Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Sex and Relationships

Is Open Marriage the Modern Couple's Answer to Infidelity?

By Joslyn Matthews, Sirens Magazine. Posted June 14, 2007.


Why does open marriage work for some married couples and destroy others? The answer could be that for it to work you need to be in an extremely healthy relationship.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

When I think about open marriages, I can only conjure a stereotype: deeply unsatisfied adults, most likely going through a mid-life crisis, pathetically searching for hot sex as a solution. You know, key parties, "The Ice Storm." It is difficult for me to think of it as something new or current, or as something my friends would do.

But apparently, I am stuck in the past. Plenty of intelligent, successful, hip people are considering the not-quite-forsaking-all-others option on 'til-death-do-us-part. And by now, most women are familiar with the statistic heard 'round the world, publicized in an article in "The New York Times" in January. At this time in our history, for the first time ever, there are more women living that are single than are married. Women are staying single. Couples are divorcing. Marriage isn't entirely working, at least for a subset of the population. So could non-monogamous coupling be the answer?

To look into that very question, I created a Personals profile on Nerve.com, a site that encourages candid dialog about sex through blogs, feature stories, fiction and photography. I became, for the purposes of this story, a woman looking for fun times with couples (man and woman)--yes, this is a check-box option there--and thus was permitted to peruse through other similar profiles. I found dozens upon dozens of couples, some married, some attached, some who preferred not to say, but most of whom claimed to be healthy, happy, stable and just looking for cool people to hang out with who didn't mind getting naked at the end of the night.

By observation, most Nerve couples seemed to be in their mid-20s to mid-30s and most were Caucasian (profiles that included a photo were available for viewing first). Like any other dating site, people seemed to come from a range of incomes, occupations, and cities across the country, including Oregon, Wisconsin, Texas, Illinois, Connecticut, New York, and Massachusetts. The couples were open to meeting other couples, and other single women, but few sought to bring a single man into the dating scenario. (I sent emails to six couples explaining that I was looking for input on the topic of this story, but I haven't had any responses.)

Although it is slippery by definition, open marriage is generally considered a committed marital relationship between two people who, under a set of mutually-agreed upon rules, engage in sexual encounters with various partners other than their spouse. According to those who care, it should not be confused with polyamory, a lifestyle that promotes multiple romantic relationships between any combinations of people at the same time. Old or new, middle-aged or Midtown, the questions that hover around the issue of open marriage are, "Can it work?" and "Is it sustainable?"

Traditionalists, which include most of the people I know, don't understand how open marriage can be successful. When I bring up the topic, I repeatedly field the following questions: Why bother getting married? What if you fall in love with another person? How long can it go on before it causes a problem due to jealousy and insecurity? "I just don't get it," says one married friend.

Alex Caroline Robboy, a Philadelphia-based sex and marriage therapist and founder of HowToHaveGoodSex.com, has counseled numerous couples in open marriages, some successful, some not. She says defining a marriage as "open" is really just giving a vocabulary to something that couples are already doing, including marriages in which one partner is having an affair and the other knows, but looks the other way. If you look cross-culturally and over time, says Robboy, most people do not remain faithful to one partner for the duration of their marriages.

So, then, is open marriage the modern couple's answer to infidelity? Is it two people's attempt to reinvest in the idea of commitment, to define it on their own terms and to try to avoid divorce? Could it be viewed as an honest attempt to make marriage work? "I think that's what people tell themselves, but it raises a red flag for me," says Robboy. "It is incredibly common and incredibly destructive for couples to experiment with open marriage in response to problems or boredom in their sex life. This is not the time to experiment with open marriage. To experiment with open marriage, you have to be in an extremely healthy relationship."

The difference between the successful and unsuccessful open marriages, she says, comes down to communication, agreed-upon ground rules, and compatible values regarding sex: "The couple has to come first. Once you stop talking and stop prioritizing your partner's needs, you're in trouble." Robboy believes there are two basic approaches to sexuality: a) Sex as an expression of love, or b) Sex as a fun activity or hobby, like playing basketball on the weekends. She says plenty of people value sex as an enjoyable activity without attaching added meaning to it. But, "if you are in an open marriage and you view sex as an expression of love, you are playing Russian Roulette."

