Sign up for Haute Flash!

Haute Flash
  • E-mail
  • Print
  • Bookmark
  • Document user evaluation
    (40 people)

Polyamory: Inside an open marriage

Before you dismiss the idea of open marriage as aberrant, consider that polyamory is on the rise, especially among couples of a certain age

Updated:
2010-04-08 11:54
Published:
2010-03-27 14:40
By:
Anne Bokma
open marriage

Deciding to try polyamory

When Jill Barrett's* close friend Marguerite Palmer* lost her husband after a lengthy illness, Jill was there to offer support in any way she could: going to the funeral, coming over to cook meals, and planning shopping trips as a diversion from the loneliness that had seized her friend. Jill's husband, Leonard*, was also there for Marguerite: helping to repair a dripping faucet, taking her out on the lake in his boat, holding her and letting her cry in his arms.

As the months passed, Marguerite and Leonard found themselves attracted to each other and longed to move beyond consoling hugs to sexual intimacy. But instead of starting an illicit affair — the discovery of which carried the risk of ruining both a solid marriage and a long-standing friendship — they talked openly about their feelings.

Leonard told his wife about his sexual desire for Marguerite. Marguerite told Jill she was lonely, had gone a year without sex and longed for the loving touch of a man she could trust. And Jill? She gave the pair her blessing to go forth and fornicate, to enter into a sexual relationship without any guilt, shame or fear of getting caught. "My own feelings surprised me," says Jill. "But the fact is, I trust my husband and I trust my friend. Life is short; why should I stop them from having this experience?"

Taking the leap to open marriage

It's safe to say Jill's reaction isn't typical: Accusations of betrayal, tears, screaming and a suitcase thrown to the curb would be more like it. But Jill, an athletic 41-year-old mother of three children, age seven to 12, and a successful tax lawyer in southern Ontario, says she took a clear-eyed view of the situation and believed the strength of her 14-year marriage and her healthy self-esteem would not be threatened by this sexual dalliance.

Besides, she wanted her friend to feel better and she believed her husband should be able to indulge his desires. "I've had lots of good things happen to me. What happened to Marguerite — losing her husband at such an early age — isn't fair. Who am I to say she shouldn't have some nice stuff in her life, and if I can enable that even a little bit, that's a good thing. As for my husband, I wouldn't want to get to the end of our lives together without him having had this fun."

You might think Jill is incredibly altruistic (or sadly naive) for allowing her husband to find pleasure in the arms of another woman, for taking a chance that he might fall in love and choose to leave her. But could she simply be more evolved than the rest of us in her ability to move past the petty feelings of jealousy, possessiveness and insecurity that cause us to demand our partners be bound only to us for life? 

*Names changed by request

Next: So who wins in this sexual revolution?

Advertisement

Pagination Documents

Page 1:
Deciding to try polyamory
Page 2:
Open marriage the next sexual revolution?
Page 3:
Dealing with jealousy
Page 4:
Developing ground rules
Page 5:
Open marriage is a lifestyle choice

Comments

  • Kitwench's avatar Kitwench wrote:

    2010-04-01 11:40 AM

    I wanted to like this article, but unfortunately it ignores the real feelings involved. Your partner's other partner isn't a golf habit or a book club that, when it starts to take up too much time, can easily be set aside. Your partner's other partner/s are real human beings - as is your partner! Simple deciding unilaterally to say 'ok, fun over, end this now' and expecting everyone involved to be fine with simply walking away is naive and unrealistic. Jill may think things are fine, but why didn't we hear from Leonard and Marguerite on how they feel right about now? Polyamorous relationships are not about treating people as if they are disposable conveniences for your fun. It's about ETHICAL non-monogamy and there is nothing ethical in acting as though you can easily set aside another human being's feelings and pretend all is well. The same applies to Samantha, who wasn't being honest with herself at all. She simply wanted her poly partner to be HER 'primary' and divorce his wife of 26 years - that's not polyamory, that's serial monogamy under false colors.
  • misskitty_79's avatar misskitty_79 wrote:

    2010-04-07 11:10 AM

    Dr Doherty's comparison of open relationships to people's "impulses [...] to lie, to cheat, to steal and kill." It horridly opinionated & terribly offensive. As for his thoughts on how men & women are emotionally affected by sex, I believe that his narrow-minded assumptions have caused him to see the gendered reactions that he wants/expects to see, rather than reality. Suffice to say that I am *NOT* impressed.
  • brewer7563's avatar brewer7563 wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:21 AM

    I was involved in this many years ago, my wife had a lover she cared for very much and was involved with him for a couple of years, i wasn't jealous but was happy for her as he gave her something that i couldn't, not exactly sure what it was but she loved us both and she looked forward to seeing him on a regular basis.
  • Rose2010's avatar Rose2010 wrote:

    2010-04-08 1:06 AM

    Most women are NOT OK WITH sharing their husband;that's why he is your husband. This would work for people that also sleep with more than 1 person while they are dating but for the majority of the population who believe in monogamy,this is not acceptable;it has become so OK in our culture to overlook the importance values,we act on our feelings instead of looking at what is best of the marriage.If a married couple are missing something in the marriage they should talk to each other &resolve it & get closer,otherwise it's not a marriage if you have to fill the void with someone else;I would prefer people to be ashamed & feel bad re being wt someone else because it would mean they have a consciouness & a heart, instead of having NOW IN OUR CULTURE THE ARROGANCE TO MAKE IT OK TO CHEAT, OR IN THIS CASE WHICH IS WORSE, be selfish enough to MAKE IT OK TO BE WITH ANOTHER IN A MARRIAGE. Maybe the reason people get bored of someone is because they don't know what TRUE LOVE is; if you truly love someone like let's say your child or your pet how can you ever get bored with them.I don't get it &I know I am not the only one.why doesn't anyone in our culture stand up for STRONG FAMILY VALUES THAT KEEP A MARRIAGE & FAMILIES TOGETHER INSTEAD OF CONSTANTLY LOOKING AT OUR OWN SELFISH DESIRES, WE HAVE TO EVOLVE BEYOND WHAT WE WANT & DO WHAT IT TAKES TO HAVE STRONG FAMILIES, WHEN WE COMMIT TO BE IN A MARRIAGE.
  • dodger45's avatar dodger45 wrote:

    2010-04-08 2:25 AM

    Trying my best to stay open minded here, I can't help but think of the human as social animal versus individual. Is it altruistic for one partner to offer the other sex outside of the marriage, or is it an indication that the partner is so independent that they should not be in a "marriage" in the first place? Is marriage an outdated institution for such individuals? Or is it that sex is not an intimate act, but one of sport, like water skiing? I suppose everyone has their own boundaries on what is acceptable, but I have a strong suspicion that this situation is not at all common. I appreciate that it would be difficult to get any numbers, but I would be surprised if it was more than a fraction of 1%. Biology is about territory as well as sex.
  • theLOVEguru's avatar theLOVEguru wrote:

    2010-04-08 3:51 AM

    It seems everyone is set on establishing which approach to relationships is more mature, more moral, more evolved. I am writing to say neither. Neither more than the other, that is. The only thing that matters in a relationship is that it is based on trust and love and it shouldnt matter how many people are involved. And, trust and love are the same foundations of "strong family values" (Rose2010). But let's be honest here, the concept of a one man/one woman marriage is based on catholic/judeo christian values, not the concept that monogomy makes for stronger family values. Again, love is the key. When has promoting love become a bad thing? Love is natural. And when you put a limit on the love you can extend to others, you are limiting the natural flow of human energy thus resulting in negative emotions towards whomever because that energy has to be expended one way or another. Einstein proved energy cannot be destroyed, it can only transform from one state to another. (more below)
  • theLOVEguru's avatar theLOVEguru wrote:

    2010-04-08 3:51 AM

    That being said, there are differnet kinds of love that dont involve sexual intimacy. And so, monogomous marriages CAN work if thats what those people believe in and are fully engaged in what they believe love to be. But to say that polyamorists are acting on their "own selfish desires" (Rose2010) because they dont know true love, is ignorant as well as arrogant. No one person can define what love should be for others. And its not about being bored with your partner, its about not limiting your capacity to love on an intimate level. Therefore "TRUE LOVE" is not defined by how mnay people are involved, but rather by the negative emotions that are not. As long as there is no fear (because it is fear that causes all the rest to occur; jealousy, distrust, et al.) In the case of Monogomy v. Polyamory, it is my ruling that neither are right, nor wrong. The case is dismissed without prejudice.
  • BIBLE BIGAMIST's avatar BIBLE BIGAMIST wrote:

    2010-04-08 4:14 AM

    Polyamory is a vague term that carries about as much dirt as the rest of them (polygamy, polygyny, polyandry, etc.) but this is not to say that MONOGAMY (so-called) does not carry its own brand of filth and deceit. So-called "Serial Monogamy" is really the most common form of marriage these days and frankly, it is really only a form of licensed polygamy: Marriage with an expiry date (sort of like a driver's license). Any person who has had more than one intimate sexual partner in their lifetime is a POLYGAMIST at heart and I would even go so far as to say that polygamy is really the norm — not the exception. (I just happen to be more honest about it than most people.) As for "many loves" here is where the vaguery begins, with the multi-million dollar question, "What is love?" I believe the western world is not quite ready for this because the greater part of the western world has a hard enough time just committing to one person alone in marriage — let alone committing to more than one. Admittedly, there are exceptions to the rule, but these are few and far between. I would be careful about jumping to conclusions or being overly simplistic: Thinking that "many loves" is the same thing as an "open marriage" is much like thinking that people who don't love each other aren't capabale of marriage. If there is no commitment there is no marriage... Only those short-lived sparks of passion that have been known to burn down many houses.
  • BIBLE BIGAMIST's avatar BIBLE BIGAMIST wrote:

    2010-04-08 4:36 AM

    As to the person that attributed Monogamy to Judeo-Christian values, I suggest they read their Bible a little more closely. The Bible is rich with examples of bigamy and GOD blessing such unions immensely, never once condemning those men who engaged in the practice of having more than one wife. The simple rule was that the woman could not be another man's wife, or it was called adultery. If that sounds sexist, so be it. Having sexual proclivities, propensities, and privileges is a reality for both genders that is not likely to change for as long as babies are being born.
  • Ninianners's avatar Ninianners wrote:

    2010-04-08 5:35 AM

    I believe people are capable of having feelings towards more than one person. If this were not the case all women would be single with one child as there would be no love left for anyone else. Being in an open relationship myself I know my feelings for my husband has not changed. We each have another partner we share time with. They give each of us something we crave. We know what we were looking for in the others we chose to spend time with. Being honest about our needs and feelings have brought us closer. We have been actively with others for a few years now and it has not changed our feelings or our sexlife with each other. Rules are in place in regards to the sexual intimacy aspect with others. We are happy with our choice.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 8:10 AM

    The conclusion says it all, to me. I suspect that is the way such relationships usually culminate, i.e., the wife discovers she has had enough of the arrangement, before the other two have. I think if people, in general, feel the requirement for more than one partner, it is wiser to not bother with marriage, at all, in our changing society. As well, when a couple has participated in the experience of polyamory, how does one curtail this, in future, should the wife wish her husband not participate, again? Surely this, too, is bound to lead to a broken marriage. It is no different than an extra-marital affair. Who is trying to fool whom?
  • mikeroman's avatar mikeroman wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:28 AM

    Marriage, defined in any other way than religious and institutional doctrine bred into us from birth, is a hoax and ever increasingly, a failed proposition for the enlightened. No business, enterprise, law, or other forms of common sense endeavours would last 5 minutes with the absurdly high failure rate of marriage. It is, by its very nature, unnatural and hence doomed to fail despite religion, righteous and puritan North-American morality and any other "beliefs" used by commentators to this article who pretend to uphold some form of high ground. As we begin to use fractions more of our ability to understand our own true nature, so do we strip ourselves of these man-made impositions restricting our right to live our lives as we choose and perhaps as meant naturally. Marriage is not love and 3 kids, a house and a dog does not a fulfilling life make...not for everyone!
  • unknown's avatar unknown wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:41 AM

    But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 1 Corinthians 7:2
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:47 AM

    Except the Bible contradicts itself, as therein, men have more than one wife, in several passages, though women did not have more than one husband.
  • unknown's avatar unknown wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:52 AM

    "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." Matthew 19:4-6
  • Steph77's avatar Steph77 wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:53 AM

    This article is SICK. Marriage is a covenant between two people, and as soon as you enter into an intimate relationship either emotionally or physically with someone else you are breaking that covenant, breaking your VOWS, betraying your partner. People that encourage their spouse to sleep around with other people shouldn't be married in the first place. They don't understand what marriage IS and obviously don't truly love their spouse. If you feel "jealous" YOU SHOULD. That's YOUR WIFE, YOUR HUSBAND. You are supposed to be the apple of his eye....You are supposed to be the only one who has her heart... I am seriously disturbed by how twisted this article is. I hope people are smarter then this.
  • Steph77's avatar Steph77 wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:58 AM

    People who believe this, or force themselves to believe this shouldn't be married in the first place. Marriage is a covenant, you made vows to each other. That's what marriage is. A loving, safe relationship where YOU should be the apple of your husbands eye.. YOU should be the only one who has your wife's heart. This lifestyle is very wrong, very twisted. I hope people don't actually fall for this. It is selfish, betrayal. Your spouse is the only person in the world who should be fulfilling your sexual needs, your emotional intimate needs. Thats the relationship that marriage is. People who are this selfish and believe this stuff SHOULDN'T BE MARRIED. Don't make a commitment you can't keep.
  • curvymom's avatar curvymom wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:14 AM

    I am a divorced parent who works full time. I don't have the time or energy right now to invest in a traditional relationship. I have been involved with the same man for almost 20 years. We weren't involved during my marriage. He is now married & we live in the same city. He & his wife have an open marriage & both have another partner. I am his. Due to the nature of his job, I see him once or twice a month. We love each other very much & I admire & respect him. He is my best friend & even if we were no longer intimate that wouldn't change. He spends more time with his wife when he's home as he should. They have a home & other obligations he needs to tend to. I'm a busy mom & quite independent. I'm fine with how much time we spend together & don't foresee me needing more anytime in the near future. His wife & I are friends & occasionally the three of us will go to a movie or she & I will have a coffee together. This type of relationship is not for everyone & many of my friends wonder how I can do it. But at this point in my life, its just what I need. I have a man who loves me unconditionally & has done so for almost 2 decades, we never fight, I always look forward to seeing him & never tire of it, & I don't have to deal with the monotony of a "normal" relationship that frequently is it's downfall. I am free to see other people & have on occasion. I haven't found anyone worth giving up this relationship for. We're all happy & no one's getting hurt - that's what matters to us.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:21 AM

    Yes, I have "unknown." I have also read, more precisely, ... Lemech, Abraham, Esau, Jacob and Gideon, among others, had more than one wife. So, it seems that they "held fast" to an assortment of wives, while wives held fast to their only husband. I totally agree, Steph77, I believe marriage, generally, to be a sham in today's Western society.
  • Canuckchic67's avatar Canuckchic67 wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:34 AM

    I am in a poly relationship. I have been married to my husband, whom I love greatly, for 24 years. For the past 6 years I have had another man in my life. If anything, it has made my marriage stronger,deeper and more loving. When a person has children, they do not have love only for one child, they love them all. Why can not this same concept be passed on for adults? While so many of our friends are ending their marriages, ours continues to grow and blossom. For the three of us, it is all about LOVE, not necessarily sex.
  • Katblues's avatar Katblues wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:40 AM

    Personally I believe the problem with our society today is that we spend alot of time putting the wrong information into our minds. If we practiced being faithful and what that entails, then maybe we would know how and want to try. Everything is a conscious effort and involves work and honest interest. If the interest to stray is there, then ask yourself why. I think your partner might be able to help you or you might be able to help yourself for your partner. Don't get married if you don't want to work at upholding the institution. To me it's just weird that a wife would let her husband get his rocks off with her friend. Maybe she is just giving up on marriage and really is staying for the children.I've seen that happen too many times. People get tempted everyday...doesn't mean they have to act on it. Don't get married if you can't handle it. What you put in your head is what comes out..teach yourself and never stop learning how to make things interesting. Try being romantic and try interacting spiritually and mentally with your partner on a regular basis. Planning different events and intimate situations is necessary. It's work people! I think it is really sad how people just give in to their physical desires when they could be expressing that with the person they married.
  • Justaguy's avatar Justaguy wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:46 AM

    This is totally wrong. Couples out there don't give in into this way of life. Invest more time, energy and every good thing into your marriages. That they may be renewed each day, month & year. Or do you think that this doesn't come without consequences? It is naive to think that the partner will not be hurt. Remember that we reap what we sow. It is this that we want to pass to our children? It is this that we want to see our children to do when they grow up. We can't put a beautiful paint to unfaithfulness. Advise: Reconsider, repent and work on your marriage. If not possible, don't get married. 7 yrs married, & no children yet... :)
  • debz's avatar debz wrote:

    2010-04-08 10:51 AM

    Am I to believe that I'm one of only a handful of people who view the very thought of this "open marriage" repulsive? I've been married for 25 years to the same man...happily! Isn't this how it's supposed to work: you grow up in your teens dating several people, you find "the one", you fall in love, you get married, you have kids, you grow old together, you set an example of love and commitment for your kids, you die. If you don't find "the one", you keep dating until you do. You don't get married, hoping you'll learn to love that person, and then hide behind the moniker of "open marriage" as the excuse to have an affair when you finally do find "the one". Sure I may be an idealist, but in today's world...when over 52% of new marriages end in divorce...doesn't it say something for the old ways? Shows on TV (ie: Big Love) which glamorize the idea of polyamory or polygamy, set a dangerous example for our children...how will they ever be able to grow into loving, commitment, fulfilling relationships when they are bombarded by confusing, experimental-based ideals such as this? Besides that, I'd like to see how Jill's story turns out in another 6 months when her "happy" husband starts sneaking around behind her back to rekindle the sexual fulfilment he found in the arms of Marguerite?
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:18 AM

    I cannot, for the *life* of me, comprehend how it is that to engage in sex with someone else, would serve to make my marriage stronger and tickle my husband pink! This seems to me, to be delusional. It weakly attempts, IMO, to romanticise that which is lascivious. How would you feel, CanuckChick, were your partner in adultery to take on another woman in order to embellish his relationship with you? I can understand why one would prefer to engage sexually with another person, attributable to a boring and lacklustre marriage, which one might as well dissolve, rather than to demean and dishonour it.
  • ll1969's avatar ll1969 wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:35 AM

    What ever happened to committment? How about honour and respect? I'm not naive eoungh to say "and they lived happily ever after"...marriage takes work, committment, patience and, let's face it, some sacrifice. Why be married at all if you aren't prepared to commit to the relationship? If you're in a loving marrage/relationship, you really shouldn't feel the need to augment it with additional partners. This article illustrates how, sadly, society has come to accept self-indulgent, immature behaviour. And quite frankly, "polyamory" (a joke of a term) shows a general lack of respect; both for one's spouse, the extra-curricular partner and one's self. Sad.
  • Canuckchic67's avatar Canuckchic67 wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:41 AM

    Jyli, First my marriage is neither boring or lacklustre. Very far from it in fact. Having an open marriage neither demeans nor dishonours my husband and mine relationship. Like I said in my other post, it is not about sex. Is your marriage based soley on sex? Mine isn't. My partner in adultery as you call him could take on another woman if he so desired. I am not a jealous person, and I was taught to share as a child. I never said this is for everyone, most people can not get past the 'ownership' that a marriage implies. But for us, it works very well and we are all happy. I fail to see what damage we are doing to anyone.
  • ll1969's avatar ll1969 wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:54 AM

    Fundamentally, a loving relationship or marriage involves a committment made by two individuals to love, honour and respect each other. This applies to a partnership between a man & a woman, two women or two men. If you want/need a third party to be involved, why bother entering into the relationship/marriage in the first place? When a third person enters a realtionship, it shows the respect is gone (or never was).
  • Daxereck2008's avatar Daxereck2008 wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:02 PM

    Marriage, marriage is a union of 2 people who want to spend the rest of their lives together. If you do not want to spend your life with one person and one person only DO NOT GET MARRIED. You ruin the sanctity of marriage and give your children warped views of respect for one another. You are seriously ill people to think that sex is not a major part of any relationship, sex is about trust and sharing yourself with someone. You should not be spreading your legs for whomever you so please because it is just sex, your all ignorant. Marriage is not outdated, the fact is that all you adulterers are looking for anyway you can make yourself feel less guilty for being so weak and self-serving. You should not be allowed to be married because in fact the whole purpose of being married is not so you can go out screw something and come home to another doing household chores. Get a maid get divorced and stop telling people this is normal and okay.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:05 PM

    CanuckChic, if not about sex, then why not change adultery to simple friendship or camaraderie? Ownership? One might do better to take ownership of oneself, rather than to donate oneself. I would enjoy hearing about you some time after the fact, in retrospect. How many polyamorous relationships does one reasonably expect, in life? A dozen, a hundred? There are no obvious ties that bind, it seems, either inside or outside marriage. I definitely think this sets a poor example for children, particularly adolescents, who are bound to model their parents' behaviour.
  • ll1969's avatar ll1969 wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:09 PM

    I feel sorry for those involved in these "open" raltionships. Entering into such a relationship obvioulsy makes up for something missing from their marriages in the first place.
  • CommentNinja's avatar CommentNinja wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:10 PM

    Leonard is totally going to hook-up with Marguerite behind Jill's back. So much for their experimentation with polyamory. I love how Jill maintains that she was not jealous yet, was starting to feel like a single parent and resentful that Leonard was spending more time with Marg, umm that sounds like jealousy to me. If my girlfriend & husband told me they wanted to hook-it up, I would bitch-slap the both of them. A relationship is tough enough as it is with two people, why complicate things with more parties? Idiots!
  • ll1969's avatar ll1969 wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:14 PM

    Hey CommentNinja...LOL! Very honest and realistic take on this!
  • mochasofa's avatar mochasofa wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:29 PM

    I find this whole idea to be a whole new form of torture. When people make comments like "I'm not a jealous person" I do not believe them for a minute. Why don't I believe them? Because jealousy is something that is felt innately...it is in our DNA, and I hate when people try to justify their delusion by saying..."I'm not a jealous person" Am I the only one that calls BS on this?! This points such a finger on our society...instead of working on a relationship and allowing you and your partner to weather the storms...turn to other people...a quick fix. Just jump into bed with someone else and WOW aren't we both happy. Again...I call BS on this. Open marriage is not an "enlightened form of love" it is a delusional and self indulgent form of love. I agree that people need other relationships in their lives. This is why we have friends...children...parents...and a community to spread our love to. I think that this is a high form of disrespect to another person's feelings...and IS NOT a zen like higher love form. ANYONE can sleep with others...anyone can seek comfort outside of their marriage...don't try to tell me that those in open marriages are somehow more open to love and somehow on a higher level then the rest of us. Again, I call BS.
  • ll1969's avatar ll1969 wrote:

    2010-04-08 12:40 PM

    It's symptomatic of our drive-thru generation...the "me mentality" of I want it all, I want it now, and if it requires hard work, forget it. It's much easier to turn to another partner to satisfy something missing from a relationaship than it is to face the problem and work on it. It is so sad...and it's ridiculous to suggest this behaviour is to be admired.
  • Cityslicker73's avatar Cityslicker73 wrote:

    2010-04-08 1:09 PM

    The article has some shortcomings but if it were longer it'd be a novel. People are shoulding all over themselves here. I hope everyone gets that :) The negative, guilt driven people take themselves and their values way too seriously. Values are flexible it's those who defend them that are not. Ever hear of polarized thinking? Check it out, the world is not White and Black and our values as a society need to reflect that. Here's the meaning off "Should" is most commonly used to make recommendations or give advice. It can also be used to express obligation as well as expectation. Anyone can look it up. I've never liked should can you tell? Remove should from your vocabularies because it is a word that sets us up for failure because we all never do what we should all the time, do we? If we fail once are we a failure for life? No! Learn your vocabulary well so you can express yourself well and not have to use should in guilt driven way. If you have an obligation use the words "I have an obligation or a commitment" and that is a commitment between you and whomever you may wish to share that with, not anyone else. People who have a commitment or obligation to one another can change it as they see fit with whom they see fit.
  • Cityslicker73's avatar Cityslicker73 wrote:

    2010-04-08 1:09 PM

    We are creatures capable of rapid changes like nothing else on this planet so we are also capable of changing our feelings and values as I think God could be of changing his. Since he supposedly created us in his image then we are as flawed as he is. When was the last time the bible was changed? Probably when it was translated or adopted by different countries or religious sects, wait I think a new religion was created yesterday. If anyone likes the way the bible was written 2000 years ago try living like the people did back then or move to wear it was written, I guarantee it won't be easy hebrew is a tough language to learn and that's the language it was written in, anything else does not have the same meaning. I agree with the love and trust element of the argument being that is what matters most in being good people, good families and uniting us all. Isn't that the purpose hear? Sounds like some unconventional undistracted people are working towards that goal, are you?
  • Cityslicker73's avatar Cityslicker73 wrote:

    2010-04-08 1:15 PM

    May all of the hypocrites never go through a drive thru or use a self serve vending machine again, lol.
  • Silverfish's avatar Silverfish wrote:

    2010-04-08 1:29 PM

    Marriage is a commitment and also involves finances and property. The thing about an open-marriage is how to set boundaries. It might be fine with the couple to step into a sexual relationship with others outside of their marriage but if the sexual friendship extends to finances and personal properties then the marriage is in trouble. There are very many skilled individuals (male and female alike) who may pretend to love someone for the sake of expecting some financial reward or some form of financial compensation (gigolos for men and gold diggers for women). How would you know if the person you involved with sexually outside of your marriage suddenly wanted some financial compensation or wants part of his or her lover's property for spending years of sex and companionship with your wife or husband? These people even acquire lawyers to pursue this cause. This also happens if there is a big age gap between sexual partners. And in today's modern world there are relationships with men and women who decades apart (10, 20 even 30 years their senior or junior).
  • bobtay's avatar bobtay wrote:

    2010-04-08 4:10 PM

    After a career in as a cop, I wonder if polyamory is being used as a label to avoid the word adultery, just as we use shoplifting to avoid the word theft as if it makes it less of an offence. Certainly it is a breach of a commitment made, usually in front of family and friends. That raises my first point, in the instances quoted, are the families of those involved aware of the other partners and if so what do they think? In Maureen's case I wonder really what her response would be if David decided that he was going to do the same as her. My own feeling is that what she says, and likely even thinks she would do, might turn out very different in fact. I would ask Maureen whether Wil has the same freedom sexually as David ie birth control, safe sexual contact etc. If so, as her children were born after the relationship started, how does she or David know who fathered the children and how does David know that he is not raising one or more of Wil's bastard children. Also how does he know that he isn't at risk for a sexually transmitted disease, becasuse we know that Wil has at least one girlfriend in his home area, but do we know that it is only one and lets face it, when you sleep with a partner you sleep with everybody that partner has slept with. Those are just a few points that would have to be answered before entering into an open marraige
  • EffectingAChange's avatar EffectingAChange wrote:

    2010-04-08 4:59 PM

    I think this is disgusting, and a mockery of the definition of marriage in the first place! Marriage is to make promises of MONOGAMY. If you do NOT want to be monogamous, do NOT get married! I am all for people practicing what they believe in, in their personal lives. But this is pathetic, and against everything that marriage stands for. If you wish to be intimate with more than one person - do NOT get married, simple as that. And I don't even want to hear any crap about financial benefits, because in Canada, we have common-law marriage, which is assumed after a period of time living together. You would still have rights! Its HILARIOUS considering the documents signed, in order to obtain a marriage license, implicitly states, under no uncertain terms the relationship is to be monogamous. I mean - do you have ANY idea what kind of legal ramifications could arise should partners decide they DO want a divorce, and there is no proof that the 'affair' was agreed to? You could be knee-deep in you know what! This is insanity! Want to be involved in a poly-union? FINE....but don't make a mockery of an institution that so many of us take so seriously and hold so closely to our hearts. It is OFFENSIVE and DISRESPECTFUL.
  • Hughes's avatar Hughes wrote:

    2010-04-08 5:58 PM

    Yeah sure, 40 something curvy chics can get a young hunk of 25 something and have the best of both worlds. The older 45 something dude that has more financial stability and 25 something dude that has more virility and manhood in bed. What the older man cannot quench the younger dude will. This is the era 'plyamory'. Works wonders in winters in our lovely land!
  • Katblues's avatar Katblues wrote:

    2010-04-08 8:43 PM

    Canuckchik I think you are delusional. How does the act of your partner with another woman not make you jealous? Maybe she's a better lay than you are and he thinks of her every time you are together. Perhaps it turns you on sexually to know that he is freely getting it on with another woman and then that makes you responsive and wakes up your sex. Hardly spiritually satisfying...it's back to the same old sharing. Chocolate covered sh*t in my opinion. Life should be alot more meaningful than that. Giving into satisfying your partners sexual needs with another is giving up in my opinion. A prime example of people who do not have the mental fortitude and capacity to feed their minds and try! It is rewarding to be able to look back and say that you knew how to please your partners needs by yourself and that you had a spiritually satisfying relationship as a couple. Why is that not good enough for you?
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-08 9:01 PM

    These sexual "fads" regularly come and go. This puts me in mind of the keyclubs, during the 60's. There is something sullying (and creepy) about the whole concept. One could actually not know whether one was, indeed, *infected* by the others' aberrent behaviour. It would be imperative, IMO, that the lot be regularly tested for STD's. How can one know that such arrangements are truly confined to only one or two others? How can one trust other people's sexual history and habits, which are so often downplayed and well hidden? I so concur with Bobtay's and EffectingAChange's posts. Not only does this strike me as being completely unethical and risky, it smacks of naivete.
  • LAURIEJ2010's avatar LAURIEJ2010 wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:18 PM

    Your article is pathetic. I do not believe that "jealousy, possessiveness and insecurity" are a part of why women or men would not want an "open marriage" marriage is about commitment, trust and honesty. That being said, for those who feel they must participate in multiple sex partners hey all the more power to them. However, I do not believe that you should insult those who do not agree with this type of behaviour. Perhaps you -the one- who wrote this article is attempting to justify the actions of yourself or your partner because either you or both have stepped outside of the bedroom with other partners. Don't make other people feel bad to make yourself feel good honey! Laurie
  • LAURIEJ2010's avatar LAURIEJ2010 wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:23 PM

    Im sorry but as a social science and psych major in university I can't help but see through this article. The author I believe is writing about her own experience. Things do not add up about the story she told. Go back and re-read it. Laurie
  • 41_woman's avatar 41_woman wrote:

    2010-04-08 11:39 PM

    I am all for the idea of 'open marriage'...I would love to see the stats on how many people cheat...but that is never going to happen! I would also love to know how many couples make it through a marriage being completely monogamous for life...let's get real!! It's unrealistic! But unfortunately, most people, women more than men, can't handle the idea of an open-marriage, and if both parties are not into it completely it will never work.
  • Lando's avatar Lando wrote:

    2010-04-09 12:11 AM

    Curvymom wrote " I haven't found anyone worth giving up this lifestyle for" This kinda contradicts your arguement, sounds like you are just lonely and passing time, and your love bird friends are a great distraction. which is all great if you can handle mediocrity in your love life. I hope that you find that special someone. Now unrelated to Curvymom: I think that all we can truly control is ourselves and our choices I can't judge any side it is futile and a waste of energy. I personally do not believe in marriage it is just a paper to me and I am from a solid home my parents happily married till death do they part. My point being that there is so many influences that children face in this big world to help mould their belief systems, marriage is not the only thing to do this, sounds like some of you may be pushing your views on to your children and I hope that you will one day support what ever decisions they make without the judgements you all write here...
  • Lando's avatar Lando wrote:

    2010-04-09 12:12 AM

    Cont... I am not married nor want to be, I am in a relationship that is monogamous and full of love. If at some point things change and no amount of work can solve things. I will then be single and enjoy not being monogamous and I will be honest about it. Both being single and being in a relationship have pros and cons to both sides. That is why this is such a debate in the first place. I will say cheating or deceiving is the same as lying, so I have to respect anyone who is honest to their partner or partners. I think everyone should hear honesty and have the choice to live the way they so choose. The partners in these open relationships at least have can have a choice to be involved which is more than I can say for all those that are lying to their significant other and pretending to be monogomous. Grab a back bone and be honest. And can people stop bringing the bible in to back up an arguement, grabbing a few lines here and there to judge and control other belief systems how perfect! hasn't religion caused enough wars in the world! anyways I know what works for ME and no one can really know that answer except ME! So to all Married, Kinda Married and Single... Play safe emotionally and sexually and no matter how hard it is DO NOT LIE to yourself or others.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-09 5:06 AM

    Yes, I believe there are several articles at this site which are written in the third, instead of the first, person.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-09 1:52 PM

    Part 1 Wow, that article was so wrong in so many ways. Like many of you I also long for days past when traditional values meant something. I miss the days where the vows you took were a bond never to be broken. I miss the days where I could beat my wife if she got out of line. I miss the days where women stayed home, couldn't vote and were not allowed to have an opinion. Give your damn heads a shake people. A huge part of the reason this lifestyle is taking off is because we as a people are gaining knowledge, growing, learning that the dogma that has been drilled into our heads is just that, garbage. Science killed God. Get over it! Some of you call it selfish, I say that to demand that my partner’s happiness only be allowed to come from me is selfish. Insecurity is the only reason I can see that I could be jealous seeing my partner happy and enjoying her life.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-09 1:53 PM

    Part 2 From what I read here it would seem that the only reason to have more than one child is that you figured you didn't get it right the first time so let’s try again. Having a second child MUST mean that you don't love the first because you CAN'T love more than one person. We live in a day and age where divorce is at an all time high. What’s changed? We now have the access to information and a greater world view that’s what’s changed. Knowledge and information. Did anyone ever stop to think that the reason divorce is so prominent these days is not a lack of respect for marriage as an institution but finally an educated population that has figured out that marriage (in its traditional sense) just doesn't work anymore? Lets face it, marriage in its traditional sense is simply a man made control measure, men over women. A man has to know that his off spring are actually his and he also can’t allow her to see that another male may have a bigger penis than his (in effect allowing her to see or be stolen by a "true" alpha male). Traditionally and even to this day in parts of the world a male will have many affairs and that’s fine and good but if a woman does even once she can be killed.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-09 1:54 PM

    Part 3 I've been in vanilla relationships. The biggest thing I have found is how easy it is to take for granted. I'm a talker, a communicator. It blows me away how many people talk the talk but don't know how (or don't care) to walk the walk. My partner and I talk about everything (and yes, our open relationship has had a few bumps in the road). We don't get defensive, we don't get mad, we talk and we work it out. That just does not happen in my past vanilla relationships. It’s easy to just push it down and ignore. My open relationship FORCES us to communicate and not take for granted ...I’m kinda happy about that. Or maybe, just maybe our ability to communicate is what allows us to enjoy our open relationship because we DO care about the others happiness (as much as our own) and just maybe it’s our UNSELFISH nature that makes it work. Or maybe we are just more enlightened than those that choose to believe the brainwashing that has told them what is required of them and how they should act and feel.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-09 1:58 PM

    For the record, God died 24 November 1859. Just so ya know.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-09 4:03 PM

    Part 4 So go on you "traditionalists", go back to your fairy tales, go back to your fantasies, go back to your high divorce rates, go back to your fears and insecurities, go back to your dogma. Enjoy your hypocrisy as you flirt with the girl at the coffee shop on your way to work every morning or as you masturbate to the porn you hide from your wife.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-10 8:39 AM

    Wait until the fad fades, HS. I suspect you will be left bereft, as usual, slightly more tainted and stained, yet angrier, perhaps, than previously, or now. A communicator? Your post fails to convey this strength that you tout, about yourself, according to your post.
  • Hot Shot's avatar Hot Shot wrote:

    2010-04-10 10:45 AM

    Jyli, its far from a fad. Information is power. Its a movement thats growing and growing. The problem has always been narrow minded people making those of us who choose a different path feel isolated and fear for our jobs and our status in the community much the same as homosexuals did (and still do at times). With the growth of the internet (again, information and knowledge is power) we have been able to discover that we are NOT alone and have been able to build a community. This will only grow. My original post conveyed anger, no doubt about it. Read back through other posts. Discriminations is still alive and well. From people opposed to alternative choices there is very little "live and let live", there is often just attacks and hate.
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-11 7:54 PM

    One needn't be purely out in left field, or else purely traditional. Neither appeals to me. Of course information is power. I don't see what information or power have to do, specifically, with your lifestyle choice. It is not a new concept but I still consider it to be faddish as it blooms, then wilts, like so many other fads.
  • agoodbadhabit's avatar agoodbadhabit wrote:

    2010-04-15 11:41 AM

    The term "marriage" covers a lot of things. Khym and I only got officially married for economic and legal reasons; our relationship did not need the state's stamp of approval. From the beginnning of that relationship, though, we'd always had the understanding that monogamy was *not* a requirement for our relationship. Honesty, however, was. We were married for almost 15 years before either of us acted on that understanding. It wasn't a matter of boredom, or something lacking that led to the actual opening of our relationship, it was simply opportunity; we'd met like-minded folks and decided to give it a try. Five-plus years later we're still together, stronger than ever, and we've made some wonderful relationships with others to boot. Love is infinite; only time is not. cheers, Matt
  • Jyli's avatar Jyli wrote:

    2010-04-15 3:52 PM

    Sorry, I simply can't get in the groove(s) of group promiscuity. One can bet that when intimately involving other couples, they too have involved other couples, and on and on it goes. You are, therefore, "sleeping" with everyone else's partners' "infestations." I value both my health and life, too much. Too many have STD's, either life threatening, or not. Besides, it just isn't ethical, in my mind. Besides which, the topic, here, has gone cold. Time to move on to something else.
  • agoodbadhabit's avatar agoodbadhabit wrote:

    2010-04-15 5:09 PM

    @Jyli- Your values are yours, and I won't criticize your personal orientation; I'd appreciate reciprocation. And yes, STDs are a concern, just as they are for everyone else. I've got 17 years working for a nonprofit reproductive healthcare provider and STDs are *far* from unknown among the nominally monogamous married community. Honest communication, safe sex, and routine testing are small prices to pay for pursuing our non-traditional relationship.
  • noregrets's avatar noregrets wrote:

    2010-04-25 5:03 PM

    I am a single female who has become involved with a polyamorous male. The relationship started out as friendship and has turned into something kind and loving. His partner of many years knows he is polyamorous and aware of our relationship. It hasn't been until recently he made me aware of his polyamory nature. At first I felt betrayed he had not shared this with me at the start of our relationship.I have spent many sleepless nights trying to figure it all out.The situation has made me face insecurities, fears and feelings I haven't dealt with before. I know I have grown enough to realize there is no right or wrong relationship. We have to decide what works for us. I have this wonderful,kind,amazing,loving person in my life and an open mind. So no regrets.
  • oneofakind63's avatar oneofakind63 wrote:

    2010-05-12 10:26 PM

    .Jill is kidding herself.I have way to many married male friends who have or are thinking of leaving their wives.Usually when a man starts looking at other women or vice a versa its because they are dissatisfied in some way in their relationship..Not necessarily just with the sex. Maybe because he felt needed? Maybe because jill was not paying attention to him? And its only now that she is missing him when he is no longer available..? I think jill is playing with fire and would not be surprised if she just lost her marriage. .When a marriage starts out we all turn down many people we find attractive because we are more attracted to our spouses but after years of verbal or being lonely or misunderstood or abused, that is when both sexes will find it easier to turn to someone else for satisfaction. I think that if your relationship has come down to turning to others for sex then its pretty much over. I hear from both women and men that are no longer attracted to their spouses that the only reasons they stay are for the kids or money or not to lose the house ext..In this kind of relationship then if both partys are in agreement then why not...its over anyway they are living like brother and sister..But to take a good marriage and start playing with fire is a silly mistake....Most people will only play until they find the one they want to leave you for...
  • talking_Janet's avatar talking_Janet wrote:

    2010-05-27 2:06 PM

    An open marriage can obviously work judging by some of the comments here. I’d suggest that not only do couples talk about what is okay or not relationship and sex-wise, but also ensure they are practicing safer sex and getting tested for STIs: www.youshouldknow.ca
Leave a comment

* marked fields are required.

You must be logged in to leave a comment.

Send to a friend

* marked fields are required.

MyMore

Welcome, please log in, register or preview.

Subscribe

Partners

Contests

Search Locally

weblocal.ca
Find Local Businesses
Find Local Businesses: