................................................
> 
> 
> Basically what i am saying is one's past shapes one's future and you can't control another persons actions with threats, culture, or responsiblities.



I dont think people have a tendency to follow their parents example in relationships. Half the people i know would do anything to avoid that happening! I think its more likely that, if someone has witnessed a parent being treated with utter disrespect, ie. that parent althought they were not happy, has 'put up' with a partners infidelity, the child will not want to be like them. The child will see how upset the 'cheated on' parent was, and while its impossible to control future partners to 'not cheat on you', you can enter into a relationship where you give the partner freedom to sleep with other people, therefore they are never 'really' cheating on you. I also dont underestimate the ability for people to have differing oppinions from their parents because of idea's they have been presented with that they never realised was an option before.

I agree that you cannot control another persons actions with threats, or should not. I thought this was a discussion about consentual polygamy though..so there would be no need for threats. By responsibilities, if you mean kids then i would say to an extent you can alter the behaviour of the other parent. They HAVE to pay child support, so they at least are legally obligated to have responsibility for their child. I guess in other cultures polygamy is seen as the social norm. In some cultures 50yr olds marrying 10yr olds is the social norm. I'm not comparing the two by any means, i'm trying to illustrate that sometimes to think outside the box, socially is harder for us to do than we think.


----------



## escapist (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Lmao.. who wrote this 'interesting article'? It talks metaphorically about taking a shit on someones heart! I'm not sure whoever wrote this is a brilliant mouthpiece for polygamy. Anyway..i still think polygamy is ok as long as its consentual, same goes for monogomy. I just didnt get what chickenlegs was saying about finding out why peoples parents divorced and learning from it..I think divorce is too complicated a matter to bring it into an argument 'for' polyamorous relationships. Also, i think my parents should have divorced..but they didn't ..they are monogomous but i never want to have a relationship like theirs but still i want to be in a monogomous relationship.



Well what I quoted and what I said was pretty much exactly what she meant. Same crap happened with my parents Sneaking and cheating. In the end it was similar to someone taking a crap in your heart so they got it right. I just think its right to eject from the relationship and/or be open about what your doing, and give your partner a choice BEFORE any action is taken.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

escapist said:


> Well what I quoted and what I said was pretty much exactly what she meant. Same crap happened with my parents Sneaking and cheating. In the end it was similar to someone taking a crap in your heart so they got it right. I just think its right to eject from the relationship and/or be open about what your doing, and give your partner a choice BEFORE any action is taken.


Or even better, tell them you are poly before they develop feelings for you so that they have more of a choice to decide whether or not they want to persue a poly relationship. I agree, it is better to tell people you are not monogomous, than just to cheat on them.


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I dont think people have a tendency to follow their parents example in relationships. Half the people i know would do anything to avoid that happening! I think its more likely that, if someone has witnessed a parent being treated with utter disrespect, ie. that parent althought they were not happy, has 'put up' with a partners infidelity, the child will not want to be like them. The child will see how upset the 'cheated on' parent was, and while its impossible to control future partners to 'not cheat on you', you can enter into a relationship where you give the partner freedom to sleep with other people, therefore they are never 'really' cheating on you. I also dont underestimate the ability for people to have differing oppinions from their parents because of idea's they have been presented with that they never realised was an option before.
> 
> I agree that you cannot control another persons actions with threats, or should not. I thought this was a discussion about consentual polygamy though..so there would be no need for threats. By responsibilities, if you mean kids then i would say to an extent you can alter the behaviour of the other parent. They HAVE to pay child support, so they at least are legally obligated to have responsibility for their child. I guess in other cultures polygamy is seen as the social norm. In some cultures 50yr olds marrying 10yr olds is the social norm. I'm not comparing the two by any means, i'm trying to illustrate that sometimes to think outside the box, socially is harder for us to do than we think.



Parents are our greatest example on how we live..good or bad..on our relationships with food, cleaning habits, child rearing, how we treat our loved ones, etc. Now whether or not we follow all or non of their habits is up to that person. There are somethings i like about my parents and somethings i dont like, and visa versa. 

As far as threats and responsiblities..I think you understand more than some how living outside the "normal straight monogamous" relationship can be when it comes to family, laws, and child rearing in the USA and Great Britain.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

chicken legs said:


> Parents are our greatest example on how we live..good or bad..on our relationships with food, cleaning habits, child rearing, how we treat our loved ones, etc. Now whether or not we follow all or non of their habits is up to that person. There are somethings i like about my parents and somethings i dont like, and visa versa.
> 
> As far as threats and responsiblities..I think you understand more than some how living outside the "normal straight monogamous" relationship can be when it comes to family, laws, and child rearing in the USA and Great Britain.


I dont know why i would understand more than some about living outside a "Normal monogomous" relationship, as i am in a monogomous relationship and i feel i am normal (as far as it goes lol). I'm not straight but i dont have children so i really dont know more than some when it comes to family, laws and child rearing. I dont study Law either, so i'm not really sure about a lot of those laws either.


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 2, 2009)

frankman said:


> ...snip...
> 
> And why someone would still cheat in an open relationship? Beats me...



*Frankman here is the only example I can think off off-hand: 

A couple in an open-marriage/relationship has one rule - both partners must both agree on any sex partner before anything can happen. One day Partner-A meets a prospective invitee and would like a tryst, but when Invitee and Partner-B are introduced something does not click between them and Partner-B says no. That should be the end of the story - correct? But what if Invitee is so lusty for Partner-A, that all considerable seduction is invoked and a "just that one time" happens? Partner-A is now guilty of cheating. *



mergirl said:


> Or even better, tell them you are poly before they develop feelings for you so that they have more of a choice to decide whether or not they want to persue a poly relationship. I agree, it is better to tell people you are not monogomous, than just to cheat on them.



*I would agree with this totally only if a person has determined they are beforehand. If say a woman was raised in the most strict of upbringing (yeah I know most of us feel we were) that the thought of being anything other than monogamous never entered her head. She's now a married woman of several years, has seen more of the world and she is now aware of her true nature/deeper feelings. Now she's seriously thinking *I really want this_*, but knows her husband has not changed his views. So yes, she must say something to him now rather than cheat; but she had not misrepresented herself when they first met and got married because that was who she was then. She changed/came into herself many years later*_.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

OneWickedAngel said:


> *I would agree with this totally only if a person has determined they are beforehand. If say a woman was raised in the most strict of upbringing (yeah I know most of us feel we were) that the thought of being anything other than monogamous never entered her head. She's now a married woman of several years, has seen more of the world and she is now aware of her true nature/deeper feelings. Now she's seriously thinking *I really want this_*, but knows her husband has not changed his views. So yes, she must say something to him now rather than cheat; but she had not misrepresented herself when they first met and got married because that was who she was then. She changed/came into herself many years later*_.



I hadn't thought about it like that before. That puts a new spin on it. I suppose each individual has their own story, reasons etc for following their particular path. I would always leave room in any situation for realisations and growth.. though, if a person is totally sure they would never want a monogomous relationship ever, then i think they should share that with potential partners from the offset. I wonder how many poly people actually do that? hmm its an interesting debate and its making me think about things.. For me, personally, i really dont think i could 'be in' love with more than one person at a time.. I just never have been and i cant imagine that it is possible for me somehow. When i am with someone i want to give them everything i can, my time, energies, attention.. Though, I do love myself too..i wonder if that counts!? lol.
I am wondering if polygamy is more about sex than it is to do with love?. I guess the love alternative is polyamoury??
I'm wondering if more men than women consider themselves polygamous/like if it is a biological/evolutionary thing?
If the reality of a polygamous relationship would be do-able... I actually think the initial thread was about open relationships..which i guess is a bit different. .hmmmm..


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 2, 2009)

olwen said:


> I don't think you're a failure if you argue in front of your kid. It's hard to avoid sometimes. Anyway, kids are smart, you know. I think even if you say nothing and avoid arguing in front of the kids they can still tell something is wrong, and they might ask what's up or say nothing and then watch you both like a hawk to try to suss it out.



Agreed. Also children learn how to be adults based on the examples of adulthood their parents give them. So seeing an argument between their parents might not be a bad thing if its handled in a healthy, respectful way. People argue, that's just life. 

