Open Marriage and very happy

[woinlove]

My questions haven't been answered yet. Why be married at all? I live with my GF, we are committed to each other, and we aren't married. If you have the same, why f**k someone else? Like another poster said why take the risk? There's an old saying, "if it ain't broke , don't fix it". If you, Lovinhimlovinher and Woinlove, are both in such blissful marriages, what motivated you to begin looking for othe people to enter into your marriage, in the first place?, because that's exactly what you are doing. You are allowing other people to be involved in your intimate relationship. I can at least understand swingers, they keep their home life completely separate from their swinger clubs, resorts, etc. What failures or inadequacies caused you to even begin to look into this? Most of the "open marriages", are the result of sexual/emotional dissatifaction by one partner or the other. I have never heard of any couple getting up one morning and both of you simultaneously saying that you want to f**k other people. There has to be a cause. I'm truly not trying to give either of you sh*t, but you are presenting a very idealistic, and one-sided view of "open marriages, when , for the most part, they are almost certain to end in divorce, whereas living together relationships can last for a lifetime.

 

We did live together for years before getting married, but married because we wanted to make the commitment to spend our lives together and to start a family -- basically, we each felt we had found "the one", and we still feel that way. We had already decided to have an open marriage, it was the way we wanted to live. As I said, we didn't even act on this for another 5 years so obviously it wasn't based on any immediate urge.

 

It seems that to you it would be a failure or a "solution" to some problem - but we've never thought of it that way. We feel we live a full, rich life that, by mutual choice, has fewer restrictions on how we interact with others than most couples.

[woinlove]

And this is clearly why open marriages are never recommended to fix relationship problems. "relationship broken, add more people" doesn't work.

 

I am still curious why people who enjoy very satisfying sex with their partner prefer an open relationship, but I do believe that some people ARE very satisfied (even more satisfied) with their primary partner, and still prefer an open relationship.

 

xxoo, you've made good points in your posts and my apologies if I haven't answered some of your questions. They aren't easy questions, but I'll try this one:

 

I like the freedom combined with a enduring marriage, I like discussing our desires and attractions, including when those involve other people. On LS people have mentioned "hysterical bonding" after an affair, and I think there may be something similar involved even though there is no deception. On the non-sexual side, the emotional connection, a third person sometimes awakens a different part, makes us think a different way, and that then gets brought back into the marriage.

[xxoo]

xxoo, you've made good points in your posts and my apologies if I haven't answered some of your questions. They aren't easy questions, but I'll try this one:

 

I like the freedom combined with a enduring marriage, I like discussing our desires and attractions, including when those involve other people. On LS people have mentioned "hysterical bonding" after an affair, and I think there may be something similar involved even though there is no deception. On the non-sexual side, the emotional connection, a third person sometimes awakens a different part, makes us think a different way, and that then gets brought back into the marriage.

 

Thanks for answering A lot of that makes sense, esp the freedom, if that is very important to both partners.

 

About the "hysterical bonding" dynamic, does it ever feel like you are "using" the new partners for a spike in the marriage? I'm projecting here, as I think that is what it would feel like to me.

[Toodamnpragmatic]

of what an open relationship is. While I don 't understand and certainly think you are kidding yourself about them and I think they re certainly in 99.9% of cases one-sided (though the one getting the short end of the stick will argue otherwise), you have been honest and brought up some interesting points.

 

I find it very interesting that one's Husband has "lovers" and the the other has a male she has sex with...... She then says she comes home talks about it and has great sex with her husband. I find the comment about these relationships being akin to "hysterical bonding" also very interesting and revealing. We also have read here that that type of bonding usually does not last.......

 

As said a very interesting topic.

[Toodamnpragmatic]

BTW I too would love an update from Vodkafan. Admitedley though it would be selfish, because if things still were fine, I'd say things are still early. If things have fallen apart, I'd shrug my shoulders and say "told you so".

[woinlove]

Thanks for answering A lot of that makes sense, esp the freedom, if that is very important to both partners.

