“We had an arrangement, be discreet and don’t be blatant. There had to be payment, it had to be with strangers,” sings Lily Allen in her surprisingly candid and detailed album thought to be about her open relationship with her ex-husband.

The album has catapulted the concept of non-monogamous relationships into the spotlight, and couples therapists report that an increasing number of their clients are choosing to go down this route.

But as Allen’s album makes clear, while open marriages, or consensual non-monogamy, may work for some, they can also go very wrong – and there are a number of common pitfalls to avoid.

“It’s a risky business emotionally. I’m seeing it more and more in the work that I do, but how it manifests itself varies hugely,” said Katherine Cavallo, a psychotherapist and spokesperson for UK Council for Psychotherapy. My wife is my best friend. How do I tell her I want an open marriage?

“It’s normal for feelings of jealousy and insecurity to emerge, and those need to be responded to. The existing relationship, the attachment between the couple, needs to be maintained as well.

“And things can always change. It has to be an ongoing process in which things are continually reviewed to make sure it remains consensual.”

Communication, consent and trust were key, she said, and if agreed boundaries were not adhered to, it could lead to “significant emotional and relational trauma”.

People choosing to open up their relationship after one partner has had an affair, or doing it in order to “fix” something, are cause for concern. “It’s bound to be problematic going down that route,” Cavallo said.

Katerina Georgiou, a psychotherapist and senior-accredited member of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, said there was an important distinction to be made between people who identify as polyamorous, and heteronormative couples choosing to do this.

The latter might choose to open up a marriage for “sexual experimentation, to create intimacy by playing with sexual dynamics, or an agreement as a result of circumstances such as being apart for a while”, she said.

The modern dating world, and dating apps, were also fuelling the shift, she said. “People are being more liberal, but I think there’s also some people maybe being pressured into it. I’m seeing more of that feeling that it’s too vanilla to just want straight monogamy.”

Juliet Rosenfeld, a psychoanalyst and author of Affairs: True Stories of Love, Lies, Hope and Despair, said the growth of open relationships was part of a wider societal trend in which “the idea of the couple is shifting radically”.

“It’s a challenge for therapists because there is a much wider range of ways to be in a couple now,” she said. “A monogamous lifelong relationship is simply not what a lot of people, in particular women, want.”

Marriage and birthrates have declined rapidly across the UK and elsewhere in recent years, and in England and Wales, the proportion of adults who have never entered a legally registered partnership increased from 26.3% in 1991 to 37.9% in 2021.

Rosenfeld said there were a number of potential positives, as well as negatives, in opening up a relationship. “In marriage now there is feeling that people want the other person to be everything – a partner, best friend, teammate, lover – which is very pressurising. So one way of looking at an open marriage is it’s a way of taking pressure off that,” she said.

“But I would be looking to understand whether wanting other people in the relationship was a way of avoiding ending it. If you are in an open marriage, how do you not know that your partner isn’t trialling someone else to replace you?”

She said there was a growing acceptance and normalisation of open relationships, but still a lack of understanding about exactly what makes them work well. “We don’t know enough about what kind of characterological capacity or strength people need to be in a consensual non-monogamous relationship.

“What happens if one person falls in love, for example? What does the couple do then? When you remove sexual exclusivity, what else are you removing? What else are you taking away?”

top 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh stfu

Because we ALL know that straight monogamous relationships NEVER go wrong and are never "emotionally difficult". MFs. Ever since discovering non-monogamy, my relationships are healthier, happier, less stress and more loving.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 75 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 37 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    back then we called it "swinging" and it wasn't rare.

    now it's an open relationship or "relationship anarchy"

    i'm not a swinger. tried it. never will be. glad people can enjoy it.

    there's no "right way" to have a relationship.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Swingers are a specific kind of polyamory. They tend to be short hookups, though sometimes with people you've met and hooked up with before.

    Nothing wrong with it as long as it's all consensual, but I have found swingers to not always be on board with what's going on with the rest of polyamory. In my area, they tend to be surprisingly conservative. There will be tons of cars in the parking lot for the hotel takeover with NRA and MAGA stickers. They accept bisexual women, but often are weird about any other form of LGBTQ+ expression. That may or may not be the case in your area.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm not against different relationship arrangements and it's often argued that you shouldn't dump all your emotional needs on one person.

    However... That being said the more people you add to the mix the more complex and more emotional energy you have to dictate to the situation. A lot of people are genuinely not ready for such a thing even if they think they are. Because while you might have mor emotional needs met, you're also faced with higher emotional and social demands from your partners. Some people don't seem to understand that you can't avoid giving more of your emotional self to others when you give it to more than one person. In my experience, some of the people pursuing these kind of relationships are actually seeking less personal emotional investment, and I think that grossly misunderstands the situation and is a bit selfish, at best.

    I think these situations can be healthy, but I also think healthy ones are more rare, just like healthy traditional relationships are often rare.

    Finally, I am not shocked at people opening up to the idea of throuples when two parents can barely afford to raise a child. Three incomes starts to take the weight of the financial cost off just a little. Not a lot, but a little.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    As someone who used to be poly, I agree 100%. Poly people can be emotional wrecking balls if they don't put in the work to build and maintain healthy relationships. Poly drama story time!

    The worst of my poly primaries believed she had infinite love to give, so she saw no reason to limit herself to one partner. While her love might have been truly infinite, her time, emotional capacity, and sense of commitment were not. She frequently overextended herself with multiple new interests and had her desire for attention and validation fulfilled far beyond reason without the capacity or apparent intent to fully reciprocate.

    Her interests were typically less socially adept men who didn't have much luck in dating, so they threw themselves at a charming, intelligent woman showing intense emotional and sexual interest, unaware or uncaring that she hid her flaws with equal intensity. (She had this thing about fucking virgins: hey, I don't kink shame!) I saw her break a few hearts when they realized they weren't going to "win" her for themselves, but only toward the end discovered that this wasn't due to self-delusion as she claimed, but instead her failure to clearly communicate firm expectations and boundaries. Sometimes that they weren't communicated at all. I also learned after the split that there were far more men than I knew about. Uggggh.

    Eventually she began breaking the rules we established for our relationship and chose to leave me when I insisted we close the relationship to work on ourselves, as we promised to do when we first became committed. She opted instead to begin fucking two mutual friends, one of which immediately ghosted me while the other, a newly former virgin, soon called off our friendship so he could, in his own words, "have a clear conscience while pursuing a lasting relationship with her". I'm sure I don't have to explain how successful he was.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Chiming in as another poly person, having been poly and monogamous in different parts of my life (currently poly). A lot of people that want to be in a poly situation do not fully comprehend the responsibility involved. It can be easy and casual, but I've seen multiple polycules fall apart (dramatically) due to insufficient communication and poor management of expectations. It's totally possible to be poly, and in a serious, committed relationship. I was. It's also very very difficult. It takes a lot of work, communication, and trust.

    Like you said, I've been in relationships with people that truly believe they have infinite love to give, which even if that were true, no one has infinite time and emotional bandwidth. I've had a longstanding rule that I've set for myself, that any committed relationship I am in must have a rock solid foundation of communication and trust before polyamory is possible, and I always close off my poly relationships until I am at that point in a relationship (obviously assuming my partner is okay with that). People need to communicate their desires going in, and should regularly check in and discuss boundaries, expectations, and hopes for the future in any relationship, and much more so in poly ones.

    Fucking talk to each other, people. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and extend the same level of honesty and trust that you wish to receive. If I and my past partners always approached relationships with a communication-first perspective, we would've avoided a lot of pain and heartbreak.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago

    My wife and I have been poly from the start of our relationship and it's been great. That said we've also long held a commitment to healthy emotional management

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    I would love to have multiple partners so that more incomes are coming into the household

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Who the fuck gives a shit anyway.

    I've dated two women. Two. And you know what I've learned?

    Jack fucking shit. The first woman abused me for a decade, the second was only one date.

    The idea of people dating is one thing. The idea of people hooking up is a different one. But The idea of people fucking outside of their committed relationship is so vastly foreign to my simple experience I'm beginning to wonder if the universe is conspiring to isolate me from humanity.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    No conspiracy, let me shed some light. First, open and poly relationships don't work if anyone involved is especially possessive. I don't mean like a little jealous, or slightly insecure (that can be worked through) I mean one person expects a fair bit of say over one or multiple others lives.

    Assuming you now only have a pool of a few reasonably well adjusted emotionally people (well adjusted socially is nice but not requisite) you can now just have N people agree they like each other and want to be together, but like occasionally hook up outside the group either under some arbitrary rule such as being in different zip codes from everyone else or just in general so long as proper precautions are taken. You have a core group of N people who are emotionally and financially intertwined and N+X people who happen to have all hooked up.

    It's a fine system, have almost never been monogamous, and it's just like the times I was monogamous except no one is going to be upset about random hookups unless there was a generally accepted rule broken. I also personally find a core group of N=3 to be the roughly ideal number, but everyone's mileage will vary.

    Though I suspect that societal normalization will be informed by the economic situation. The reality is if you can't afford to live without 3 incomes everyone will eventually organize around 3 person core households and society will defend the new tradition or whatever.

    Of course somewhere in there a lot of people have to give up on religious and social hangups but that's already in progress if the number of articles like this coming out is steadily increasing (it is)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    And then there's my autistic ass that just sees a fuckton of socialization rules there and I'm already panicking

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    You really don't need a lot of rules, I know a lot of people swear by stuff like relationship contracts and the like. But realistically that's never been something I've pursued and that does seem incredibly overwhelming. Current relationship the rules are as follows: don't bring STDs home, don't bring people over during normal sleeping hours without approval, preferably a couple days of notice; and don't become emotionally unavailable otherwise it's not really a relationship. That's it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That just sounds like a bunch of friends with benefits. The thing that defined a relationship imo is the valuation you put on your time spent with someone. If you enjoy being with them more than anyone else, its worth pursuing a relationship. And I simply dont see how thats possible with mutliple people unless youre "dating" the group and not any individual member. Or unless you have nothing but free time on your hands. As an austist, i find it difficult but managble to handle my personal hygene, work responsiblilities, and sleep on the same day. Adding in social time and r&r time or "me" time, and it becomes extremely difficult to manage my time daily. Add in a relationship, and my life would be maxed. I cant imagine handling multiple relationships, which is what it sounds like youre describing.

    To be clear, im of the mind that is people want to be polygamous, there is absolutely nothing I have to say about it. Its not my thing, but I'd like to understand it. I don't need to to support its existance indirectly by not speaking out against it. But I would still like to, hence having discussions with people whose views differ. This just feels like the type of topic people are going to get heated about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't disagree necessarily, I would describe the woman who's part of a different poly that we hook up with occasionally as a friend with benefits situation, though I'd be open to changing that dynamic if she was. But very much the stable and lasting poly relationships I've been in were effectively group dating. Like not to say there was never separate dates here and there, but very much most things are communal. I'm with you on barely having enough spoons to maintain the minimum required hygiene and meet general social expectations, I couldn't handle a situation where I'm going on multiple dates with different people every week. Been there. Tried that. It wasn't sustainable. But a core group where individual members just happen to have FWBs is perfectly manageable in my experience, though keeping track of paramours can be a pain since I'm really bad with names.

    Having that close core group also comes with benefits such as someone almost always being available and even if not all interests are mutual you'll share some with one, some with another, and a lot more time can be spent together with someone your close with working on projects or getting way to deep into philosophy or lore.

    And to be clear I'm of the mind that people can be monogamous if they want, I just don't get it. It feels to possessive and limiting. I don't want to and literally can't be someone's everything and don't expect any one other person to be my everything either. Probably helps no kids are involved nor can they become so biologically with who I'm currently with. Kids seem to complicate the fuck out of relationships from what I've seen. So at least in our case that can't become a thing without mutual agreement. Not to say kids require monogamy, that's not true, I've seen it work without that being the case, but only twice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why would you say its possessive? Its more about avoiding drama and just having one person you know you can count on. There's enough drama in a mono relationship without having to pick sides.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I tend to view telling someone what they can and can't do as being possessive. Demanding monogamy is therefore possessive. It's taking away agency not as bad or as possessive as saying you can't have friends who are X. Which is probably the most commonly recognized form of such behavior, but it's on the same continuum in my mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 72 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    "Traditional" meaning "the last 2,000 out of 300,000 years"... Not to mention how it was only the norm because it was forced thru powerful organizations and not everyone just choosing it.