I never saw my parents argue, not once while growing up. The first time I had an argument with my ex-husband I thought there was something really very wrong with our marriage (there was but not due to that first argument) because my parents were happily married and they never argued.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> If you got cheated on..surely that would mean that your relationship wasn't open though? hmm.. i'm mixed up. I dont see why people would both be allowed to sleep with other people if they told their partners about it and then sleep behind their partners back..why would they do that except maby because they had exhausted all other forms of excitement for themselves??



Because some people are excited by the sneaking around. Or maybe someone was determined to be off limits, for whatever reason one spouse was uncomfortable with another spouse seeing a particular person but the spouse went ahead and had sex with the other person anyway. 

There are still rules, and there is still trust, so if someone lies or sneaks (even in an open relationship) they are cheating.


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 2, 2009)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Well, um, I'm going to say this. If you have been with more than one sexual partner, you are not monogamous. Not by the standards set forth by the Christian church - and that's who set these rules, right? So serial monogamy - yeah sure, which still means you are having multiple sexual partners. But truly monogamous - nope.



And I'm going to say again as clearly as I know how: I've never had a sexual partner in my life, and I won't unless I get married. I am truly monogamous.


----------



## mergirl (Apr 2, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> And I'm going to say again as clearly as I know how: I've never had a sexual partner in my life, and I won't unless I get married. I am truly monogamous.


hmm.. bet you think about lots of different women though.. Thats 'thought polygamy'!!


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 2, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> And I'm going to say again as clearly as I know how: I've never had a sexual partner in my life, and I won't unless I get married. I am truly monogamous.



Then you know what? I tip my hat to you - you are a rare breed.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 2, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> And I'm going to say again as clearly as I know how: I've never had a sexual partner in my life, and I won't unless I get married. I am truly monogamous.



I think the term is currently NOnogamous. 


And :bow: for your commitment to yourself. No matter what it is, always remain true to yourself. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. 

Though this is Hyde Park. I'll be waiting.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> I think the term is currently NOnogamous.
> 
> 
> And :bow: for your commitment to yourself. No matter what it is, always remain true to yourself. I don't thanbk anyone would disagree with that.
> ...



This is NOT Hyde Park, Sparks. This is THE LOUNGE. 

Ya feckin' lounge lizard. Yeah. I said it. I don't know what it means, but it sounds kinda clever.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 2, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> This is NOT Hyde Park, Sparks. This is THE LOUNGE.
> 
> Ya feckin' lounge lizard. Yeah. I said it. I don't know what it means, but it sounds kinda clever.



Holee, cripes?? How did I get over in the Lounge?? I was out with BarbBBW last night for drinks......you know drinks ONLY discussing monogamy and something must have been in those Diet Cokes I was drinking.....<whew>

Anybody see my shirt??


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Apr 2, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Ok...see...I think this kind of thing is a problem. If two people are in an ' open ' relationship...they are not treating their main man/woman in a bad way. For them, it is something they have both *agreed* on. It would only be " treating someone else like that ", if it was one-sided.


I would agree to that as well. If only one side is into opening up the marriage, then it's outright cheating. I would also say that sometimes partner x will agree with partner y only out of fear (that they will go behind their back anyway) or do it because they do love them (the impotent man example given way back) and want their needs met. To me it's still not 50/50 because both partners aren't 100% committed to it. That I think is the true issue at hand with most honest discussions of this; the swingers I've known tend to have the same concerns--one person (more often than not the man) initiates the swing lifestyle, the wife goes along with it for a time, then finds out that the hubby just wants to bang a variety of women.



TraciJo67 said:


> [REDACTED]...The only real issue for me is when people have children. At that point, their lives change, and becomes more about the child. I wouldn't want to do anything that I know could harm my little boy. Right now, I feel like a complete failure when my husband and I can't refrain from any kind of disagreement -- even a mild one -- in front of him. I can't even imagine adding another man or woman to the mix, and then being unable to contain my jealousy and resentment because hubby got a little too cozy with his lady friend. That is an experience that is just beyond my frame of reference.


I would say that you have to sacrifice a certain percentage of YOUR life for your child, but not to the detriment of your overall happiness. I would say you have no business berating yourself for arguing in front of children; more often than not they need to learn adult interactions from their perspective. The way my mom and dad constantly fought in front of my sister and I shaped how I refuse to do so with my children, and when it does erupt into a discussion I make a point (that my parents didn't) of explaining WHY mommy and daddy were discussing things and that it wasn't to be mean. Even with that a kid is going to interpret it with a kid logic we can never fully control. I would also say that the parents in your example need to learn some fucking tact and not discuss carnal matters in front of their children, even the ones who may be old enough to understand. 



Sandie_Zitkus said:


> This is the thing. I don't believe in shame or in hiding anything, I'm as honest as the day is long and I don't know how to be any different.
> 
> Let me give you an example. We were with a group of friends having dinner out. Someone told a joke about anal sex and without skipping a beat I said "Oh I've had anal sex, it's not as bad as people think." Then I realized there was dead silence at our table. I loooked up and everyone was staring at me with this look of surprise on their faces, forks in mid air. I then said "What? we were talking about anal sex weren't we?" Everyone laughed and dinner went on. It never accured to me that saying that was not cool.
> 
> So if you think I've given too much info here - this is nuthin'.


I get flack if I talk about doodie in a child/diaper situation on here. I think there is a certain level of social decorum where one tries to estimate the level of TMI in a given group, especially in a social setting where a badly spoken word could be awkward.

Then again, I've gone to dinner with my father-in-law's best friend (crotchety Vietnam veteran) who felt comfy throwing around the N-word in mixed company and would totally get in a black person's face if they brought it up. At that point you want to snap your fingers like Q and teleport away somewhere.



frankman said:


> What I like about the previous poster is... Oh, wrong thread.
> 
> Actually, for those who believe in the inner animal residing deep within the mono-/poly-/different-gamous person, a list of animals that mate for life:
> 
> ...


I would disagree with you on the termites; to me you can't be considered monogamous if you're instinctually driven to mate with only one organism. Honeybee drones are pushed out of the hive after the female is fertilized and his help is no longer required--sucks to be him.

I would also say that the examples I selected above - humans were not given cool enough classifications .



NoWayOut said:


> And I'm going to say again as clearly as I know how: I've never had a sexual partner in my life, and I won't unless I get married. I am truly monogamous.


If you can end up meeting one woman who satisfies you sexually and emotionally in every way for the rest of your life, without having 'known her' before you committed to her for life and home and finances, AND keeps you from lusting or chasing after another woman, then I salute your principles. I also have this wonderful bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to show you. It's a real bargain. 

I would also agree with the earlier poster that monogamy implies you already HAVE a partner.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> Holee, cripes?? How did I get over in the Lounge?? I was out with BarbBBW last night for drinks......you know drinks ONLY discussing monogamy and something must have been in those Diet Cokes I was drinking.....<whew>
> 
> Anybody see my shirt??



Wooohoo!! Drinks with Spanky! I was having "sex on the beach" while you had Diet cokes! Very true, YOU were discussing monogamy , I was staring at your sexy self:eat2:! My bad :doh: LOL


----------



## Mini (Apr 2, 2009)

Whatever gets your rocks off, so long as it doesn't scare the horses.


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I dont know why i would understand more than some about living outside a "Normal monogomous" relationship, as i am in a monogomous relationship and i feel i am normal (as far as it goes lol). I'm not straight but i dont have children so i really dont know more than some when it comes to family, laws and child rearing. I dont study Law either, so i'm not really sure about a lot of those laws either.



Ok....***snaps fingers like Q***


----------



## exile in thighville (Apr 2, 2009)

Mini said:


> Whatever gets your rocks off, so long as it doesn't scare the horses.



open-marry me you son of a bitch


----------



## Mini (Apr 2, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> open-marry me you son of a bitch



Done and done. 

As you're the only one currently having regular sex, I will vicariously enjoy the ins and outs of your penis.


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

frankman said:


> What I like about the previous poster is... Oh, wrong thread.
> 
> Actually, for those who believe in the inner animal residing deep within the mono-/poly-/different-gamous person, a list of animals that mate for life:
> 
> ...



Don't forget the ferocious Lysiosquillina maculata, or Zebra Mantis Shrimp.
Actually, almost all other mantis shrimp are loners (the Lysiosquillia family are mate bonders, and are genetically designed as such. They literally don't have enough saliva-glue to solidify a big enough burrow alone, they HAVE to have a mate to make an adequately safe home), but L mac is a badass exception. One pair in a bay in Hawaii has been observed for well over 22+ years now...same pair, same burrow. Cute!