 

About the "hysterical bonding" dynamic, does it ever feel like you are "using" the new partners for a spike in the marriage? I'm projecting here, as I think that is what it would feel like to me.

 

Using the third person (even though I always try to be honest with him too) is certainly an issue for me and probably the biggest reason I have spent so many years being monogamous in an open M. It never felt that way at the time, but in hindsight, one realizes how easy it is to rationalize or overlook some things. I am sensitive to this and try to look critically at why I want to become involved with someone, trying to make sure it is something between him and me (and not H and me). However, even still, it gives a positive spike to the M, so one has to wonder.

[JustJoe]

Another question is that both you Woinlove and LHLH are at great pains to repeatedly say that most of the time you are monogamous and that you both are blissfully married and totally in love with your spouses, yada, yada, yada. So why are you so defensive? Guilt perhaps? Can either of you admit that if you didn't have issues , you probably wouldn't be doing this? Which of you brought it (open marriage) up first? your SO or you? Somebody started the ball rolling, it didn't happen by itself, spontaneously. Neither of you can answer the same three questions. 1. If your marriage is so great, why do this? 2.If you're going to live an open relationship, why marry? . Who wasn't satisfied and started the train of thought , that lead to the "open Marriage"? So you'll tell me again how wonderfull it is, but will not answer these questions honestly. Sorry if I seem abrupt, but I simply don't believe that things happen in a vaccuum, there is ALWAYS cause and effect. I've said my piece, and will let you guys continue as you were. I was merely expressing myself, and meant no disrespect to anyone. Bye Bye.

[woinlove]

Another question is that both you Woinlove and LHLH are at great pains to repeatedly say that most of the time you are monogamous and that you both are blissfully married and totally in love with your spouses, yada, yada, yada. So why are you so defensive? Guilt perhaps? Can either of you admit that if you didn't have issues , you probably wouldn't be doing this? Which of you brought it (open marriage) up first? your SO or you? Somebody started the ball rolling, it didn't happen by itself, spontaneously. Neither of you can answer the same three questions. 1. If your marriage is so great, why do this? 2.If you're going to live an open relationship, why marry? . Who wasn't satisfied and started the train of thought , that lead to the "open Marriage"? So you'll tell me again how wonderfull it is, but will not answer these questions honestly. Sorry if I seem abrupt, but I simply don't believe that things happen in a vaccuum, there is ALWAYS cause and effect. I've said my piece, and will let you guys continue as you were. I was merely expressing myself, and meant no disrespect to anyone. Bye Bye.

 

I don't feel guilty or defensive, just trying to answer some questions and put it in some context. Writing about this makes me think maybe I should have had threesomes and more partners but all I can do is describe my own situation. You keep asking the same questions and some I feel I've answered more than once.

 

You don't seem abrupt or rude or disrespectful to me, but it seems you need to connect everything to how it is for you. Everyone does that to a certain extent, but you seem to do it to an extent that you can't imagine or believe something different.

 

As to who brought up the idea of "open" first, I did, before we even discussed the idea of marrying. H first brought up the idea of "marriage". so...you see...it was a joining of minds, putting the two together.

[sally4sara]

Simply put, and I didn't make the rules...Marriage is sacred, Holy, and designed solely for one man and one women to share their entire lives together... Each shall do it through hard times, and good times...For, marriage and life isn't about being "happy", no, life is about learning, loving, forgiving, and having a relationship with the one who created marriage, God...

 

Well you've got a grasp on the romanticism of marriage, but marriage wasn't invented for romance. It was to protect monetary holdings and to help ensure that the people you left your holdings to upon your death were of your own blood. And the connection of god to the contract of marriage was simply a motivator to comply. It was the invention of men, not a god. Even in the bible, there were committed couples who never signed a marriage certificate and "marriages" well before the construct of legal commitment.

 

Because it is the invention of men, the rules are changeable. Shared values, goals, rules are up to the two people making the commitment.

 

 

I am glad for boundaries that I need not explain to my spouse....