    Monogamy and Abrhamic values are nothing but a fad on the timeline of human existence.

    We ain't built for that shit. Some people are and that's fine, some aren't and that's cool too.

    There's a reason we're not all built the same.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Can’t speak for anyone else but I will never do an open relationship. Either you are with me or you aren’t. Your choice.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    uh oh, now you two are stuck together

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    I'd rather be alone thanks

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Big sigh. Every time this topic comes up, the same kind of questions come up. Usually there's a lot of ignorance and some malice, and it's kind of tiring. But, most people are probably talking in good faith , even if they're firing from the hip.

    First off, not all non monogamous relationship types are the same. Swinging tends to just be about the meat. Open relationships often are hierarchical and have some people as secondary "fun but not serious", and often have one "primary" relationship. Polyamory and relationship anarchy tend to be less about hierarchy. But also sometimes people will use the same word and mean different things.

    Common questions and responses

    "This sounds exhausting"

    Cool. So does rock climbing and marathon running. Don't do it if you're not interested.

    "I don't have time for that"

    Cool. I also don't have time for some things , so I don't do them. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to post on a topic about baseball that watching all those games takes up too much of my day.

    "It's just cheating"

    No. Cheating is when you break the agreed upon rules. If your rules say "you can fuck other people" and then you fuck other people, you have not cheated.

    "It's just dating. I dated a few people before I met my spouse."

    Not really. It's common for people to go on multiple dates before they go exclusive. In those cases it's typical for the emotional connection to be more shallow. You're just getting to know someone.

    With some forms of non monogamy, people can form meaningful emotional bonds with multiple people.

    Note that a polycule doesn't have to be a closed shape. A can date B, B can date C, but A and C can have any or no relationship to each other.

    "I want an emotional connection"

    Many polyamorous people form emotional connections with their partners.

    "This all sounds complicated"

    Many things in life are. Pathfinder is a complicated tabletop game, but you don't have to play it. Don't engage with it if it doesn't sound worth the effort. You can play simpler games instead and be perfectly happy.

    "I knew a couple that did this and they broke up".

    Cool. I knew a monogamous couple and they broke up.

    "But they broke up because of the open relationship!"

    Did they? Or were they unhappy for other reasons? Also, I knew a couple that broke up because of WoW. Does that mean WoW will doom a relationship?

    "I've never seen one work"

    I have. Also many poly people don't talk about it with strangers. You might know people who are happily non monogamous and they just never told you.

    "I can't even find one relationship"

    Yeah it's hard out there. It's mostly a numbers game, and location is a big factor. Don't believe incel or manosphere mythology.

    Counterintuitively, pursuing non monogamy for me meant fewer dates. It's a smaller pool of candidates.

    "I'm too jealous for this"

    Thank you for sharing your character flaw. The first step towards addressing a problem is usually recognizing it.

    That said, most people experience jealousy sometimes. A mark of maturity and strength is recognizing it and handling it well. Talking about how you feel insecure when your partner doesn't text you for a few days is fine. Stalking them to see what they're up to is not.

    "What about STDs??"

    Use protection. Single people dating get by. If you feel the risk is unacceptable, don't engage in non monogamy

    "What about families? Kids??"

    Kids are pretty flexible. The poly familes I knew, the kids were doing great. Everyone in the polycule loved them. It was like having extra aunts and uncles, mostly.

    "But what if there's a breakup??"

    When my aunt divorced Uncle Steve I was sad because Steve was cool, but my parents explained to me that sometimes relationships end. It's not different.

    "You're being really condescending right now"

    Yeah. It's one of those eternal September / for me it was Tuesday topics for me.

    "But you made me feel bad, so I'm not really reading your content"

    Yeah, that happens. Read this comic about it: https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

    Ok, I think I got all the common ones.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    How do people have the free time to have multiple relationships? It sounds exhausting.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    It can also be very rewarding.

    I had a partner where we could post-sex pillow talk for hours. It was very relaxing, and it's the thing I miss most about hooking up with them. We're still friends, but their life got too full and we had to call off romantic involvement.

    Which is to say that, yeah, the time involved can be an issue. Maybe one of you needs to step back. The time you do spend with them can still be worth the effort.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Somehow, the traditional model makes the rich richer, and that's why they push it so hard. That's all I know.

    Why do people want so badly to have their government legally recognize their relationship? The legal contract does nothing but make it harder to separate when the relationship runs its course, whenever that may be. Have the ceremony, go on the honeymoon, get "married" but don't include a legal contract in it. You don't need it.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Primarily administrative privileges, at least from a practical standpoint.

    It can be done without declaring it a marriage legally, with wills, medical proxies, etc. if you prefer granular control.

    I just want my partner to not go through the nightmare of probate court and legal headaches should something happen to me, or be able to see me in the hospital without pushback. If one piece of paper covers 90% of that then I’m reasonably willing to sign it. On the flip side of that, I hate weddings and would prefer to spend that money on a more material investment lol

    Everyone is different though, and there should be alternative options that aren’t such a huge hassle, so I do agree with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Stability of partners and income makes it more predictable to pay for rent and taxes. That's pretty much it.

    Over the years, monogamy meant predictability and trustworthiness. Generally speaking that's true. When there's fewer emotions in the pile, there's more predictable results. More emotions and people? More unpredictability. Landlords and banks don't like that when it comes to loans or rental situations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    i dunno how i feel about this. on one hand, i wouldn't mind having a fuck buddy, but on the other hand i just feel like committal relationships are better because im a emotional person. i dunno but i don't have to worry becuase i know ill prolly be single and involuntary celibate for the rest of my life!

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Oh young people.

    The silents and boomers tried this crap too.

    Raised a generation of angry Gen-X kids through weekend visitation rights.

    I had very few friends whose parents hadn’t been divorced from some form of this (cheating or swapping).

    Some couples survived but the marriages were strained.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    My cousin and his wife did this and then one day my cousin and their new girlfriend dumped his wife

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    I'm not going to judge people who try open relationships, but I've literally never seen them work. It's also nothing new. Swingers were a thing decades ago. I've seen marriages implode, people end up needing therapy, and the like. I have a friend who is poly and has multiple people in her relationship group. She tried to tell me "how great it is" and then the next day I hear about the latest group drama. I'm like "yeah fuck that noise".

    It's kind of like communism. I love the idea of communism. Equality for everybody and everybody has an equal say in the means of production. However, it only takes one prick not pulling their weight on purpose to abuse the system and it all comes crumbling down, which is why so many communist countries have a dictator forcing everyone to "be equal".

    The same is true of open relationships. It only takes one possessive or damaged person to blow up the whole group. The weakest link in most things is the fact that some people fucking suck.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    It seems you're correlating conflating "polyamory" (non-monogamous relationships) with "polycules" (relationships with more than two people). Not all polyamory is a polycule and not all polycules are necessarily permanent; nor have their members exclusive with each other.

    Sometimes polyamory looks like a marriage where both members have okayed having sex with other people. Sometimes it's groups of "swinger" marriages where they "swap" members. Sometimes it's just a person who regularly casually hooks up with others. I'd argue that what people consider monogamous relationships have a bit of wiggle room. Life is complicated; people are complicated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I think you mean "conflating", not correlating. I'm not comparing two disparate data points.

    Both of the things you described are the same sides of a coin, but with the commitment slider moved around a bit. Much of what I said applies to both.

    Polycules, in your description, might be more "successful", but that's only because there isn't any real commitment. If the relationship falls apart, oh well move on. That's barely a tick on the slider from a fuck buddy and two ticks away from one night stands.

    Again, everybody should be allowed to do whatever they want. Freedom in sexuality is important. I just don't think these relationships are successful in the majority of cases and I prefer a stable relationship with someone I know will be there throughout my whole life. I have no doubt that I'll die before I ever considered leaving my SO because I'm in it for the long haul.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    unrelated. But genetics is wild when you can have Lily Allen and Alfie Allen in the same branch.