And since the inevitable questions/comments will emerge, they supposedly taste a bit like lobster, but good luck catching this species for dinner, they grow 1.5 feet long, and can have up to 6" long dactyls (The blade arms).
They shoot out of their burrows like trapdoor spiders, spearing fish swimming by overhead. And (Not that many would care) I do have permission to repost Dr. Caldwell's pics. Great guy, and he even said it was cool if I used them for t-shirts.  Woohoo, Mantis Shrimp!

Just thought I'd throw in a very interesting monogamous animal into the mix. 

View attachment l_maculata1.jpg


View attachment l_maculata2.jpg


View attachment l_maculata3.jpg


View attachment l_maculata4.jpg


----------



## Spanky (Apr 2, 2009)

WHERE SOME FARGIN COCKTAIL SAUCE WHEN YOU NEED IT. 


Is Uriel taking this convo back to fish and chips??


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 2, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> If you can end up meeting one woman who satisfies you sexually and emotionally in every way for the rest of your life, without having 'known her' before you committed to her for life and home and finances, AND keeps you from lusting or chasing after another woman, then I salute your principles. I also have this wonderful bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to show you. It's a real bargain.
> 
> I would also agree with the earlier poster that monogamy implies you already HAVE a partner.



I would disagree with that position, but you're entitled to that definition of monogamy. 

As for the rest of your post, I disagree that my principles make me gullible. Maybe there is no one right woman for me, but if I do find her, all other women are off limits. I'd never chase after another woman if I was married, because I know that I could never look at myself in the mirror afterwards. If I don't find her, I die a virgin, and I'm okay with that. 

It's my own set of morals. I recognize most people don't feel the same, and that's okay. All I know is that for me personally, I get to marry one person in my life, and she's the only person I ever have sex with. That's the only way that's right for me.


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Wooohoo!! Drinks with Spanky! I was having "sex on the beach" while you had Diet cokes! Very true, YOU were discussing monogamy , I was staring at your sexy self:eat2:! My bad :doh: LOL



Ugh...Sex Onna Beach...nasty thing, that. Sugartastic...Could have been worse, could have been a Screaming Orgasm.


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> WHERE SOME FARGIN COCKTAIL SAUCE WHEN YOU NEED IT.
> 
> 
> Is Uriel taking this convo back to fish and chips??



See, now there you go...you'd lose your hand long before you got to reach for the drawn butter.

Mantis Shrimp: Ounce for Ounce, the World's most dangerous (Non-Venomous) animals.
They have been on almost as many 'Most Extreme' shows for the AP as Sharks.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> Ugh...Sex Onna Beach...nasty thing, that. Sugartastic...Could have been worse, could have been a Screaming Orgasm.



Or a Slow Comfortable Screw Against a Wall.......


Boy, that's 80s shite fer ya.


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> Or a Slow Comfortable Screw Against a Wall.......
> 
> 
> Boy, that's 80s shite fer ya.



I don't get much of a call for those, maybe a regional thing with folks.

People do ask an awful lot for a Red Headed Slut. Often Redheads, with a mischievous grin. (Jaeger,peach and cranberry for anyone curious)


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> Don't forget the ferocious Lysiosquillina maculata, or Zebra Mantis Shrimp.
> Actually, almost all other mantis shrimp are loners (the Lysiosquillia family are mate bonders, and are genetically designed as such. They literally don't have enough saliva-glue to solidify a big enough burrow alone, they HAVE to have a mate to make an adequately safe home), but L mac is a badass exception. One pair in a bay in Hawaii has been observed for well over 22+ years now...same pair, same burrow. Cute!
> 
> And since the inevitable questions/comments will emerge, they supposedly taste a bit like lobster, but good luck catching this species for dinner, they grow 1.5 feet long, and can have up to 6" long dactyls (The blade arms).
> ...


Correct me if I'm wrong (my aquarist-fu is a little weak) but aren't Mantis Shrimp those mean sonsabitches that you get sometimes hiding in live rock you get from the shore/aquarist store? You don't see it because it's nocturnal, but suddenly all your new fish start disappearing because it's eating them overnight.

And also remember they are hard as hell to catch because a) you have to use blacklights and b) they can lay you open with those monster claws of theirs.

Excellent pictures, though.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> I don't get much of a call for those, maybe a regional thing with folks.
> 
> People do ask an awful lot for a Red Headed Slut. Often Redheads, with a mischievous grin. (Jaeger,peach and cranberry for anyone curious)



Cripes! 

I didn't know we were dealing with a professional here. 

I am more of a paint 'n suds kinda guy anyways.


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong (my aquarist-fu is a little weak) but aren't Mantis Shrimp those mean sonsabitches that you get sometimes hiding in live rock you get from the shore/aquarist store? You don't see it because it's nocturnal, but suddenly all your new fish start disappearing because it's eating them overnight.
> 
> And also remember they are hard as hell to catch because a) you have to use blacklights and b) they can lay you open with those monster claws of theirs.
> 
> Excellent pictures, though.



Yes, you are correct, although you'd never catch a spearer like L mac in live rock, they live in sandbeds. I have had (counts) something like 20-24 mantis over the last 5 years, always in their own tank, btw... While they are hell to a community tank, they are actually really awesome pets in their own (Acrylic) tanks. And some can break glass, their strikes being comparative to bullet hits, and now, in more detailed tests with the big boys, a shotgun. 

As far as catching them, most folks that I know with the problem have had a helluva time getting them out. Bummer...

Some smasher species will break a finger, the one in the pics would remove a finger easily enough, if you reached into it's burrow.
The shots were from Dr. Caldwell's site, he's the World's foremost expert on the little bastards, and one of the big men with blue ring octopus as well.

Here are a couple of mine from the past, pics by me (RIP) 

View attachment Glnew1.jpg


View attachment Achilles02.jpg


View attachment Dagon1.jpg


View attachment Hydra03.jpg


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> Ugh...Sex Onna Beach...nasty thing, that. Sugartastic...Could have been worse, could have been a Screaming Orgasm.





Spanky said:


> Or a Slow Comfortable Screw Against a Wall.......
> 
> 
> Boy, that's 80s shite fer ya.



YES PLEASEEEEEEEEEEE:smitten::kiss2::wubu::smitten:


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 2, 2009)

Now this is a good thread!!
Completely off the topic, but thats ok!!


----------



## escapist (Apr 2, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Or even better, tell them you are poly before they develop feelings for you so that they have more of a choice to decide whether or not they want to persue a poly relationship. I agree, it is better to tell people you are not monogomous, than just to cheat on them.



well I think the point of that quote and what I was saying extends beyond just poly thoughts. I was really going at the choice to have even just a fling outside of the relationship. That's something that can come at any time even if at one time you had the intentions of a committed relationship. However I have known others to go from total rejection of poly thoughts to total desire of a poly lifestyle. Life is not static and thoughts feelings wants and desires certainly do change especially when we are talking over a very long periods of time.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> Or a Slow Comfortable Screw Against a Wall.......
> 
> 
> Boy, that's 80s shite fer ya.



It's a sure bet that a man named that drink.

Any woman would tell ya that there's nothing comfortable about a screw (slow or otherwise) against a wall. Not, mind you, that comfort is always the all-important issue, drink or otherwise  

Bartender, make mine A Piece of Ass.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 2, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> It's a sure bet that a man named that drink.
> 
> Any woman would tell ya that there's nothing comfortable about a screw (slow or otherwise) against a wall. Not, mind you, that comfort is always the all-important issue, drink or otherwise
> 
> Bartender, make mine A Piece of Ass.



haha Traci, very true!!


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

From Webtender


Drinks with Sex in the name...

# Sex at my House
# Sex in the Desert
# Sex in the Red Zone
# Sex in the Shower
# Sex On Acid
# Sex on an Arizona Beach
# Sex on Daytona Beach
# Sex on Ice
# Sex on my face
# Sex on the Beach
# Sex On The Beach - Jersey Style
# Sex on the Beach Bettsy Style
# Sex on the Beach
# Sex on the Brain
# Sex on the Grass
# Sex on the Pool Table
# Sex under the bleachers with a KU cheerleader
# Sex under the boardwalk
# Sex With An Alligator
# Sex with the bartender
# Sex with the Captain
# Sexoholic
# Sexual Chocolate
# Sexual Harrasement
# Sexual Trance
# Sexy Blue Eyed Boy


Ha, that's a lot of sex


----------



## Uriel (Apr 2, 2009)

Drinks with Orgasm in the name...



1. Orgasm (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Creme de Cacao, Amaretto, Triple sec, Vodka, Light cream 
2. Orgasm #2 (Shot. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Peppermint schnapps, Bailey's irish cream 
3. Orgasm #3 (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Orange liqueur, Bailey's irish cream, Cherry 
4. Orgasm a la Denmark (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Vodka 
5. J's Tropical Orgasm (JTO) (Cocktail. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Absolut Citron, Absolut Mandrin, Peach schnapps, Strawberry liqueur, Cranberry juice, Orange juice, Pineapple juice, Cherry 
6. Multiple Orgasm #1 (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Orange liqueur, Bailey's irish cream, Milk, Strawberries 
7. Multiple Orgasm #2 (Other/Unknown. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Kahlua, Amaretto, Vodka, Half-and-half, Ice 
8. Multiple Orgasm Cajun Style (Other/Unknown. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Dark rum, Kahlua, Amaretto, Creme de Cacao, Rum cream liqueur, Ice, Ice-cream 
9. Screaming Multiple Orgasm On The Beach (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Amaretto, Triple sec, Midori melon liqueur, Malibu rum, Peachtree schnapps, Club soda 
10. Screaming Orgasm (San Francisco Style) (Cocktail. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Triple sec, Cognac 
11. Screaming Orgasm II (Shot. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Amaretto, Bailey's irish cream, Vodka 
12. Tropical Orgasm #2 (Punch / Party Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Triple sec, Malibu rum, Orange juice, Ice 
13. Orgasmic Fantasy (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Vodka, Bailey's irish cream, Kahlua, Vanilla extract 
14. Black Orgasm (Cocktail. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Sloe gin, Blue Curacao, Peach schnapps, Vodka 
15. Bleeding Orgasm (Punch / Party Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Vodka, 151 proof rum, Cranberry juice, Pineapple, Mountain Dew
16. Chocolate Orgasm (Milk / Float / Shake. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Kahlua, Cherry vodka, Espresso, Chocolate milk 
17. Dirty Orgasm (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Orange liqueur, Galliano, Bailey's irish cream 
18. Jennifer's Orgasm (Shot. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Butterscotch schnapps, Spiced rum 
19. Kinky Orgasm (Cocktail. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Amaretto, Kahlua, Milk 
20. More Orgasms (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Vodka, Malibu rum 
21. Mutual Orgasm (Other/Unknown. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Amaretto, Creme de Cacao, Vodka, Half-and-half 
22. Passcack Valley Orgasm (Milk / Float / Shake. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Vodka, Amaretto, Kahlua, Cream 
23. Screaming Multiple Orgasm (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Orange liqueur, Bailey's irish cream, Galliano, Milk, Strawberries 
24. Screaming Orgasm (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Vodka, Bailey's irish cream, Kahlua 
25. Screaming White Orgasm (Milk / Float / Shake. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Bailey's irish cream, Kahlua, White rum, Cointreau, Milk, Ice 
26. Tropical Orgasm (Punch / Party Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Pink lemonade, Vodka, Daiquiri mix, Rum 
27. Twains Orgasm (Ordinary Drink. Alcoholic.)
Ingredients: Peach schnapps, Bailey's irish cream


----------



## chicken legs (Apr 2, 2009)

Spanky said:


> Or a Slow Comfortable Screw Against a Wall.......
> 
> 
> Boy, that's 80s shite fer ya.



in the shower.....mmmmmmm


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> From Webtender
> 
> 
> Drinks with Sex in the name...
> ...



YES PLEASE AGAIN lol


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 2, 2009)

Uriel said:


> From Webtender
> 
> Drinks with Sex in the name...
> 
> ...


 
But where's _Sexy Blue Haired Boy_ on this list? Oh wait >>> that's not something you drink? Oh! Er- I mean... umm ... :blush:


----------



## frankman (Apr 3, 2009)

Uriel said:


> Drinks with Sex in the name...
> 
> # Sex at my House



I know I should dig the fact there's sex in the name, or alcohol in the drink, but the only thing my head's doing right now is yell:

*Whose house? Run's house! *


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Apr 3, 2009)

And of course the lonliest drink of the all, Sex With Myself


----------



## Fascinita (Apr 3, 2009)

frankman said:


> *Whose house? Run's house! *



The Rev and his family! God, I had a crush on him when he was tough. The way he used to stand with his arms crossed and the Adidas with the fat laces.... lol 

Anyway, for the record, I voted, "No," in this poll. Great poll. Great poll. :bow:


----------



## frankman (Apr 3, 2009)

Here's Rev trapped in an invisible box.

AAAaaaand back to the list: how does one actually ask for a "sex with the bartender"? That's a lawsuit waiting to happen... 

View attachment run-dmc-paris.jpg


----------



## Fascinita (Apr 3, 2009)

frankman said:


> Here's Rev trapped in an invisible box.



haha TOo cool for laces. lol

And as to Open Marriages, my answer (in French) is a simple "_Non_." In Brooklynese it's, "HELL, no!"


----------



## Surlysomething (Apr 3, 2009)

Why get married in the first place?


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 3, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> Why get married in the first place?



Did you read all the threads on here, before posting this question??? ut ohhh


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2009)

Mini said:


> Done and done.
> 
> As you're the only one currently having regular sex, I will vicariously enjoy the ins and outs of your penis.




*tries to stifle laughing out too loud at work* niiiiice


----------



## Surlysomething (Apr 3, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Did you read all the threads on here, before posting this question??? ut ohhh




I did, what's your point?


I personally don't see why people get married if they want to be with someone else. My opinion.


----------



## Cors (Apr 3, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> I personally don't see why people get married if they want to be with someone else. My opinion.



Hmmm, I can only speak for myself. My partner and I are not married, but we are in a serious long-term open relationship and have considered it. 

I choose to be a relationship with him because I love him and appreciate his company. Our relationship is non-sexual because he is asexual, I am not physically interested in males and we don't see the point in making love for the sake of it. Some people argue that we should have just stayed friends, but we have a much deeper connection with each other. We enjoy doing typical romantic couply things together and I get unlimited comfort, intimacy, safety and warmth. 

I am allowed to engage in BDSM play or even sleep with someone I find attractive. He has the same freedom too, though he is unlikely to act on it. We believe in open honesty and have tremendous respect for each other. I will always seek his permission before playing with someone else and we do have certain rules like no emotional attachment, no kissing and safe sex. Of course there is always a risk that one of us might fall for someone else and it can happen regardless of whether we are in an open relationship or not. I personally think that this is unlikely because what I do have in my relationship is far more important to me than lust or power cravings. If it does happen, then we will just have to discuss it openly and honestly like we do about everything else. 

Would I still be interested in an open relationship if we have such sizzling chemistry that every other possible partner pales in comparison? Probably not, though being a greedy human I might still crave variety. No relationship is perfect and if you have a partner satisfies every single physical and emotional need, so much that it overrides your inherent nature to be sexually attracted to more than one person, great for you. I can also understand and respect those of you who are sexually attracted to others but choose to remain monogamous anyway (and have a relatively easy time doing so), out of respect and love for your partner if s/he demands it. What I feel is not okay is when people insist on monogamy merely for the sake of it simply because they think it is the only morally right or socially acceptable thing to do, even when they or their partner clearly has a hard time doing that. Struggling with his or her own desire, feeling guilty, having to lie to make up for it and even cheating... no thanks. 

This isn't targeted at anyone in particular, but I am slightly amused by people who condemn the idea of open relationships but yet approve of short-lived serial monogamy, sleeping around when single and hell, even cheating. Fine if it works for you and your partner, that is all that should matter anyway. Just don't assume that everyone is, or should adopt your relationship model and judge people who don't.


----------



## chunkeymonkey (Apr 3, 2009)

I miss the show SWING TOWN I hope they bring it back.......Its always fun to watch !


----------



## Surlysomething (Apr 3, 2009)

Cors said:


> Hmmm, I can only speak for myself. My partner and I are not married, but we are in a serious long-term open relationship and have considered it.
> 
> I choose to be a relationship with him because I love him and appreciate his company. Our relationship is non-sexual because he is asexual, I am not physically interested in males and we don't see the point in making love for the sake of it. Some people argue that we should have just stayed friends, but we have a much deeper connection with each other. We enjoy doing typical romantic couply things together and I get unlimited comfort, intimacy, safety and warmth.
> 
> ...



I have no problem with that at all. But you're not married.

Committed relationships vary in so many ways. Why go through the whole horse and pony show with the dress and the legal paperwork? Oh yeah, for the gifts. 

And for the record, I don't care if anyone adopts anything of mine. I never said that.  I just don't see the point of "marriage".


----------



## Cors (Apr 3, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> I have no problem with that at all. But you're not married.
> 
> Committed relationships vary in so many ways. Why go through the whole horse and pony show with the dress and the legal paperwork? Oh yeah, for the gifts.
> 
> And for the record, I don't care if anyone adopts anything of mine. I never said that.  I just don't see the point of "marriage".



No worries, like I said, it isn't is not targeted at you. I have met many people who like to shove their monogamous ideals down other's throats and you are not one of them.  

I elaborated because I don't think my relationship dynamics will change if and when I do get married to my current partner. I can't speak for others in open relationships who might be intending to marry, but I personally don't see a need to change something that works. 

Haha, I don't think people still marry for the gifts because a wedding is likely to be more expensive anyway. Maaaybe for social recognition, tax reasons and other benefits.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Apr 3, 2009)

If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that they get married for reasons of security and love, just like a lot of people. Security can cover a multitude of areas, including legal, financial and emotional - these are ties that by law, can only exist when a couple is married, or in a legal domestic partnership. The benefits are many, including medical decisions, lower taxes, inheritance, etc. In terms of love (the emotional kind) - a marriage partner would obviously (I'm guessing) hold a much higher level than sex partners. A spouse is someone you both love and trust, while a sex partner is probably someone with which there isn't as deep an emotional tie. Also - a spouse is someone you'd feel comfortable and safe returning to, while that may not be the case with a sex partner.

That's just what I've picked up from listening to people in open relationships. The point is that having an open relationship doesn't negate the value of marriage (the quality of it would be another question), it's just a different way of managing one.


----------



## AnnMarie (Apr 3, 2009)

chunkeymonkey said:


> I miss the show SWING TOWN I hope they bring it back.......Its always fun to watch !



It was officially canceled on Jan 14. I liked it too, really too bad it didn't make it.


----------



## olwen (Apr 3, 2009)

SamanthaNY said:


> If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that they get married for reasons of security and love, just like a lot of people. Security can cover a multitude of areas, including legal, financial and emotional - these are ties that by law, can only exist when a couple is married, or in a legal domestic partnership. The benefits are many, including medical decisions, lower taxes, inheritance, etc. In terms of love (the emotional kind) - a marriage partner would obviously (I'm guessing) hold a much higher level than sex partners. A spouse is someone you both love and trust, while a sex partner is probably someone with which there isn't as deep an emotional tie. Also - a spouse is someone you'd feel comfortable and safe returning to, while that may not be the case with a sex partner.
> 
> That's just what I've picked up from listening to people in open relationships. The point is that having an open relationship doesn't negate the value of marriage (the quality of it would be another question), it's just a different way of managing one.



You know, my own feelings about marriage are mixed at this point. Part of me feels like the only real reason to get married are for the legal benefits only. It seems almost insulting to say to someone prove you love me by signing this legally binding contract. To me a truer relationship is one where there is enough trust, compromise, love, comfort, security that you don't need a contract for added security. But should things go sour and you need to end it that contract is good to have when it comes time to place value on the things you've earned together. How to spend time with the children if there are any is separate to me because even if you aren't married you can still go to court for child support and such. 

On the other hand the marriage status appeals to me. I kind of want to be able to say, yeah I'm somebody's wife. I do sometimes wonder tho, what humans did before writing was invented....like where did this concept of marriage come from, when did it start and was polyamory ever so common that it would seem silly to not be polyamourous?


----------



## Keb (Apr 3, 2009)

To me, it's not the legal contract that makes a marriage. It's the promises, the intent to be joined for life, and the behavior. I think the idea of common law marriage is downright reasonable--if you're acting married, it's silly to have a legal difference. Of course, in our modern litigous society, the legal agreement does protect the rights of those in a marriage. But what I'm hoping for in a marriage is definitely not a few legal rights.


----------



## olwen (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> To me, it's not the legal contract that makes a marriage. It's the promises, the intent to be joined for life, and the behavior. I think the idea of common law marriage is downright reasonable--if you're acting married, it's silly to have a legal difference. Of course, in our modern litigous society, the legal agreement does protect the rights of those in a marriage. But what I'm hoping for in a marriage is definitely not a few legal rights.



If marriages didn't come with that piece of legal paper would you still want to be married? Would it still mean the same thing? 

P.S. I feel the need to point out I'm not trying to be contentious with the questions. I'm not sure how I would answer the question myself since my feelings about marriage are mixed.


----------



## Keb (Apr 4, 2009)

olwen said:


> If marriages didn't come with that piece of legal paper would you still want to be married? Would it still mean the same thing?
> 
> P.S. I feel the need to point out I'm not trying to be contentious with the questions. I'm not sure how I would answer the question myself since my feelings about marriage are mixed.



Yup. In fact, I'd take it a step further and say that once I sleep with someone, piece of paper, promises, or no--I'd consider us married (unless he was already married to someone else--in which case I'd never knowingly sleep with him). But that's mainly because I'm waiting for marriage for sex in the first place.


----------



## olwen (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> Yup. In fact, I'd take it a step further and say that once I sleep with someone, piece of paper, promises, or no--I'd consider us married (unless he was already married to someone else--in which case I'd never knowingly sleep with him). But that's mainly because I'm waiting for marriage for sex in the first place.



Wow, that's a huge step. It does make sense tho if you're waiting to be in a committed relationship before having sex.


----------



## exile in thighville (Apr 4, 2009)

Mini said:


> Done and done.
> 
> As you're the only one currently having regular sex, I will vicariously enjoy the ins and outs of your penis.



my (our?) penis is strictly exit-only.


----------



## MsGreenLantern (Apr 4, 2009)

olwen said:


> I do sometimes wonder tho, what humans did before writing was invented....like where did this concept of marriage come from, when did it start and was polyamory ever so common that it would seem silly to not be polyamourous?



I think prior to the written word [in any civilization] coupling was much much more about survival and procreation than anything we could associate with love ,commitment, or polyamoury. Your family chose who you were with, not you. There were more than likely very few choices, especially who weren't related to you closely. Most people died before they hit 32, and only a third of the babies being born by the woman survived to be a child let alone adult. Even post writing most marriages in ancient times were selected for you, were void of personal connection, and the women tended to die young after having offspring, and the man would quickly remarry to continue with life. Women could be killed if they had affairs without a blink of the families eye, so there was not much chance for 'loving' more than one person there either. If you count polygamy as polyamoury, then yeah, many cultures let men have several wives, but that was more about status and sex than about love or affection.

Even so far as novels from the 1700 and 1800s stated that marriage was about status, and mothers gave the speech to their children that they would "learn to love" their husbands. 

I suppose a few cultures believe in polyamoury though. Some American Indian tribes and African tribes believe a woman can openly sleep with whoever they want. I don't believe they 'marry' though, they just are one big game of sharesies. Trading women was/is common in some cultures. It is sometimes acceptable for a man to enter a neighboring nomadic camp and steal a guy's wife to take back to their own camp community, but again, that's not the woman's choice either.


----------



## Adrian (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> Yup. In fact, I'd take it a step further and say that once I sleep with someone, piece of paper, promises, or no--I'd consider us married


That is my old fashion view of how I behave. The step is not so large, there are a bunch of small steps leading up to it that require time, patience and, are very important. The step is not large, it is just extremely important!

Adrian


----------



## Uriel (Apr 4, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> my (our?) penis is strictly exit-only.



Ugh..._Sounding_ nightmare...


----------



## frankman (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> Yup. In fact, I'd take it a step further and say that once I sleep with someone, piece of paper, promises, or no--I'd consider us married (unless he was already married to someone else--in which case I'd never knowingly sleep with him). But that's mainly because I'm waiting for marriage for sex in the first place.



Is this a religious choice or just a personal rule? Because if it's a personal rule, could you indulge me and answer a hypothetical? If so, here goes:

Say the right guy does not come along. He was accidentally born in Urugay and nobody told you. Would you die a virgin or would you try sex with someone who's not husband material, if only to see what the fuss is all about?


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> Yup. In fact, I'd take it a step further and say that once I sleep with someone, piece of paper, promises, or no--I'd consider us married (unless he was already married to someone else--in which case I'd never knowingly sleep with him). But that's mainly because I'm waiting for marriage for sex in the first place.



I can understand waiting to have sex until you are married. BUT!! To say once you sleep with someone you are married will scare every man and most women on the planet off. That's just insane and clingy, to think that if you sleep with someone, you are married!!!


----------



## frankman (Apr 4, 2009)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> I can understand waiting to have sex until you are married. BUT!! To say once you sleep with someone you are married will scare every man and most women on the planet off. That's just insane and clingy, to think that if you sleep with someone, you are married!!!



But that is not a problem, cause you're looking at it upside down. I guess what she's saying is that she won't have sex before her marriage, so if she's having sex she obviously is, even when legal documents disagree.

But I do understand it kind of sounds like a trap....


----------



## olwen (Apr 4, 2009)

Adrian said:


> That is my old fashion view of how I behave. The step is not so large, there are a bunch of small steps leading up to it that require time, patience and, are very important. The step is not large, it is just extremely important!
> 
> Adrian



Speaking only of myself here, but I would be upset to find out that the person I love isn't sexually compatible if I waited for marriage to have sex. Then I'd be stuck with someone who doesn't do it for me. Sex is important to me so this would be really upsetting to me. Love doesn't fix everything.



BigBellySSBBW said:


> I can understand waiting to have sex until you are married. BUT!! To say once you sleep with someone you are married will scare every man and most women on the planet off. That's just insane and clingy, to think that if you sleep with someone, you are married!!!



No, but her answer to the questions makes sense. If you decide to wait, in the absence of a marriage license, how do you determine when you are married. To her it's after they have sex.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 4, 2009)

olwen said:


> Speaking only of myself here, but I would be upset to find out that the person I love isn't sexually compatible if I waited for marriage to have sex. Then I'd be stuck with someone who doesn't do it for me. Sex is important to me so this would be really upsetting to me. Love doesn't fix everything.
> EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!! I am so with you on this one! I think GREAT sex is sooo important to a great marriage!
> 
> 
> No, but her answer to the questions makes sense. If you decide to wait, in the absence of a marriage license, how do you determine when you are married. To her it's after they have sex.



right, its a choice that is hers! Its a wonderful concept


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> To me, it's not the legal contract that makes a marriage. It's the promises, the intent to be joined for life, and the behavior. I think the idea of common law marriage is downright reasonable--if you're acting married, it's silly to have a legal difference. Of course, in our modern litigous society, the legal agreement does protect the rights of those in a marriage. But what I'm hoping for in a marriage is definitely not a few legal rights.




Keb, I totally respect your decision and your seeming committment to it, but may I ask a couple of questions?

Have you thought about what you would do, if you did indeed wait until your wedding night and your husband turned out to be an incredibly terrible lover? Are you intent on also marrying a virgin? In that case you can learn and grow together. But if you were to marry someone that has led a life complete with sex he may very well be stuck in his ways, not all men are willing to change their style of love making. 

Also, what would you do if ever your husband were to have an affair? Would that be the end?


----------



## Theatrmuse/Kara (Apr 4, 2009)

"Because while you may want to marry because he/she is the one you want to grow old with and come home to every night - he/she may not be the only person you love and want to have sex with. Sex and love are 2 seperate things at least for me. 

Whenever anyone asks why I got married? I say because he is the man I want to live with and create a life with, but I also feel love and attraction for others."

The above is a quote from Sandy........and I believe similar beliefs about MY marriage.........not yours or hers or anyone else's. Everyone's marriage is different and there are those of us who have chosen marriage for reasons that have NOTHING to do with sex..........only with love. Now, these two things can come together and that can be most wonderful, but sometimes life throws you a surprise and each couple must decide on what works for them.

Some of us are even married to soul mates that we are NOT currently intimate with........something else for everyone to think about. 

Just my own 2 cents, Kara


----------



## Keb (Apr 4, 2009)

Wow--my post generated a lot of questions!



frankman said:


> Is this a religious choice or just a personal rule? Because if it's a personal rule, could you indulge me and answer a hypothetical? If so, here goes:
> 
> Say the right guy does not come along. He was accidentally born in Urugay and nobody told you. Would you die a virgin or would you try sex with someone who's not husband material, if only to see what the fuss is all about?



Is there really a difference, for a person with a religious faith, between a religious choice and a personal rule? I'd say it's a personal rule that my religious beliefs, family upbringing, and independent study have brought about together. It's not a choice I've made just because God Said So (or even sillier, because some Guy Who Knows What God Wants Said So), but I do see certain biblical texts about marriage as being relevant to my decision.

Anyway, for the hypothetical, may I respond with a reverse hypothetical? Suppose I decided arbitrarily that if I get to be 89 without meeting The Guy, it's never going to happen, and I should have sex to say I did. What happens if two days later I -do- meet The Guy, and I'd have had...okay, three years or so...of wedded bliss. Was it worth giving up? 

Anyway, while I'm hoping there will be only one for me, that doesn't mean that there aren't many The Ones out there. I don't think you only get one shot at love, or that things can't be worked out between most people. 

And if he never comes along? Well, I'll be disappointed, sure...but at least I will have lived as my conscious dictated. And I'll be ready if he does.



BigBellySSBBW said:


> I can understand waiting to have sex until you are married. BUT!! To say once you sleep with someone you are married will scare every man and most women on the planet off. That's just insane and clingy, to think that if you sleep with someone, you are married!!!



By current western standards, you're absolutely right. But Frankman got what I meant, dead on. For me, sex and marriage are intimately linked, so if I'm agreeing to sleep with someone else, I'm going to be taking that as seriously as marrying him--and I don't plan on that happening without the vows first. Don't worry, I'm not going to sleep with someone and tell him we're married in the morning without him knowing it!



frankman said:


> But that is not a problem, cause you're looking at it upside down. I guess what she's saying is that she won't have sex before her marriage, so if she's having sex she obviously is, even when legal documents disagree.
> 
> But I do understand it kind of sounds like a trap....



Thanks for explaining it so well.  



Ella Bella said:


> Keb, I totally respect your decision and your seeming committment to it, but may I ask a couple of questions?
> 
> Have you thought about what you would do, if you did indeed wait until your wedding night and your husband turned out to be an incredibly terrible lover? Are you intent on also marrying a virgin? In that case you can learn and grow together. But if you were to marry someone that has led a life complete with sex he may very well be stuck in his ways, not all men are willing to change their style of love making.
> 
> Also, what would you do if ever your husband were to have an affair? Would that be the end?



Yeah, I've thought about it. But I might turn out to be a really bad lover too! Fortunately, there's a lot of evidence and plenty of testimonials that people can learn. I think it would be nice if we could learn together from the start, but I'm realistic enough to realize that the chances of finding a virgin male my age, who is also compatible with me, and -likes- me...yeah, pretty slim. I'm okay with that. There are things that matter a lot more to me, like wanting kids, sharing my faith, being responsible...and, oh, yes, being quite in love with me. 

I very much hope it'll never come to him having an affair...I suppose it would depend a great deal on the circumstances as to whether it would be over. I have a hard time seeing cheating (not the same as an open marriage, imo, even though the latter is not for me either) as not being a concious choice to hurt people that you love, so it would be pretty serious to me...but again, people can learn, and marriage is important to me--so I think I'd do my best to make it work, if possible.


----------



## frankman (Apr 4, 2009)

Keb said:


> Anyway, for the hypothetical, may I respond with a reverse hypothetical? Suppose I decided arbitrarily that if I get to be 89 without meeting The Guy, it's never going to happen, and I should have sex to say I did. What happens if two days later I -do- meet The Guy, and I'd have had...okay, three years or so...of wedded bliss. Was it worth giving up?
> ***SNIPPED***



Although it'd be nothing for me, it is quite a beautiful concept. I hadn't thought about it like that, so yeah, thanks for answering.


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 4, 2009)

frankman said:


> Is this a religious choice or just a personal rule? Because if it's a personal rule, could you indulge me and answer a hypothetical? If so, here goes:
> 
> Say the right guy does not come along. He was accidentally born in Urugay and nobody told you. Would you die a virgin or would you try sex with someone who's not husband material, if only to see what the fuss is all about?



I have her same viewpoint of waiting to marriage, and I wouldn't try sex with any girl I'm not married to. Sex just isn't worth it to me that I would have to try it no matter what. Without love, sex is meaningless to me.


