|
|
Post by shamwow on Jun 15, 2017 10:46:28 GMT -5
Last December she went off ape shit style on me, asking what I thought our pastor would think about my behavior. She has more respect for our pastor than she does me. I swear, if she ever drags me in for a counseling session with him, I'm going to float the idea that we swap partners until he accepts or kicks us out. I'm not a cuck. I want an even trade. But I think it might help my wife to get the bone from someone she respects. Even more importantly, last summer he preached a sermon on sex, and declared that Christian married sex was the best sex ever. I want him to experience the corpse fuck I deal with and hear his take on what Christian married sex is like for me. Their pairing is a win-win for me, and I get some strange, too. What an awesome experience. I just don't see any down side. What's the upside of marriage in the scenario you are suggesting? From other posts, a stable environment for the kids and not chopping the assets of the marital estate in half. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 15, 2017 10:54:28 GMT -5
Our couples' counselor suggested open marriage the second to last counseling session when I admitted out loud (again, but with a third party present) that once-a-month marital sex life was simply a deal breaker for me. It kind of baffled me that he suggested it - his ideas are a little complicated emotionally (IMHO) for my husband to grasp. I had read so much about it on here, that even in the past when I had asked for as much, I have come around to the thinking that it would be a hollow replacement for what I really want. And even though I am not necessarily emotionally invested in the marriage, save the children, I would guess his dalliances would infuriate me too. I recognize that I would not be emotionally mature enough to handle that. The last counseling session, I admitted I don't care if this works out. We opted for husband to do individual counseling with our couple's' counselor first and we discontinued our couple's' counseling. Sex since, has been devoid of emotion on my part. A place I never thought I was able to get to - but, here I am. My guess is - open marriage will fix the physical issue for many. I simply cannot separate passion and love from the equation, so it would not work for me. Sometimes, a clever counselor suggests an avenue that's intended to reframe an issue in which thinking is stuck in a rut. It might not be that he thinks it's a great idea for you to open the marriage, but rather to shift the burden of consequence to even the load. As a partner to someone who isn't romantically invested in you, you carry the greater burden. Filibustering on that issue benefits your partner's goal, which is to extend the relationship and whatever benefits it brings him, while you carry the emotional burden of his rejection of you. Let me assure you that watching your partner put on make-up and get dressed to go out with someone else on a night that might end up in sex - is an intense experience. Simply posing the open relationship as a possibility introduces the idea that his non-participation is an active choice, rather than a default state that you are bothering him to change. If he doesn't want you, other guys will - and he needs to choose what he feels about that. It's a test of his conviction, designed to clearly show that it's not just that he doesn't want to fuck you, it's also that he doesn't want you to fuck anyone either. It's designed to switch the discussion from monogamy to one of celibacy - which is a more authentic description. It's a gambit designed to bring the pimple to a head. I note, as above, that many open marriages include passion and eventually love. In the open relationship world, just as in the normal dating world, people rarely cannonball straight into LOVE before they have sex - it arrives or doesn't on its own eventually - but it's certainly not uncommon to have love and passion within a non-monogamous relationship. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 15, 2017 10:59:22 GMT -5
What's the upside of marriage in the scenario you are suggesting? From other posts, a stable environment for the kids and not chopping the assets of the marital estate in half. Are you suggesting that the environment is stable? This is going to end in one of three ways: stay living miserably, or until she discovers somehow that she is actually into you. outsource - either transparently or not leave. Which do you think has the highest likelihood? |
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Jun 15, 2017 11:00:00 GMT -5
Yes. Maybe, just maybe, if she got ONE GOOD EXPERIENCE, she'd bring that back to me and say "this is what I like." On the other hand, maybe connecting like that with a guy she's into and having a poor experience would give her an appreciation for me.
I'm the only dick she's ever had.
Before her, I'd had a girlfriend that was twenty years older than me, and an athlete, and equally insatiable to me. I wanted a family, though. I would not trade my kids for all the hot sex on earth, but, some things she said that I ignored now ring in my head.