  • source
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    What's more interesting to me is that every single human society has had the opportunity to allow open relationships and instead settled on some form of hardlined partnership regulation function. To put it another way, every person in every setting in every culture in every era have all come to the conclusion that it is better to have a rigid structural partnership contract of some kind than it is to even attempt to tackle the societal issues open relationships present.

    It's not the first time humans have asked this type of question. Is this really a modern shift, or is this an ongoing historical fad whose waxing and waning phases have been glossed over in favor of more exciting history?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That is just literally not true. There was never any grand consensus. There was religious persecution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Religions don’t just pop up out of a vacuum. They reflect and reinforce the predominant cultural practices of the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    No they don't. They are a social power structure that enforces cultural practices by claiming it's the norm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I'm something more than friends with a guy in a open relationship, and I just want to see him more than I get to. He wouldn't mind me seeing other people, but I don't want other people. I want him. 😩

  • source
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If you want an open relationship just date around like everyone else. Committed open relationships is a recipe for disaster.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Casual hookups have always been a thing, why pretend they are a relationship?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    If you're not exclusive you're fuckbuddies. Maybe it'll stick, or eventually something better comes along for either. Then it ends.

    Tomorrow we will cover how to determine whether you are being hit on by gays.

  • source
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    "Open Relationships" are what you do when you don't take sex (or intimacy in general) seriously. It doesn't end well.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I dont agree but I do think an overly individualistic and hedonistic approach to physical love can be harmful over time. There are people out there that are essentially masturbatng with another persons body and that is never going to be fulfilling in any meaningful way. A lot of mainstream, commercial porn portrays love making this way which can be problematic for so called gooners.

  • source
  • parent
  • 7 comments in c/lgbtq_plus@lemmy.blahaj.zone view that post
    [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    Unethical and hierarchical non-monogamy is risky emotionally, ethical non-hierarchical non-monogamy without envy driven rules is not any more or less risky emotionally and can be very rewarding with truly loving partners as you don't have to rely on a single person to provide things you need when it's painful for them to be forced into providing those things since you can't find another partner to provide those things.

    Especially bad for ace or disabled people or women with vaginal issues and men with erectile issue when their partner is left sexless, but they need it to be fulfilled for example, or when one partner needs lots of physical touch but the other has trauma related to it, or a partner who loves to worship breasts, but has a partner with very sensitive nipples, but other than these issues the relationships are great. With ENM those things can be fulfilled by other partners while maintaining an even stronger relationship with the first partner.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    As someone whos mental health and attachment style can't cope with Poly, RA or ENM, it's starting to feel more and more hopeless when trying to date, 90% of the queer people I know are one of those. My ex made me feel broken and wrong for wanting a mono relationship and tried to convince me to be ENM because apparently mono is rooted in colonialism.

    I'm just like, am I not allowed to like what I like?

    Its fucked and makes me feel like I'll be alone forever.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • No, I’m right there with you. No shade on those who want to be in poly/ENM relationships, but it just doesn’t mesh with my brain and how I like to exist in relationships. As long as both partners happy and equal, I can’t imagine why there should be anything wrong with being in a monogamous relationship.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm poly and honestly don't understand how other queer people of anyone have a hard time wrapping their head around sexuality not being a choice. Mono/poly is just another axis on sexuality just like gay/straight

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Who said anything about wrapping my head around it?

    I have plenty of poly friends, got some RA friends, I have no issue with them or the way their relationships work.

    I literally said that MY mental health can't cope with it and it's difficult being in the dating pool when most people are poly.

    I'm not sure where you're extrapolating your assertion from.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 3 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    All relationships are risky business emotionally.

    If you get jealous, don't do poly, and don't date poly people.

    The hard part is figuring out what you actually want.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    my wife offered to have an open relationship because she's intimately distant and knows that. I told her I would get jealous if she were to be with someone else and it was something I couldn't accept. if she was willing to accept that I could be and she couldn't then it would be fine, but I don't think it would be fair to her to agree to that.

    she didn't really give me a clear answer so we just continue our relationship as it has always been.

    jealousy is a hell of a way to ruin a good marriage.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    I'm not really convinced the numbers have risen that much. Just seems like it's getting more attention.

  • source