----------



## frankman (Apr 4, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> Without love, sex is meaningless to me.



BUT: how would you know if you've never tried it?

No, I get it. Just messing with you.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 4, 2009)

I hope you find that guy Keb, and I hope that when you do find him that he's a fantastic lover and you guys click in every way imaginable.

I keep trying to put myself in your shoes, but find it difficult. Maybe because I've had sex and I know what I'd be missing out on should I choose to not have sex until marriage. Sex is such a significant part of an intimate relationship (in my mind) and I just can't imagine promising myself to someone for the rest of my life without knowing that he's gonna be knocking my socks off for the rest of my life. 

Maybe when I'm older and not as interested in sex it won't be such an issue but I'm 34 and the hormones are a raging. 





Keb said:


> Wow--my post generated a lot of questions!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Apr 4, 2009)

Ella is right....when you get older, sex takes on a whole new meaning


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 4, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Ella is right....when you get older, sex takes on a whole new meaning



EXACTLYY THANK YOU GEF!!!


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 4, 2009)

Ella Bella said:


> I hope you find that guy Keb, and I hope that when you do find him that he's a fantastic lover and you guys click in every way imaginable.
> 
> I keep trying to put myself in your shoes, but find it difficult. Maybe because I've had sex and I know what I'd be missing out on should I choose to not have sex until marriage. Sex is such a significant part of an intimate relationship (in my mind) and I just can't imagine promising myself to someone for the rest of my life without knowing that he's gonna be knocking my socks off for the rest of my life.
> 
> Maybe when I'm older and not as interested in sex it won't be such an issue but I'm 34 and the hormones are a raging.



THANK YOU ELLA!!!! I AM 34 Y/O TOO AND MY HORMONES HAVE BEEN NUTS FOR LIKE 10 YEARS NOW WHEN DOES IT END??? LMAO


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 4, 2009)

I imagine that's just for women, and I'm thankful for that.


----------



## Keb (Apr 5, 2009)

*checks* Oh, the hormones are whirring here...there's certainly nothing wrong with me there! (I'm 29, btw.)


----------



## Bellyjeansgirl (Apr 5, 2009)

Cors said:


> I personally don't believe in monogamy for the sake of it. If my partner chooses to have sex with me only, I want to know that it is because the experience is special and superior to what he can get elsewhere, not because he mindlessly subscribes to social norms and stifles his urges because he thinks it pleases me.




Well said *clap*

I honestly think to each their own. 

As for my personal input... I think there's a difference (and it's a very fine line) between wanting to include more people into the bedroom and wanting those specific people in the bedroom. 

Things can get really messy if your partner starts thinking about the person they aren't with at times. It's the whole "The grass is always greener" scenario. I think that is the one thing that would stop me from any open relationship. 

also, I don't like to say "No, you can't have her." If he's with me, then why does he want her? 

On the other hand, I believe in having as many experiences in life as possible. 

I'll cross that bridge when I get there. <-- Someone special says that phrase to me often <3


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Apr 5, 2009)

Keb said:


> *checks* Oh, the hormones are whirring here...there's certainly nothing wrong with me there! (I'm 29, btw.)




Lol, you haven't started  


hehehehehe, Just teasing. Kudos to you for sticking to your guns. I hope you find everything you are looking for. :bow:


----------



## Adrian (Apr 5, 2009)

Ella Bella said:


> Maybe when I'm older and not as interested in sex it won't be such an issue but I'm 34 and the hormones are a raging.


Sex also changes in a relationship even if the hormones remain high. As the relationship ages, you discover other aspects of the person of which you didn't fully recognize before that become higher in importance. As a man (a male perspective only) gets older whether he has ED or not, concern about it causes him to take a look at his health, its affect on his sex life should he become ill. Especially because people are living longer but, will the quality of life remain as high? Things like going to your fortieth high school or college reunion and hearing about classmates who died of natural causes, illnesses or accidents, lets him know he is mortal.
As a couple you evaluate if one of you has a catastrophic illness or accident which greatly interferes with your sex life, will you evaluate your whole relationship because sex will be placed on hold for a long period of time maybe, a year plus.
Times get tough in a relationship as one person changes one way and the other doesn't, later vise versa. If you are to remain a couple you must have or find parts of your relationship that will bare the load for the absence or reduction of sex if it wanes.
Sex is very important in a relationship but, a lasting relationship has to be a dynamic, ever changing yet, there must be a bond that transcends any single element of that relationship.


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 5, 2009)

" Things can get really messy if your partner starts thinking about the person they aren't with at times. "

This has been a topic of discussion (and debate) with a guy friend of mine who is in an open marriage. He says he and his wife have two rules when it comes to how they play. No unprotected sex and no emotional involvement. They have strategies for minimizing the risk of becoming emotionally involved with a playmate, but it is still something he is pretty tense about. In his opinion, his wife falling in love with a playmate is one of the worst things that could happen. 

Which is where the discussions and debates come in over the hypothetical question about what if his wife DOES fall in love with a playmate? He is just simply unable to wrap his mind around the concept of polyamory (loving more than one person at a time). To him, that is the ultimate betrayal. She is free to share her body as she wishes; but her heart is his, all his, and ONLY his (and vice versa). Because he believes that you can't love a second person without taking something away from the first. Either it minimizes the commitment to the first (they are no longer the "one and only"), or there is not enough love for two and both get "less than everything". For him, the love they feel for each other and only for each other is the tie that binds them. And feeling love for another person would undermine the entire foundation of their marriage. 

Sometimes I think that the fear is not that she could love somebody else *also*, but that she could love somebody else *more*. Which is an absolutely normal thing to feel. We all at times feel jealousy and insecurity over our partners and relationships. It's just part of being human and being deeply emotionally invested in something. Some of us just feel it more often and more intensely than others. Doesn't mean that our relationship is stronger or weaker, it's just how our minds work. 

It's become a taboo topic for us and we have agreed to disagree. 

But yes, "messy" is an understatement. For a lot of people, it would be catastrophic.

Tracy


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 5, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> I imagine that's just for women, and I'm thankful for that.



hehehe too funny!


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 5, 2009)

Keb said:


> *checks* Oh, the hormones are whirring here...there's certainly nothing wrong with me there! (I'm 29, btw.)




awww Keb, I wasn't suggesting there was something wrong with you. I'm sorry if it came off that way.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 5, 2009)

Adrian said:


> Sex also changes in a relationship even if the hormones remain high. As the relationship ages, you discover other aspects of the person of which you didn't fully recognize before that become higher in importance. As a man (a male perspective only) gets older whether he has ED or not, concern about it causes him to take a look at his health, its affect on his sex life should he become ill. Especially because people are living longer but, will the quality of life remain as high? Things like going to your fortieth high school or college reunion and hearing about classmates who died of natural causes, illnesses or accidents, lets him know he is mortal.
> As a couple you evaluate if one of you has a catastrophic illness or accident which greatly interferes with your sex life, will you evaluate your whole relationship because sex will be placed on hold for a long period of time maybe, a year plus.
> Times get tough in a relationship as one person changes one way and the other doesn't, later vise versa. If you are to remain a couple you must have or find parts of your relationship that will bare the load for the absence or reduction of sex if it wanes.
> Sex is very important in a relationship but, a lasting relationship has to be a dynamic, ever changing yet, there must be a bond that transcends any single element of that relationship.




Well, I'm in a relationship. Have been for 7 years so I know that sex doesn't stay the same. I never said that it did, or that it should. The post of mine that you quoted was in reference to me not being able to imagine being celibate because of my prior sexual activity. 

That said, I would never walk away from my current relationship due to lack of sex (should it ever happen) but it would be an issue. One that we'd have to have a very long truthful talk about.


----------



## rollhandler (Apr 5, 2009)

Zandoz said:


> Personally, I disappoint one woman at a time, I do it very well, then I keep doing it ad nauseam. Your mileage may vary.
> 
> The only ones who can decide on what is right in a specific marriage are the two involved in it.



I believe that not only can it be a wonderfully enlightening experience and spice up a sexlife that is in a rut by learning from the experiences of others and broadening the experiences of a couple, it should be shared by both partners in the relationship to be fullfilling. There is NO right way to have a relationship. The only thing that bugs me is when people are told that their way of having a relationship is wrong.
Rollhandler


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 5, 2009)

rollhandler said:


> I believe that not only can it be a wonderfully enlightening experience and spice up a sexlife that is in a rut by learning from the experiences of others and broadening the experiences of a couple, it should be shared by both partners in the relationship to be fullfilling. There is NO right way to have a relationship. The only thing that bugs me is when people are told that their way of having a relationship is wrong.
> Rollhandler



thats right babe! agreed 100% bravo!


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Apr 5, 2009)

Ella Bella said:


> Well, I'm in a relationship. Have been for 7 years so I know that sex doesn't stay the same. I never said that it did, or that it should. The post of mine that you quoted was in reference to me not being able to imagine being celibate because of my prior sexual activity.
> 
> That said, I would never walk away from my current relationship due to lack of sex (should it ever happen) but it would be an issue. One that we'd have to have a very long truthful talk about.


 


rollhandler said:


> I believe that not only can it be a wonderfully enlightening experience and spice up a sexlife that is in a rut by learning from the experiences of others and broadening the experiences of a couple, it should be shared by both partners in the relationship to be fullfilling. There is NO right way to have a relationship. The only thing that bugs me is when people are told that their way of having a relationship is wrong.
> Rollhandler


 
*Absolutely agree with both.*


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 8, 2009)

rollhandler said:


> I believe that not only can it be a wonderfully enlightening experience and spice up a sexlife that is in a rut by learning from the experiences of others and broadening the experiences of a couple, it should be shared by both partners in the relationship to be fullfilling. There is NO right way to have a relationship. The only thing that bugs me is when people are told that their way of having a relationship is wrong.
> Rollhandler



I disagree with that, I think there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. It just seems wrong to me to get married if you have no intention of committing to that one person for life. I think if that's what you want to do, fine, but you shouldn't be married.


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 8, 2009)

" It just seems wrong to me to get married if you have no intention of committing to that one person for life. "

Why assume that they aren't committed to each other for life? It is entirely possible that their definition of commitment is different from yours. And also within the realm of possibility that the vows they made to each other are different than those you chose or would choose for yourself.

Tracy


----------



## Miss Vickie (Apr 8, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " It just seems wrong to me to get married if you have no intention of committing to that one person for life. "
> 
> Why assume that they aren't committed to each other for life? It is entirely possible that their definition of commitment is different from yours. And also within the realm of possibility that the vows they made to each other are different than those you chose or would choose for yourself.
> 
> Tracy



What she said. It's possible to be committed to the person and the relationship for life, and yet feel you want/need certain sexual experiences that that person cannot provide. Seems to me that finding a way to make something like that work, within the relationship, is a lot better than cheating or divorce. 

On a personal note, this is something we "dabbled in", a long long time ago. It worked out okay, but there was a lot of stress and angst because of the very natural, very human emotion: jealousy. I think most people are at least a little jealous and insecure and getting beyond that to make an open relationship work is very hard for most people. We got through it without any real disasters, but I'm not sure it's something I'd do now. It's just a whole lotta work, and I can't imagine any situation that would be worth rocking the boat.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 9, 2009)

Tracyarts said:


> " It just seems wrong to me to get married if you have no intention of committing to that one person for life. "
> 
> Why assume that they aren't committed to each other for life? It is entirely possible that their definition of commitment is different from yours. And also within the realm of possibility that the vows they made to each other are different than those you chose or would choose for yourself.
> 
> Tracy


Ok I have no REPS left today, but I am making a note for tomorrow first thing for you!! Thank you very much!!
This thread has been painful LOL Can I tell you how many men and women hate me and JUDGE me for asking about their opinions on this subject?? WOW its staggering. ANd yet, I have never once, cheated, did a swing, a 3 some or 4 some or anything besides be with my hubby for 9 years now. I am tagged a harlot and lose for that?? LMAO just find it amusing at this point! Still love you all no matter what!!


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 9, 2009)

Miss Vickie said:


> What she said. It's possible to be committed to the person and the relationship for life, and yet feel you want/need certain sexual experiences that that person cannot provide. Seems to me that finding a way to make something like that work, within the relationship, is a lot better than cheating or divorce.
> 
> On a personal note, this is something we "dabbled in", a long long time ago. It worked out okay, but there was a lot of stress and angst because of the very natural, very human emotion: jealousy. I think most people are at least a little jealous and insecure and getting beyond that to make an open relationship work is very hard for most people. We got through it without any real disasters, but I'm not sure it's something I'd do now. It's just a whole lotta work, and I can't imagine any situation that would be worth rocking the boat.



Same to you reps in the AM VIckie LOL


----------



## mossystate (Apr 9, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> This thread has been painful LOL Can I tell you how many men and women hate me and JUDGE me for asking about their opinions on this subject??



Barb, I may have missed some of the posts made in this thread, but, I do not see any ' hate '. 

You put this out here for all people to give their opinions. You have said, more than a few times, that you might not ever make your marriage an open relationship, but that talking about it turns you on. 

If you wanted to only receive ' sexy ' answers, or only receive ' hey, your life is your own '...then you should have asked for that. People are going to participate in the ways that make the most sense to and for them.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 9, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Barb, I may have missed some of the posts made in this thread, but, I do not see any ' hate '.
> 
> You put this out here for all people to give their opinions. You have said, more than a few times, that you might not ever make your marriage an open relationship, but that talking about it turns you on.
> 
> If you wanted to only receive ' sexy ' answers, or only receive ' hey, your life is your own '...then you should have asked for that. People are going to participate in the ways that make the most sense to and for them.



I never said i wanted ONLY SEXY answers,.again, as usual in this thread things get twisted so easily,.. but..thank you, and I have no prob with opinions, I am just stating my opinion too. I am not here to argue at all. It just isnt my thing. I am all about peace and love and happiness to the fullest degree in life. I understand u do not SEE the hate, but you dont see my PM box either ,..soooo hahaha


----------



## Surlysomething (Apr 9, 2009)

Newbie 'enthusiasm' 

wash, rinse, dry...repeat


Maybe this thread really belongs in the Fat sexuality area. Haha.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 9, 2009)

Ummmmmmmmm.........ok!!

:happy:


----------



## NoWayOut (Apr 9, 2009)

BarbBBW said:


> Ok I have no REPS left today, but I am making a note for tomorrow first thing for you!! Thank you very much!!
> This thread has been painful LOL Can I tell you how many men and women hate me and JUDGE me for asking about their opinions on this subject?? WOW its staggering. ANd yet, I have never once, cheated, did a swing, a 3 some or 4 some or anything besides be with my hubby for 9 years now. I am tagged a harlot and lose for that?? LMAO just find it amusing at this point! Still love you all no matter what!!



If that's true, then those would indeed be inaccurate descriptions of you.


----------



## BarbBBW (Apr 9, 2009)

NoWayOut said:


> If that's true, then those would indeed be inaccurate descriptions of you.



thank you!! Its all true!


----------



## FaxMachine1234 (Apr 9, 2009)

I'm just confused as to how I managed to miss this thread entirely. Usually I try to take every opportunity to make an ass of myself around here, but I guess I'll just have to wait. Anyway, I would've said No.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 9, 2009)

whatever.  if y'all cant handle how duRRTy I am you can just NOT read my posts. :doh: xoxoxo come see me in JeRsey (but don't cuz my girlfriend would be pissed) but srsly i want to sex all of you. :kiss2::kiss2:


----------



## frankman (Apr 9, 2009)

But your a dude...

so that means 2nd base, tops. And no funny business!


----------



## Spanky (Apr 10, 2009)

BarbBBW.

You have nice knockers. Mkay?? Your husband is a lucky man. Aaaaannnnnd, all the men in the world don't deserve you. Only your husband does. 

How is that for sappy? 

As for the Pic Trollop comment. Sorry, you are.......guilty.....as.....sin......


Uh, not that you are sinning. Or that being a pic trollop is sinful......ummm.......ah...hell. So be it. 

I would never judge another couple. Never. SandieZ, you, or anyone else. I have my opinion and offered it. I would be concerned about the youngins. They don't have a choice, but the choices could have consequences far reaching beyond the marriage. Again, IMHO. 

You are fun and energetic. Don't change that. It is great to have around here. Freshens up the place. We all get a little stale after while. Well, maybe just me. I don't want to presume that we are all stale. Dog forbid. 

Adn pass the bread sticks. The really ulta dry ones. Slightly stale. mmmmmmm




Oh, pst mor pix plz tanks!


----------