 

And so am I, but who of us commit to a marriage without discussion and communicating to make sure the values, goals, and rules you two will live by are compatible? You may not remember a big drawn out discussion about boundaries with your spouse because that was done bit by bit during the courting phase. You did explain them. They did explain them. And you found yourselves agreeing otherwise you two would not be together.

 

So I thin the OP is just sharing the boundaries of HER marriage. Even though they are not my boundaries or your boundaries - it doesn't mean we get to view her marriage as invalid and pointless.

[Lovinhimlovinher]

Simply put, and I didn't make the rules...Marriage is sacred, Holy, and designed solely for one man and one women to share their entire lives together... Each shall do it through hard times, and good times...For, marriage and life isn't about being "happy", no, life is about learning, loving, forgiving, and having a relationship with the one who created marriage, God...

 

With that said, in my opinion, I want that crown at the end... I know what marriage is, and its not sharing my spouse, no matter what kind of deal we have, cause Marriage is not my deal, its a contract I made before a great Creator...

 

I know marriage is work, its hard, but those few tiny moments of happiness make up for every bit of the pain of forsaking all others.....

Thats why the Bride wears white, cause she is pure, untouched by any other....

Love is exactly what cannot be explained rather than its an educational process....

When a person sees marriage for truly what it was designed for, then they truly see love in all of its colors...

I am glad for boundaries that I need not explain to my spouse....

 

 

That is your religion and that is fine but my religion isn't so strict that you have to give up happiness for rules. But thank you for your thoughts.

[Distant78]

Well you've got a grasp on the romanticism of marriage, but marriage wasn't invented for romance. It was to protect monetary holdings and to help ensure that the people you left your holdings to upon your death were of your own blood. And the connection of god to the contract of marriage was simply a motivator to comply. It was the invention of men, not a god. Even in the bible, there were committed couples who never signed a marriage certificate and "marriages" well before the construct of legal commitment.

 

Because it is the invention of men, the rules are changeable. Shared values, goals, rules are up to the two people making the commitment.

 

 

 

 

And so am I, but who of us commit to a marriage without discussion and communicating to make sure the values, goals, and rules you two will live by are compatible? You may not remember a big drawn out discussion about boundaries with your spouse because that was done bit by bit during the courting phase. You did explain them. They did explain them. And you found yourselves agreeing otherwise you two would not be together.

 

So I thin the OP is just sharing the boundaries of HER marriage. Even though they are not my boundaries or your boundaries - it doesn't mean we get to view her marriage as invalid and pointless.

 

Marriage wasn't built for monetary purposes. It was built for romance. It's just throughout history people married for convenience. But back to the topic, if the marriage and sex is so mind blowing, there should be no need to be with someone else.

[xxoo]

Marriage wasn't built for monetary purposes. It was built for romance. It's just throughout history people married for convenience.

 

I think you are factually wrong about that. I was under the impression that romantic marriage is a relatively modern idea and expectation.

[PandorasBox]

"If the marriage and sex is so mind blowing, there should be no need to be with someone else."

 

I so agree with this. If a marriage is all one claims it to be, not just physically but emotionally as well, there isn't a need to share.

[xxoo]

But back to the topic, if the marriage and sex is so mind blowing, there should be no need to be with someone else.

 

. Neither of you can answer the same three questions. 1. If your marriage is so great, why do this? 2.If you're going to live an open relationship, why marry? . .

 

Distant and Joe, woinlove gave answers to these questions here:

 

I like the freedom combined with a enduring marriage, I like discussing our desires and attractions, including when those involve other people. On LS people have mentioned "hysterical bonding" after an affair, and I think there may be something similar involved even though there is no deception. On the non-sexual side, the emotional connection, a third person sometimes awakens a different part, makes us think a different way, and that then gets brought back into the marriage.

 

So what I'm understanding is--

 

1. They enjoy being committed to each other, but would enjoy it less if it required exclusivity.

 

2. The married sex IS hot, and partly because of the spark from the outside partners. I'd be curious to know if that is dependent on the sex with outside partner being hot....or if it happens even if the third-party sex is lukewarm.

 

3. Having new partners throughout a lifetime helps them to continue to awaken and grow emotionally, which benefits the primary relationship.

[xxoo]

Using the third person (even though I always try to be honest with him too) is certainly an issue for me and probably the biggest reason I have spent so many years being monogamous in an open M. It never felt that way at the time, but in hindsight, one realizes how easy it is to rationalize or overlook some things. I am sensitive to this and try to look critically at why I want to become involved with someone, trying to make sure it is something between him and me (and not H and me). However, even still, it gives a positive spike to the M, so one has to wonder.

 

Thank you for these thoughts, woinlove. This makes a lot of sense to me.

 

I wonder, do the men involved have the same concerns re: being careful not to use a partner? Also, do the third parties care if they are "used" (not intentionally, but you know what I mean), or is it more "go ahead, use me!"

[sally4sara]

Marriage wasn't built for monetary purposes. It was built for romance. It's just throughout history people married for convenience. But back to the topic, if the marriage and sex is so mind blowing, there should be no need to be with someone else.

 

I'm sorry, but that is plainly false. Fathers chose their daughter's mates and the contract was to ensure the offspring (also property till adulthood depending on the gender)gaining the father's resources went to was of their own blood. Women could not own property so marriage was designed to ensure their needs were met via their owner. Women don't need marriage to ensure the child is of their own blood. Since they could not own property, marriage was valued by them because it was the only way for them to survive.

If any were afforded romance in marriage back then it was because they had little to no money to protect and their union was like any other union before the invention of marriage - convenience of an available option and attraction, just like any other two people who want companionship and to screw. Their option was a simple agreement we termed common law and that agreement is no longer legally binding in many states today.

 

NOW marriage can be had for the romance of it rather than the property and protection aspect behind its invention. Two people who like each other and want to screw do or don't get married, do or don't practice monogamy. So many marriages have cheating anyway, at least with the OP, she knows what is going on and has some control of the shape of things within her marriage. I'm not going to piss all over her marriage certificate simply because she doesn't follow MY boundaries. And no one is forcing my boundaries on me. No one is forcing them on your marriage either. People even write their own vows now.

 

Is it not a judgment being passed? Think of the people who seek out married sex partners on the sly - they first decide if the marriage is worth respecting based on their own opinion of what a marriage requires to be valid. Finding the OP's marriage as pointless and invalid, you do the same as people who seek out married people for sex on the sly. You decide there is nothing to stop you from your judgment just as they decide there is nothing to stop their sexual advances, because it isn't YOUR definition of a valid marriage. Calling your boundaries in marriage common or standard, it afford you the ability to ignore a legal contract and judge it as you will.

[Distant78]

I'm sorry, but that is plainly false. Fathers chose their daughter's mates and the contract was to ensure the offspring (also property till adulthood depending on the gender)gaining the father's resources went to was of their own blood. Women could not own property so marriage was designed to ensure their needs were met via their owner. Women don't need marriage to ensure the child is of their own blood. Since they could not own property, marriage was valued by them because it was the only way for them to survive.

If any were afforded romance in marriage back then it was because they had little to no money to protect and their union was like any other union before the invention of marriage - convenience of an available option and attraction, just like any other two people who want companionship and to screw. Their option was a simple agreement we termed common law and that agreement is no longer legally binding in many states today.

 

NOW marriage can be had for the romance of it rather than the property and protection aspect behind its invention. Two people who like each other and want to screw do or don't get married, do or don't practice monogamy. So many marriages have cheating anyway, at least with the OP, she knows what is going on and has some control of the shape of things within her marriage. I'm not going to piss all over her marriage certificate simply because she doesn't follow MY boundaries. And no one is forcing my boundaries on me. No one is forcing them on your marriage either. People even write their own vows now.

 

Is it not a judgment being passed? Think of the people who seek out married sex partners on the sly - they first decide if the marriage is worth respecting based on their own opinion of what a marriage requires to be valid. Finding the OP's marriage as pointless and invalid, you do the same as people who seek out married people for sex on the sly. You decide there is nothing to stop you from your judgment just as they decide there is nothing to stop their sexual advances, because it isn't YOUR definition of a valid marriage. Calling your boundaries in marriage common or standard, it afford you the ability to ignore a legal contract and judge it as you will.

 

Naw, it's not false amd it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

[Lovinhimlovinher]

Naw, it's not false amd it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

 

 

It does actually.

[woinlove]

Distant and Joe, woinlove gave answers to these questions here:

 

 

 

So what I'm understanding is--

 

1. They enjoy being committed to each other, but would enjoy it less if it required exclusivity.

 

2. The married sex IS hot, and partly because of the spark from the outside partners. I'd be curious to know if that is dependent on the sex with outside partner being hot....or if it happens even if the third-party sex is lukewarm.

 

3. Having new partners throughout a lifetime helps them to continue to awaken and grow emotionally, which benefits the primary relationship.

 

You got everything right - you're better at explaining me than I am!

 

On 2, yes it happens even for lukewarm third-party sex. I was struck by your comment it can be really difficult to match our husbands and a new partner can be exciting but not satisfying. That is all so true.

[Lovinhimlovinher]

Distant and Joe, woinlove gave answers to these questions here:

 

 

 

So what I'm understanding is--

 

1. They enjoy being committed to each other, but would enjoy it less if it required exclusivity.

 

2. The married sex IS hot, and partly because of the spark from the outside partners. I'd be curious to know if that is dependent on the sex with outside partner being hot....or if it happens even if the third-party sex is lukewarm.

 

3. Having new partners throughout a lifetime helps them to continue to awaken and grow emotionally, which benefits the primary relationship.

 

 

Thank you for that

[BellaBellaBella]

I would suggest you post in a poly forum

[woinlove]

 

I wonder, do the men involved have the same concerns re: being careful not to use a partner? Also, do the third parties care if they are "used" (not intentionally, but you know what I mean), or is it more "go ahead, use me!"

 

My H thinks I worry about this too much and the other men have been more like "use me".

 

On different reactions between men and women -- some other women really don't like the fact that the man is in an open marriage, preferring to have an affair with a man in a closed marriage. My H has encountered this and I have heard of other MM in open marriages (not my H) who actually lie to OW about their M being open in order not to get turned down. This doesn't seem to be a problem for women in open M. Strange that some women would prefer men who lie to their wives - but maybe they think it shows stronger interest or investment on the man's part. I really don't understand it.

Lhlh, have you or your H encountered this?

[Undine]

Well it's not for me, I couldn't handle it and wouldn't want to try. I can admit I'd be jealous and insecure, and part of my marriage vows were about monogamy because that's important to me and my husband. But I think that trying to tell other people what their marriage vows should include or that their marriages aren't real is really arrogant and insulting. Some people think marriage is only to make babies, some people think it's a huge religious connection, some people just want the legal and financial stuff taken care of, some people get married just for the big wedding and get divorced a year later. My personal take: people who are together for 20 years and in love and raising children and best friends and committed to growing old and taking care of each other in sickness, who happen to have sexual contact maybe even romantic contact with other people as long as it's all agreed to honestly and openly...that sounds plenty married to me.

[Woggle]

As long as it is all done honestly I see no problem with it. It is not for me but to each their own. What I hate is the dishonesty and deception of cheating.

[aerogurl87]

We did live together for years before getting married, but married because we wanted to make the commitment to spend our lives together and to start a family -- basically, we each felt we had found "the one", and we still feel that way. We had already decided to have an open marriage, it was the way we wanted to live. As I said, we didn't even act on this for another 5 years so obviously it wasn't based on any immediate urge.

 

It seems that to you it would be a failure or a "solution" to some problem - but we've never thought of it that way. We feel we live a full, rich life that, by mutual choice, has fewer restrictions on how we interact with others than most couples.

 

I'm not saying this to be mean, but it really boggles my mind as to what you consider to be "committed to one another"? Could you please elaborate on that because I just can't grasp how you can be committed to someone and say they're "the one" and then go out and have sex with someone else, building another relationship outside the marital one. How do you figure commitment into that, what is your definition of being committed to your spouse when you're in an open marriage?