One common thread through the varying types of open marriages appears to be adherence to the principle that the married couple always takes precedence over any person outside the marriage. Ideally, the minute one spouse becomes upset or uncomfortable with a situation, it should end. The same is the case with any sexual experimentation.

In reality, people often break the rules. Mike and Joan Wilson (names changed at their request), owners of a small business in New York, are an example of what can happen when you open the Pandora's box of open marriage. At Mike's suggestion, after nearly ten years of traditional or "closed" marriage, they decided to experiment with an open marriage lifestyle to bring "spice" back into their bedroom. Their foray into sharing sex partners lasted three years before it unraveled and nearly ended their relationship.

Mike and Joan decided on ground rules: They were to always be together and in the same room during an encounter, kissing was not permitted, and condoms were to be used every time, without exception. They were happy with their initial encounters, the first two with another woman, and then one with a couple. However, things came to a halt when the ground rules were violated during a second attempt at swinging. Joan's partner refused to wear protection and, at the risk of being exceedingly graphic, he didn't pull out. The experience ended Joan's interest in further experimentation, but Mike's affairs continued, in secret, swiftly moving him from open marriage into infidelity. Their marriage survived only after an intense period of fighting and unrest, with Mike's promise to give up all extracurricular encounters.

Despite answering my questions separately, without knowing each other's responses, Mike and Joan came to relatively similar conclusions about the risks and consequences of open marriage. When I ask if an open marriage can be successful, Mike says, "Yes, as long as it stays fun and emotions don't come into play with anyone other than your partner ... I don't recommend anything to anyone. Every situation is different. What works for one may be disastrous to another."

"It takes 100 percent trust in your partner to make an open marriage work," says Joan. "There is no room for error in this arena. Once trust is broken, the open marriage is at risk. It truly takes a special relationship with your partner to make it work." When I ask if it is better in theory than in practice, they both say yes. "It's not a perfect world, and therefore it's not a perfect solution," she says. "If you play with fire enough, sometimes you get burned."

So back to that "Ice Storm" key party. When I watch the film, there is one woman I identify with. At the end of the party, when it is her turn to choose her fate, she bravely dips her hand into the bowl, glances at the keys in her fist and says with feigned surprise, "Oh. My husband's keys." He looks at her from across the room. "Choose again!" clamor the remaining key-party couples. But they are already out the door.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: open marriage

Joslyn Matthews is a freelance writer based in Miami, Florida.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
this kind of thinking is exactly what is wrong with our culture
Posted by: hannah on Jun 14, 2007 3:53 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This story makes me sad. What the hell is so "healthy" about infidelity or the inclination to adopt that lifestyle in a marriage?? If one wants to "play the field", then stay single. What about diseases that can destroy lives?

It would seem that the caliber of people it takes to live with a lifelong partner and be trustworthy and faithful, is dwindling. Wouldn't that be the kind of people we want our children to grow up to be?

No wonder the rest of the world is hating us. Not only are we playing "world police", but our morality has flown out the window.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Liz Taylor... Posted by: morticia
» That we are Puritans Posted by: Gravitas
"Infidelity" is a religious construct
Posted by: stillmeg on Jun 14, 2007 4:07 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Humans as a species are inherently polygamous. "Monogamy" and "marriage" are attempts by religion to squelch our natural tendencies. (although I have to say it may help keep the human poplulation from exploding too quickly!!)

My spouse and I have been in an open marriage for years. Yes, there are rules, and we abide by them. What most couples unfortunately do when they attempt to "swing" is that they use it like "let's have a baby to bring us closer together/fix what's wrong in our relationship". That doesn't work. A couple MUST have a strong and secure marriage. It won't fix a bad marriage.

The funniest part to me about the "lifestyle" is that most of the swinging couples we know are conservative republicans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the newbie invasion
Posted by: Don Garb on Jun 14, 2007 4:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having spent the last 12 years in the lifestyle (swinging) I have seen a lot of changes. Swingers used to have an established and evolved culture that new people picked up and carried on. But since public opinion and awareness of swinging has become so much more positive, there has been a great influx of newbie couples into the swinging scene.

Old culture swingers were very respectful and would talk to absolutely everyone at a party or dance. Because you never knew where a good connection would start from. Newbie swingers can be cold or will run away from anyone they deem unattractive in the first 2 seconds of seeing them. So the established culture is being diluted away by the newbies who are basically composing their own primitive "Lord of the flies" culture. Valuable insights and rules of deportment built up over decades are being lost.

An ordinary straight person thinks that a marriage is like a balloon of rules. Prick that thin skin and the balloon explodes allowing anything to happen. But in reality, swinging is a hole in that balloon that causes a bulge to grow out of it, an extra set of expanded rules. That's what used to be communicated to new couples. Let's not forget that the majority of people will engage in infidelity, duplicity, divorce, heartbreaking and even murder because of the worthless myth of monogamy. Swinging cements together far more relationships than it splits apart.

For those who leap to their feet screaming "Anarchy!" after thinking about swinging for a millisecond I have this advice: look closer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the newbie invasion Posted by: Don Garb
» RE: the newbie invasion Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo
"I do" but "sometimes I don't"
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Jun 14, 2007 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
""Why does open marriage work for some married couples and destroy others? The answer could be that for it to work you need to be in an extremely healthy relationship. """

Agreeing to be with another person while married is a "healthy relationship" ??..by who's standards?

I suspect that if one has to make that decision, then marriage isn't for them..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: hellofriends
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: "I do" but "sometimes I don't" Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Swinging: Exploration That Leads to Growth
Posted by: terradea on Jun 14, 2007 5:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My partner and I are in our 40s and have been swinging for two years now, and have had negative (at first), but mostly positive experiences. The positive experiences have become the norm due to our growth as individuals and as a couple as we've gained more experience. We know what we are seeking, and now we find it easily. Our participation in this scene has led to a maturity and a closeness to each other that neither has ever experienced with anyone else. We will not give up our new lifestyle, and openly promote it to our family, friends and co-workers.

Yes, we have rules. Yes, we have trust. and YES, we put each other first. But there is more: we see sex as enlightenment, pure and simple. Sex, connecting with other beings on a spiritual level, helps us gain an understanding of ourselves; if we experience jealous feelings, we discuss them, try to understand them and conquer them. Jealousy, Insecurity, judgmental attitudes and anger have been brought into the open and expunged from our relationship. What we've found is that most of the negative feelings are based in fear. And this way of living and communicating has slowly eliminated unhealthy fear and made us more grounded and happy.

Religion prohibits this type of lifestyle because it "opens eyes," self-understanding abounds and a connection with the universe is made. Once that door's been opened, the enlightened need never turn to traditional religion and its silly, self-serving dogma again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good for you! Posted by: Gravitas
The guy wouldn't wear a rubber or pull out???
Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo on Jun 14, 2007 5:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This whole thing sounds very weird and not just some random bad luck. There's a lot more stress on her marriage than just her husband wanting to be unfaithful going on here. Part of being married is that people physically protect each other.

Of course Joan didn't want to continue swinging! She just got (at a minimum) her physical safety endangered, her wishes ignored and exposed to the risk of both STDs and pregnancy, by some selfish, worthless bastard, while her husband, who she trusts to back her up and protect her, just let it happen. At a minimum it's stupidity, and at the worst, this might actually have been a rape.

Where was Mike during Joan's "sexual encounter"?

Here they are having sex with people they don't know well. Common sense would dictate a certain amount of caution.

1) If the rule was to always use protection, (sensible indeed) why did Joan let the guy go ahead? Ok, maybe she was horny or lacked self-esteem, (or was drunk, or high) and didn't say "no" when she should have. But she clearly didn't want the risk involved because she asked him to pull out and he wouldn't. It's more than just bad manners to not stop when a woman asks. If the woman says no, even in the middle, it's still 'no." Granted, it's saying "no" after the horse has already left the barn, but "no" is "no".

OR: Maybe she DID ask him to not put it in without a rubber. In which case, that's clear cut rape, end of discussion. So: What happened?

2) The article says that both partners were to be present in any swinging. So either Mike was there and watching, or he was busy with the female half of what might have been a couple (we weren't told). If he was watching, why the hell didn't he say "Hey, buddy! Use the rubber or this is over right now!" If he was busy, why couldn't Joan still have called on him? So he's preoccupied. So what, his wife is in trouble. Was he in another room? (In which case, he abandoned her safety). If the guy had started hitting Joan, would he still have been too busy to intercede?