|
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 15, 2017 11:07:37 GMT -5
Yes. Maybe, just maybe, if she got ONE GOOD EXPERIENCE, she'd bring that back to me and say "this is what I like." On the other hand, maybe connecting like that with a guy she's into and having a poor experience would give her an appreciation for me. I'm the only dick she's ever had. Before her, I'd had a girlfriend that was twenty years older than me, and an athlete, and equally insatiable to me. I wanted a family, though. I would not trade my kids for all the hot sex on earth, but, some things she said that I ignored now ring in my head. Well, I can tell you I learned a lot about what I like and how I am based on my positive (and some negative) sexual experiences with others. There's certainly something to that. And what you said is close to Mrs Apocrypha's rationale for pitching an open relationship - she said she had trouble finding her own sexuality because it was always defined in opposition to mine. (not quite true - given that it wasn't always this way - she chased me for years at the beginning of our relationship and was assertive sexually). I'd be inclined to be optimistic with what she said if not for the fact that she's not just indifferent to you. She's averse to you. As in, it's important enough for her NOT to have sex with you that she is willing to bet the marriage and the shared assets on it. As much as you are trying hard to NOT put that on the line, she is very aware that it IS on the line - and she's still not banging you. That's how strongly she feels - it's not indifference. So, again, what's marriage bringing to it? She doesn't need your involvement to choose a more appropriate mate for her than yourself. That's her labour, not your responsibility. And that's ALWAYS her option, and yours. You are always choosing marriage over that. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Jun 15, 2017 11:23:17 GMT -5
I don't think she'll make a move like that on her own. I like your line about the pimple.
|
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 15, 2017 11:31:41 GMT -5
I don't think she'll make a move like that on her own. I like your line about the pimple. Just keep in mind that what goes for "I'm leaving you" also goes for "I've got a date next Friday." You will either go on that date or you won't. The statement of your intention will either carry a consequence or not. |
|
|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Jun 15, 2017 12:46:06 GMT -5
Absolutely LUST vs. LOVE - An open marriage / swinging life style just seems saturated and driven by lust - that cures the animal side of things - but seems to me - does nothing for the LACK of INTIMACY. On top that - as I recall the Swingers have higher HIV / STD risks than even going to a "Professional" . Lastly, getting an affair partner or going to swingers seems to me at best a "coping mechanism" fixing symptoms but the CAUSE and continued suffering is still there - being in a sexless / loveless / intimacy-less marriage. Maybe that is OK for some - it would not be for me - I too cannot separate fantastic dynamite sex with PASSION and LOVE - otherwise it is a porno and shallow and animalistic - I am more than an animal and love has a spiritual side too that needs feeding. And to be clear none of these comments I make are on "Morality" grounds - other than the morality of reducing suffering in one's life and the pursuit of happiness and greater spiritual satisfaction. If by chance, pure lust is all you need, then my hat is off to you. Given that most of your statements - based on my own experience within the community - are incorrect, and I gather, not based on your own experience with the matter, I am having a tough time accepting that your comments are made on any other basis than your personal social mores. There are many types of open marriages. In my personal experience, and what I've seen, love, care and affection most certainly does enter the equation, as does lust. I find it ironic that in a a group devoted to lamenting the lack of sexual expression within a loving relationship (or that hopes to create a sexual relationship where none exists), to see a post that poses "lust" in opposition to "love" as one of two choices, with "love" as the better of the two. This is the rationalization of my formerly celibate ex-wife, in framing the dilemma of whether to continue the relationship. Having an open relationship does not mean that one is promiscuous - any more than being bisexual means you are going to sleep with half the town. When I was married and open, I slept with two people in 2 years - my wife and my girlfriend. Since I've been single, post divorce, I've slept with quite a few more than that in the same time frame. THAT is "normal" though. Before I dipped my toe in those waters, I researched heavily, and my research indicated that the open relationship crowd generally does NOT have a higher STD/HIV risk, unless you are parsing the data to include gay men. The subset of the non-monogamous crowd called swingers - has a stringent culture of safer sex. Re: "going to swingers" : You don't "go to a swinger" the way you pay a pro. Generally speaking, it's not much different trying to get with a swinger (ESPECIALLY AS A SINGLE MAN) as it is with anyone else. You have to talk and get to know them. They need to think you are attractive. They have to like you - they will have many choices. The bullshit assumption that because a woman is hanging out in a swing club that you can just walk up and she's good to go with you - really doesn't fly well. I doubt any swingers are trying to kick down your door to get with you - am I wrong? To put it in perspective, I've been to general vanilla nightclub/danceclubs, and I've been to swing clubs that had dancing, and consistently - every single time - my partner was treated with more respect, care and agency at the swing club. At the dance club, I had to tell her she needed to handle the number of guys trying to get with her at least partly on her own, or I would end up being in multiple fistfights. The idea that what other people do is shallow or animalistic - as you portray it comes off to me as sanctimonious, and more importantly - largely incorrect. There might be some people - even lots - that are having animalistic, rutting sex - but you know what? There's nothing wrong with that either. Frankly I could have used a bit of that in my marriage from time to time. There's nothing wrong with having, expressing, and satisfying an appetite. And sharing that experience with someone can be just as much an onramp to a more fulsome emotional investment as anything else. Sanctimonious passive-aggressive piffle. You sound exactly like my ex-wife playing the victim by posing her "higher love" against "sex" and acting hurt that I've chosen unwisely in her false dilemma. Your "hat" is not off - you are calling him an animal and you might as well call everyone on this board the same. We will agree to disagree. Yes "lust" is also built into "love" and there is such a thing as "polyamorous" I do not doubt the sincerity of your comments. Swinger clubs (i.e., those that frequent swinger clubs) DO have higher STD rates than the average population. I give you last word if you want it (I say no more on this) I congratulate you on your love life and making the best out of difficult marriage. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 16, 2017 9:58:37 GMT -5
Swinger clubs (i.e., those that frequent swinger clubs) DO have higher STD rates than the average population. I give you last word if you want it (I say no more on this) I congratulate you on your love life and making the best out of difficult marriage. Some data: It’s important to understand how to read comparative data to establish a baseline. Whenever looking at sociological data, it’s helpful to add, “compared to what?” -Are the data being compared to the general adult population? -Is the sample clustered appropriately - for example - "swingers" have different habits than "polyamorous" people. One generally involves a more specific kind of activity than the other. -Are they comparing Consensually non-monogamous (CNM) people to monogamous? What behaviors are driving disparities? For example, CNM are often compared to monogamous married couples. Notwithstanding NON-Consenual non-monogamy (cheating), it should follow that CNM groups – especially swingers or polyamorous people ARE SEXUALLY ACTIVE and more aptly compared to singles than those in a monogamous longterm sexual relationship. That is, follow a non-married person's serial monogamy across a period of a year or two, and it’s likely comparable to the dating resume of a CNM couple. Whereas a long term monogamous couple – isn't going outside the primary pairbond at all, and may not even be sexually active with each other. So, OF COURSE the rate of STD will be higher in a group that is active sexually simply as a consequence of having more than one partner (notwithstanding cheating). You would get the same result from comparing a single person who dates monogamously in serial to a longtime married couple (providing neither married partner cheats). The difference doesn't come from the "swing clubs". It comes from being active sexually. How much is that difference? I've cited it below on an often misquote Dutch study - 2%. That's it. ---- Buzzfeed’s article cites a number of studies on the matter. www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/monogamy-swingers-stds-sex?utm_term=.pxyAAZ4zaY#.xeGPPN5Yy7Now, if we are going to widen the perspective to look at habits of swingers vs monogamously married couples as a whole, the data offer a counterintuitive point: “Reported in the current Journal of Sexual Medicine, the survey of 554 people found that monogamous couples are less likely to use condoms and get tested for STDs — even when they're not being faithful to their partner. “It turns out that when monogamous people cheat, they don’t seem to be very good about using condoms,” Justin Lehmiller, a psychologist at Ball State University and author of the study, told BuzzFeed News by email. “People in open relationships seem to take a lot of precautions to reduce their sexual health risks.” The Lehmiller Studyonlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsm.12987/abstractCNM partners reported taking more precautions than those in monogamous relationships in terms of greater condom use during intercourse with all partners and a higher likelihood of STI testing. Thus, although persons in CNM relationships had more sexual partners, the precautions they took did not appear to elevate their rate of STIs above an imperfect implementation of monogamy. Lehmiller JJ. A comparison of sexual health history and practices among monogamous and consensually nonmonogamous sexual partners. J Sex Med 2015;12:2022–2028. One in four of the 351 monogamous-relationship participants in Lehmiller’s survey said they had cheated on their partners, similar to rates of sexual infidelity reported in other surveys. About 1 in 5, whether monogamous or not, reported they had been diagnosed with an STD. Participants averaged between 26 to 27 years old, and most (70%) were women. This was replicated in the larger Conley study --- The Conley study
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02712.x/abstract“Terri Conley, a professor of psychology and women’s studies at the University of Michigan who studies polyamory, has analyzed a sample of 1,700 monogamous individuals, 150 swingers, 170 people in open relationships, and 300 polyamorous individuals for a forthcoming study. She said that while people in “open relationships” tend to have lower sexual satisfaction than their monogamous peers, people who described themselves as “polyamorous” tended to have equal or higher levels of sexual satisfaction.” “Perhaps most obviously, people who have permission to “cheat”—that is, through a planned, non-monogamous arrangement—are more likely to use condoms and have frequent STI tests than clandestine cheaters are. Unfaithful Individuals are Less Likely to Practice Safer Sex Than Openly Nonmonogamous Individuals, Authors, Terri D. Conley, Amy C. Moors, Ali Ziegler, Constantina Karathanasis, 29 March 2012 ------ Here is the Dutch study that was widely misreported, which likely lead to the notion that swingers are disease-ridden. Note the sample selection: healthland.time.com/2010/06/23/a-swingers-risk-of-sexually-transmitted-infections/Sexually Transmitted Infections journal looked at about 9,000 patients who visited three sexual health clinics in South Limburg in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2008. It found that a full 12% of patients admitted to being swingers — ah, Europe! — and that 10.4% of these patients were diagnosed with either gonorrhea, Chlamydia or both. Female swingers were more likely to be infected than their male counterparts. This compares with infection rates of 14% among gay men, 10% in straight people and just under 5% in female prostitutes. (Prostitution is legal and regulated in the Netherlands.) The sample was chosen from p eople seeking examinations and treatment at sexual health clinics. This circumstance predisposes the sample toward a higher than general incidence of STI. After all, why would a married couple even visit a sexual health clinic? These are people either seeking treatment after seeing symptoms, or - as we have noted in the other two studies - we are seeing the result of the higher than normal amount of diligence that the CNM crowd engages in. Even so, the rate of STI is only 2% over the general “straight” population of non-identified swingers seeking treatment. We are talking about a difference of 2%. In news stories, I’ve seen some of the sample in this study being reported incorrectly as if it is indicative of the general population of swingers, when in fact it is a general sample of people seeking treatment in a sexual health clinic.
That's quite a big error. It would be like sampling the ailments in a hospital emergency room and concluding that 20% of Americans have broken limbs. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jun 16, 2017 10:19:08 GMT -5
I really like and agree with DryCreek and Apocrypha on this thread. I recall an earlier thread on open-marriage, and a comment of mine there. I looked it up; here is a snippet: Outsourcing secretly is a TEMPORARY relief where there is not yet the interest or ability to move forward with a divorce. Similarly, outsourcing in an open marriage is a viable "solution" only if there is a mutual agreement that "this marriage is worth continuing". (You don't HAVE to agree on the "why it is worth continuing"... just that it is.) If you'd like, check out that full post and its thread. (Click on the datestamp to take you to the post from which this is quoted. Did you know you can do that?) |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 16, 2017 10:30:58 GMT -5
I'm going to write a post on my thoughts on what I saw among the successful couples who had an open marriage, and I'll try to be more more specific than "strong marriage" - offering some more practical description.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 16, 2017 18:37:00 GMT -5
Brother Apocrypha often makes this - key - point about sexuality in regard to a relationship. Your spouse is either (a) - attracted to you sexually (b) - indifferent to you sexually (c) - averse to you sexually If your spouse is attracted to you sexually, you have a good shot at having a robust sexual life. If your spouse is sexually indifferent to you, your chances of having a robust sexual life with them are minimal. About as good as any random stranger walking down the street. If your spouse is averse to you sexually, there is no chance of you having any sort of sexual life with them. Your chances here are actually WORSE than the chances of a random stranger walking down the street. The application of this, in an open marriage scenario (with the participants having an ILIASM shithole common background) is that if you are going to have a robust sexual experience, it ain't going to be with your indifferent or avoidant spouse. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2017 16:19:48 GMT -5
I cant imagine us in an open marriage. She says that she has no sex drive. If that is true then she would not need an open marriage. I need a half open marriage. How could any of us deal with our spouse, who denies us sex, having sex with anyone else?  |
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Jun 19, 2017 1:21:40 GMT -5
I was just talking with a kinkster friend. He does know of one guy with a sexless marriage, where the wife is cool with an open arrangement. She seeks out nothing, but, she is well aware that he has a girlfriend and is cool with it. He's retired with a pension. She's not about to reduce her standard of living to fight a battle she cannot win.
I doubt my LL wife would be so accomodating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 19, 2017 10:32:03 GMT -5
I cant imagine us in an open marriage. She says that she has no sex drive. If that is true then she would not need an open marriage. I need a half open marriage. How could any of us deal with our spouse, who denies us sex, having sex with anyone else? I went through that in several forms. First with her affair. Then later, within the context of an open marriage for a shorter period. It should be noted that my "no sex drive" wife was the one who had the affair. She justified it to herself ethically at the time as "she was trying to find her sex drive again, so as to save the marriage." Ah, the levels of bullshit we tell ourselves and each other. Once out of the fog of being invested in a dysfunctional relationship, a lot of this bullshit becomes clear. As it turns out - quite often - the lack of sex drive is specific to a person or to a marital context. |
|