When I say married folks physically protect each other, it doesn't necessarily mean bashing people over the head and it doesn't mean "helpless little female waits for big strong macho guy". My husband and I are both of us pretty good at looking out for and standing up for ourselves. But we watch each other's back, too. When I say 'each other' I mean just that: each of us looks out for the other. Example: I protected my husband the other day when he was unconscious in the hospital and I made sure to be there and stand up for him with the docs and nurses when he couldn't stand up for himself. If I have to walk at night, he walks with me. Stuff like that.

Not that we would EVER swing, we're both committed to monogamy. But if something like that happened, where a guy tried to break all the safety rules, I trust my sweetie to back me up. If a guy stuck it in me without my consent, I KNOW he'd pull the guy off me, even if he were to get hit or hurt. And if he could protect me, and didn't, I think it might destroy all the trust in our marriage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Soma for all!
Posted by: alterpa123 on Jun 14, 2007 6:02 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On second thought, keep this Utopia and your disgusting standards for human behavior to yourself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Soma for all! Posted by: cpotter
Seems wrong to me
Posted by: ateo on Jun 14, 2007 6:11 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The first couple I knew in an "open marriage" was in the military. The wife was Catholic and to my knowledge did not mess around. However, she allowed her husband to mess around because:
1. He wanted to
2. She believed that was the nature of men
3. Infidelity is so common in the military that it is just realistic
4. It was part of the "agreement" to marry after he got her knocked up and her religious beliefs demanded marriage and wouldn't allow for abortion

It's well known that when a married woman gets deployed to Korea or the desert the first thing that comes off is her ring, followed closely by her pants (anyone remember hearing about that female Air Force officer in Kyrgyzstan that went "missing" then came back and said she was kidnapped? Well the reality is looking like she went AWOL to have an abortion after getting pregnant messing around with enlisted marines. She had a husband back home.) Not to mention the guys who basically generate the demand for the sex trade/sex slave business in South Korea and elsewhere.

It is nothing, absolutely nothing, for a group of military guys to be standing around talking about how many prostitutes they had sex with while they were in Korea.

Somehow this all seems wrong to me. That's because I believe in either following the rules as they are written or changing the rules. It seems to me like the "rules" of marriage, as traditionally defined, no longer apply in the majority of cases. So what is marriage then? Just a way for two people to share a house and get tax breaks?

Marriage is dead outside of religious circles. I think we all just need to accept that. Anyway, life long bachelor status for me please. I don't wanna be one of those suckers who finds out after 10 years of marriage that his wife has been cheating on him then she takes the house, the kids, and everything he owns.

No thanks, I'll pass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What is a traditional marriage? Posted by: MatthewSavage
Nerve.com
Posted by: MartianBachelor on Jun 14, 2007 6:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The couples were open to meeting other couples, and other single women, but few sought to bring a single man into the dating scenario. (I sent emails to six couples explaining that I was looking for input on the topic of this story, but I haven't had any responses.)"

Ok, so much for it being a (single) man's world... There's an explanation for this observation: the profiles are fake, put up by a guy pretending to have an SO; then when the single woman or couple approaches him and it's finally time to meet, he appears with the excuse/explanation that she can't make it there this time or something and they'll have to go forth with just him. Guys looking for sex generally aren't really interested in having philosophical/sociological/psychological discussions. You would have found real couples, some of whom were willing to talk, at a swinger's club/organization, which exist in most larger cities. I don't know much about them, because as you discovered they discriminate heavily against single men, so take advantage of your unique access as a woman and keep up the research. Inquiring minds, and all that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

marriage with an expiration date?
Posted by: Suzon on Jun 14, 2007 6:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Long stable marriages are good for society and children, even more so when the marriage is reasonably happy.

If people who married (made a commitment to each other) knew that the law would automatically terminate their legal (if not religious) arrangement after 25 years unless there was a child under 18, husbands and wives might be more thoughtful. If you were unhappy in your marriage, you could look forward to some freedom in the future without jeopardising your children's sense of security (domestic violence is another matter). No one would have to feel stuck which would certainly increase the sum total of human happiness.

My guess is that such an arrangement would make people invest more in marital happiness knowing that their spouse would only stay with them voluntarily.

A renewal of the arrangement would be a landmark of a successful relationship. A termination would not carry a stigma.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting Question
Posted by: Gravitas on Jun 14, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sociologically speaking the author is right! Monogomy has NEVER really been the reality, historically or culturally. One post above wonders what the world thinks of us? That we are a bunch of Puritans actually. Affairs in many other places are accepted! (Sadly sometimes only on the man's part.) The role of the family as an institution was economic. Everything one needed to survive was produced in the family. It was only after the industrial revolution that the idea of family as a place of love and emotional support took hold. With people living longer and gender roles changing, the concept of traditonal marriage should be questioned. Fidelity is not for everyone. Personally, I hated being in a marriage period. I hated sharing my life on a day to day basis and having to take someone else into account when I made descions. For the last 5 years I have found the perfect relationship. Its purpose is about 95%physical! He comes over only once in awhile. I know he sees other people, but I don't because I don't care to. Like good chocolate, it gets boring and a chore if indulged in too often for me. My friends tell me he is taking advantage of me yada yada. I say so what??????? No fights, always interesting and intense, I keep my independence. He is in a high risk civil service occupation and I am glad to be a troublefree part of his life. If it works for us, who is anyone else to but in???? Keep your big nose out of my bedroom and my dinner plate thank you! I would rather see open marriage than a repressed, guilt obsessed population. There is the true danger!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Interesting Question Posted by: PopRox80
» RE: Interesting Question Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Interesting Question Posted by: Gravitas
» No response-I'm PMSing Posted by: Gravitas
» OMG It sounds ideal to me... Posted by: form516
Why Americans can't stay married: they don't know how to cooperate.
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 14, 2007 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reason so many marriages fail is that the average American doesn't know how to get along with another person for more than a limited time. Their role models, principally from their social circle and the TV, typically are in competition with one another, defending individual turf. A typical role model might be the couples in The King of Queens, or Everybody Loves Raymond (especially the older married couple in that show). These shows implicitly advocate deception and self-aggrandizement at the other's expense. And they suggest that holding your ground, and duking it out verbally, are healthy and normal behavior for couples. They are not.

Eventually, some sexual, financial or child-rearing issue comes up, the two sides take opposite positions and hunker down to lock horns, and fight it out. There is no we, just a you and a me. There is no concept of sacrifice. O. Henry's "The Gift of the Magi" could not even be understood in those terms.

Incidentally, if the marriage is open, then extramarital activity is not infidelity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who has the time for this??
Posted by: kroltan on Jun 14, 2007 8:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This all sounds like a lot of work just to get your rocks off. My wife and I have entertained the idea before, but both of us agree the amount of time involved and potential consequences were not at all worth the pleasure we would get from "swinging", or whatever you want to call it. Also, it just seems so selfish!

Why not just masturbate? Saves a lot of time & trouble, and usually is more satisfying! ;)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God works in mysterious ways. Some like it. Some don't.
Posted by: Vicente on Jun 14, 2007 8:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I get amused when some people think the same old ways are the right ways for everyone.

I suppose my idea of 5-year renewable contracts would upset some.

But monogomy isn't a natural thing for most people. That's why there's a 50% divorce rate. Would you fly an airplane if the chance was only 50% of getting there? Monogomy is fine for some people and not fine for some people; for some it's monogomy = monotony.

Besides, why does anyone care what people do in their private lives and behind closed doors. Whatever works for them should be ok. I find that preferable to lying and cheating any day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Okay Posted by: VisionQuest
requires...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jun 14, 2007 9:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... requires a very healthy relationship.

How rare is that these days???

Perhaps we should be a biiiit more interested in working on creating healthy relationships (hmm.. maybe teaching kids about how healthy relationships function.. teaching them some skills for these things rather than just throwing them out on their own and assuming their parents will probably do it... though most won't) than on just running to polyamory as a solution to relationship ills.

Perhaps if we concentrated more on healthy relationships we would see fewer couples destroyed by infidelity or by experiments in polyamory. It works for some..but not for everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: requires... Posted by: stillmeg
Just imagine some guy like Mr T servicing your wife...
Posted by: Bobsays on Jun 14, 2007 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And most men would not give swinging another thought. I don't think it is for most people and I am pretty sure it will lead to another generation of broken relationships.

Is it not better to instead work on the things that turned you on about your partner in the first place, and refresh them, hone them, polish them and keep the spark alive? Try staying fit and alive and engaged. That tends to keep partners interested in each other.

If you can't do that, don't stay married.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well Put LindaB Posted by: may261989
Mind your own business
Posted by: tdurden on Jun 14, 2007 10:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you come from a traditional view of relationships, good for you. There's plenty of other folk who prefer that. Go hang out with them. I opt for a different approach. So what? This is a mere lifestyle difference, no more significant than whether I choose to die my hair green or not. Society will not come crashing down simply because I like to have sex with more than one partner and I am honest about it.

The damage from busy bodies inserting themselves into each other's private lives, attempting to dictate lifestyle choices, deceit, hypocrisy, and the generally authoritarian impulse to seeking power over others is far more damaging than free love (and sadly, far more common).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: cpotter
» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: cpotter
» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: morticia
» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: Einherjar
» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: morticia
» RE: Mind your own business Posted by: Einherjar
» You make a good point dude Posted by: may261989
OPEN MARRIAGE IS SIMPLY AN " POLITICALLY CORRECT,"ACCEPTABLE" RATIONALIZATION FOR MORAL DEPRAVITY.
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 14, 2007 10:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Guess what? HUman depravity has been around for a long time. The study of history will clearly show that "open marriage" is a sadistic and nihilistic way to bring down a civilzed civilization. Hey, but as Santayana said: If one doesn't learn the lessons of history, they are doomed to relive them."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is having sex with goats the modern couple's answer to infidelity?
Posted by: Illiteratilumen on Jun 14, 2007 11:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sure as hell don't know. Whatever works for you I guess. Its none of my business what another guy does with his dick unless I'm sitting in his lap and its none of my business what a woman puts insider her vagnia unless its attached to me.

Really, what else is there to say about the subject?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stable Polygamy = Straight Male and bi-sexual Female?
Posted by: Einherjar on Jun 14, 2007 11:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you read through the NY article linked in the above Alternet article, they report that by far the most stable, long lasting "open" LTR's were ones that involved a heterosexual male and a bi-sexual female. The fact that single men are so discriminated against in Swinging circles would tend to back this up. I find this very interesting, especially because it is not being mentioned. Is it too taboo?

As the writer of the New York article says, is being bi-sexual now the new Best Girlfriend Ever quality? Is Swinging mostly just a pressure relief for men's Y chromosome drive to procreate?

Is Swinging simply a fear of intimacy? As time in a relationship builds, walls start to break down and our internal demons start to come out. "Will he/she leave me when I get old?" "What if he/she judges me if I bring up Fantasy X?" These questions start to build in our heads. Do people run to other partners because they cannot stand the thought of fully opening themselves up to their partner and being completely vulnerable?

All the articles I see on "open" marriages never dig this deep. Why is that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No wonder White European and White American culture is going downhill
Posted by: Whitecliff on Jun 14, 2007 2:17 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ALL cultures practice marriage. There are many forms, but it is a cultural universal.

The family is the most essential unit of society; indeed, it is THE BASIS of society. Man and wife form this most basic unit, and it it expanded when they have children. Extended family also factors in.

"Open marriages" undermine ALL of this...they undermine the sacred dyad that is marriage, they undermine the family, the trample upon the vow of marriage -- since "open marriages" undermine both marriage and the family (and the family is, as stated, the basis of society), they undermine SOCIETY AS A WHOLE.

As we speak, White Europeans (both in Europe and The Americas) are being 'replaced' by hordes of immigrants and all you people can think about is wife swapping and drunken sex orgies, mere superficialities (better enjoy that rush of endorphins while you can!) hoisted upon you by the disgusting American media-machine that is owned and operated by a bunch of fanatical cultural relativists and sick minds.

You should be ashamed that, largely due to your irresponsibility and lack of foresight, a great people (Europeans) are about to pass, a people that have conquered, settled, and built up lands from the Pacific to the Pacific...you should be scrambling to save Europe (the Motherland) and other European majority areas (the USA) from being swamped by hordes of immigrants.

This can only occur if the the family is again respected as it has been in the past; since marriage forms the basis of a family, you "wife swappers" show great disrespect not only for society in general but also for the future of your people as well.

All the while the Hispanics in America and the Muslims in Europe will continue to follow traditional patterns of marriage and child-rearing while White Europeans are on this neverending carnival ride of carnal pleasure...and because of this THEY WILL WIN AND YOUR PEOPLE WILL LOSE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hilarious Satire!!! Posted by: ZoomerSlick
» RE: Hilarious Satire!!! Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Makes me think of porn. No, seriously.
Posted by: mmeetoilenoir on Jun 14, 2007 7:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you read vintage porn from the 70s and 80s (written for an overwhelmingly male audience), there are sooooo many instances of the wife being bi, or playing along to please the guy in a menage / swinging situation. Therefore, there's some young, buxom woman that comes along, and they both then shower the man with plenty of attention.

Now, what's funny is that you don't see the other dynamic so much. Guys often think it's ZOMG GAY! to do anything with another guy, so you never seem to hear of couples who go for MMW.

I think that a lot of swingers and open marriages are excuses for guys to live their real-life fantasies out- not so much the women. I don't know how many guys I've dated that would love to see me do another woman, but cavil at the thought of another guy coming into the mix. YMMV. It's all about the guy getting double the fun and double the attention, and the women catering to their needs.

And no more "men are such animals, they can't resist their basal urges!" talk. Please. If that was the case, we'd be in a lot more trouble in the world. Oh, wait *eye roll*.

Is the primal call of nature supposed to be heeded in this instance because the ending's a chance to spread his MANLY! SEED! for the guy involved? We're not in the jungle anymore, folks!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow. What's next here on Alternet, m.
Posted by: lwbaby on Jun 14, 2007 8:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How to get around age requirements in all 50 states?

Sheesh, when did our sexual preferences define us? What happened to building houses or raising children or designing the next space ship or walking the dog or creating the next Picasso or making music?

Why does it always go back to sex?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some seem to be misunderstanding the author.
Posted by: lawyerlee on Jun 14, 2007 9:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many comments on this article seem to represent a complete misunderstanding of the author's ideas.

The author does not suggest that open marriages are healthier or more sustainable than monogamous marriages. Which is weird to say because to me, marriage is inherently monogamous, but I digress.

I, too, would take issue with anyone who contended that open marriages were somehow better or stronger than monogamous marriages. But that is simply not what has been asserted in this piece.

Instead, the author seems to have found that most people in happy, fulfilling marriages do not want open marriages because their needs are being bet. Conversely, many people who are not fulfilled seek open marriages to fill a void. Obviously, there are exceptions to these general principles, and it is these people (the exceptions) who seem to find success and happiness in open marriages. But the author's view seems to strongly reflect an acknowledgment of the fulfilling nature of a strong, happy monogamous marriage for many people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How sad!
Posted by: Epocholips on Jun 15, 2007 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How sad that so many people who know nothing of our lifestyle choose to judge us based upon their personal prejudices and nothing more.

A reasoned, mature approach to sexuality is rejected forcefully by the Ooh! Ick! That's-not-the-way-I-was-raised! crowd. Yes, it may not work for many people, but in my experience, most people have a hard time seeing past their upbringing when it comes to any expression of sexuality differant from what they percieve as the norm.

If you look at the, 'ahem', bare facts of the matter, almost every marriage will involve one partner or both sleeping around. It's simply a fact. Why not face that fact instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting, Not US! Not US! It won't happen to US!! Our love is SPECIAL!

If your love truly is special, you'll acknowledge the sexual desires of your beloved and vice versa. You'll both be able to share every intimate detail of your sexuality in full confidence that you'll recieve support and a loving attempt at understanding. While it may be unpleasant at first, discarding your preconcieved prejudices about sex will in the end, enlighten you. You'll open yourself to new ideas and the new experience of complete intimacy with someone you love.

With this understanding and trust as your base, you may one day decide to try an open marriage. And if you do, you'll join an ever expanding, liberated and happy group of people who thrive in this lifestyle. It's not for everyone, that's for sure. But before you reject it out of hand, look around you. You know that bizarrely happy couple that everyone secretly envies? The two you see holding hands and smiling mischeviously into each other's eyes after ten or twenty years together? It's a good bet they have the solid relationship that only truly intimate couples can hope to enjoy.

It's not luck that brings these couples together. It's the courage accept each other for exactly what they are.

Think about it. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Monogamy Isn't For Everyone
Posted by: Libertine on Jun 15, 2007 10:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not at all monogamous. Never have been. After a disastrous marriage years ago, I decided to accept my basic nature and to never enter into a legal marriage ever again, because I knew I didn't want to surrender my sexual freedom to anyone. I knew I couldn't be and didn't want to be sexually exclusive. And I hate lies and deception, so I decided it was best that I remain a free agent, emotionally and sexually. I don't consider myself a "swinger" or "polyamorous", but, rather a "libertine" (look it up!).

My relationship life consists of several concurrent "friends with benefits" relationships, with the occasional one night stand thrown in. Unlike the polyamorous, I don't claim to love everyone I have sex with, and unlike swingers, I don't approach casual sex as an organized couples' activity, nor am I emotionally monogamous. Though I understand that many wouldn't find this type of life appealing, it's suited me for thirty years now.

Concerning the topic of this article, I think that the problem of infidelity is the dishonesty and not keeping a promise made, rather than having sex with others, per se. With every new partner I acquire, I make it crystal clear at the beginning that I am not monogamous, nor will I ever be, and if they can't deal with that, then they can walk away, eyes open, no harm done.

Personal intimate relationships -- marriage for some people -- shouldn't have to be a one size fits all type of a deal.

Just my two cents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pretty obvious
Posted by: hannah on Jun 16, 2007 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
here we have a clearcut example of people of class and character (non-swingers/believers) and pure trash (swingers/believers). To the trash: live as you like and spread your disease amongst yourselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: pretty obvious Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: pretty obvious Posted by: baker17
We need to redefine marriage as something you really work at
Posted by: Callibrarian on Jun 16, 2007 2:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If both partners are truly interested in an open marriage BEFORE they get married and discussed how to go about it that's one thing. If they were BOTH secretly interested in it and spoke about their mutual interest after they married, that is still one thing. But I think a larger issue is that people mistakenly believe marriage is fulfilling simply because you commit to another person and things will work themselves out with little effort on their parts. Yes, couples can get bored. That happens when you stop communicating and doing things that are fun and being the person you were when you first met. Maybe they don't have the same amount of free time they did before work and kids and other priorities came into their lives, but I bet they made an effort to look good for one another, to not wear the boxer shorts with the holes in it, to put on makeup, give each other gifts and flowers and have a night out on the town. Perhaps they even listened to the other person and took their feelings and background into account. Now couples get bored, and instead of realizing it may be because they had a let down after the wedding since they're no longer the center of attention, or that problems happen, or that marriage is work and they're not working at it, they think having with others is going to solve the problem. Imagine how hurtful it must be for one partner to tell the other they are no longer satisfied with them enough to want to have an exclusive sexual relationship. That must be absolutely crushing. If you really loved that person you may end up going along with them simply because you don't want to lose them, and that's a horrible situation to be in. The article says you have to have a great relationship to start with to go ahead with swinging. Well if it was that great they wouldn't be using boredom as an excuse to have sex with other people. Instead of any therapist recommending they have sex with others, they need to recommend couples get makeovers, take a vacation and try to remember why they got married in the first place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All we need is...
Posted by: OneAcre2012 on Jun 17, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading all the comments, I've determined the only right thing to do here is to have a big alternet posters swingers party. Come on people, why else are we all arguing? It's sexual tension! And we could watch the Ice Storm, too, because it's an awsome movie. Or, if you'd all like, we could roll something up and watch How High instead...I mean, after all, it's good to have options...

"Dude, that shit on your lip got some shit on it's lip!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It all comes down to what works for you..
Posted by: millsy on Jun 17, 2007 5:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hi there...long time reader first time poster.

Monogamy, polyamory, open marriages, swinging, etc...it all comes down to what suits the individual or the couple.

To be honest, a few years ago, I would have been totally against anything other than monogamy and would have said that sex should only be between 2 people in a healthy relationship, but my mind has been thrown open since then, (thank heaven!)

I dont see anything really wrong with an open marriage/relationship, provided that lines of communication between partners are kept open and ground rules are made and adhered to, but I would agree that it is not for everyone.

And I dont see anything wrong with monogamy, provided, as I said before the lines of communication are kept open, and both partners work hard to keep the relationship fresh.

I belive that sex can be both an expression of love and something to enjoy, and I dont think you have to 'love' every person to have sex with (but there has to be some sort of chemistry), and the world has become more open to new concepts and ideas about sex and relationships in the past 40-50 years.

It all come down to personal preference. And if there is consent, and no one gets hurt, then what does it matter?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement