Would you ever consider being in an open relationship so long as you have to tell the other person and you have to be safe about it?

[FreeThinking]

So I've attempted many times to convince guys that want to date me that we should have an open relationship. That way if he wants to fuck another girl he can so long as he's safe and gets checked every time afterwards (as would I) but they always turn me down for the idea or randomly decide they want to be monogamous... some of them even cheated on me afterwards which I don't understand because they had the opportunity to be able to do that but they declined! So, would you go for this idea or do you think I'm just a loner here?

[Rawrzz]

I personally believe that polyamorous relationships are the most stable. A significant decrease in the likelihood of the relationship ending in murder/suicide. And that is simply human nature. It is not natural to be monogamous--to only have sex with one person forever. Geese are "monogamous". They choose one mate, ever, and even if it dies, they don't get a new one. Technically, humans are "serial monogamists". I think that term is a joke, because "serial monogamy" is much, much closer to polyamory than it is true monogamy. People expect their partner to be fully dedicated to them, then when they almost inevitably cheat, they get supremely hurt and outraged. It's like. Can we figure it out yet?

My ideal relationship is one where other girls are used as a supplement to fulfill my genetic semi-need for sexual variety along with additional companionship, with the "main girl" being an anchor which is always returned to and life is namely shared with. And same with her. I would want there to be a... sort of dedication still. I think that's most effective. So yes. I think it would be great to have a polyamorous relationship. However, I honestly don't know how I would react to it in the moment. I don't know if jealousy would be a factor, as I've never had a polyamorous relationship before. But even if it was, I think it would work out fine. I think it's more stable in the long run and ends up forming a much better, funner, and cohesive relationship.

But yes. Polyamorous individuals are a significantly lower percent of the population than monogamous ones; so, without some means of connecting with other polyarmous peoples, I think it's quite unlikely that you'll just randomly meet a guy willing to do that.

[BearsAnswers]

Yeah, I am in a polyamorous relationship right now. Have been for years. And have a lot of friends that are also in them. The tricky thing is that most people are unable to talk about it, so it becomes tricky to know who is and who isn't. The only ones you learn about are ones that attend lifestyle events and stuff. It can be a really stable, emotionally fulfilling relationship structure for those that are able to pull it off. It's a way to fully experience unconditional love, since you can remove that one giant condition of "I will love you if and only if you do not engage with sex with another person, regardless of how much happiness it will bring you as a person". That's a pretty big condition for some people. When you can feel that unconditional love, it's a pretty remarkable feeling.

[FreeThinking]

That's exactly what I'm looking for.

[BearsAnswers]

It's amazing when you get it to work. You just need to find the right people. Which is, admittedly, tricky. Feel free to PM me if you want to talk more about it.

[Girl_Scout]

Been there myself, can't stand the idea that you won't be exclusive then decide they want to fuck someone behind your back. Fucktards, that what they are. I suggest you look for a relationship like that in a place with people who have similar desires. Online dating, FetLife would be a good place to find people who do want that arrangement. Also look into polyamoury. Probably more fitting place to start than approaching regular encounters with such an idea. Most people cannot handle that kind of situation and don't want to be a part of such a set up.

[FreeThinking]

It's such a frustrating thing... know what you want or don't bother with me.

[Girl_Scout]

i think sometimes people want to get laid and think they can separate their feelings of emotional attachment and jealousy from a sexual encounter... but if you're looking in the general populus most guys are not going to be into this so you're setting yourself up for a fail. You need to be fishing in the right pond.

[SilenRose]

"some of them even cheated on me afterwards"
I've heard of this happening before. Those are just cheaters and it has nothing to do with an open relationship. They either want it all or just enjoy the taboo nature of cheating. One women suggested that her marriage be open with the only rule being she must approve of the women he wants to sleep with and vice versa. The husband couldn't even comply to the one rule.

Do you want an open relationship to avoid cheating or do you just like the idea of multiple partners?

[FreeThinking]

I like the idea of freedom. I like the idea that if I happen to desire to sleep with someone I'm free to do so so long as they aren't bad. And I feel like if I found the right person, they'd enjoy that freedom as well.

[SilenRose]

Okay. I see. Well good luck finding a guy who adheres to the rules and are excepting of it. Unfortunately I don't think you'll find a guy around your age mature enough to handle such an arrangement. (from what I've seen)

[FreeThinking]

I don't really consider age in my choosings of a mate. If we are compatible and they are able to keep up with my life and the things I want to do then I have no qualms.

[PrincessTashaaaa]

Well, being with a guy monogamously is like being in an open relationship anyway. What, with all their porn and long at other girls boobs.
Why be jealous anymore? Rather to scour the earth for someone I love enough to put up with, and enjoy an open relationship with them as long as they're not sticking it any diseased places.

[FreeThinking]

I want a relationship where we both can enjoy the pleasure of sex with other people but only have a relationship with each other.

[Victorianna]

I would never consider an open relationship. I am only interested in a mutual committed relationship. I would rather focus all my attention on one guy and give him my exclusive devotion.

[heywat]

Most people who think they'd like this end up resenting their partner. I'm the kind of girl who hates when my friends with benefits fucks another girl

[FreeThinking]

I never have resented them for it... only when they start demanding monogamy but they break the rules. Then I'm pissed

[Paris13]

"B" for Bad Boy.
I Never Respond to a guy on my dating site who Puts Down "In an open relationship." I was always under the assumption they either have someone whom they want to be in this with, along side of her, or is Looking to do Some Cooking with me on this end.
It is up to you, everyone is different. However, if you are Not into sharing, then this is Not an 'Open' topic for you. Even if you should Convince yourself it would work, tell it to your Heart from the Start.
Good luck. xx

[lumos]

No. I'm purely monogamous. There's no point in being in an open relationship, might as well just be single and fuck around, because that's essentially what an open relationship is.

[FreeThinking]

Not in my opinion but to each their own.

[vishna]

I wouldn't be down for that and neither would my partner. That's just not how we're wired/our culture.

[hellionthesage]

Why would you want an open relationship? That is literally just asking for the relationship to fail right from the start. I want something of substance personally and never understood why any one would want an open relationship, they almost always end in the dissolution of the relationship. In fact if a girl asked me that I would probably break up with her, obviously she is more interested in some one who isn't me so why bother with trying to have a serious relationship with her.

[FreeThinking]

You don't start dating and suggest it to be open. You start it open or not at all. That's what I want. I want both of us to be free. To do as we please and know that the love we share is beyond physical.

[hellionthesage]

Well if you loved the person so much why be with someone else? Why risk the jealousy the cheating (its actually suprisingly common in open relationships) the destruction of the relationship with the person you "love" all for physical pleasuer, a pleasuer that you can actually more easily acquire from them then some one else? The fact is the human body isn't designed for that. The brain releases oxytocin to create strong emotional bonds during sex, this is why cheating and the failure of the relationship is so common in open relationships, we are not built for it. I'm going to be blunt, you don't want to " To do as we please and know that the love we share is beyond physical." you want to do what you please, and thats all. You want to indulge any urge you may have and not be forced to restrain it. Thats all an open relationship is an attempt to get the best of both worlds of being promiscuis yet having the security of a relationship. It doesn't work, thats why we don't do it.

[FreeThinking]

#1 if you're going to be jealous, you shouldn't be in an open relationship and clearly we are not meant to be together because we cannot fill the others desires. #2 indulge in any urge? No. More like if my s/o is away on a business trip and (s) he happens to meet someone else and find them arousing, they can be free to indulge in that pleasure. As should I. However, if my s/o sister or brother tried coming onto me, that's a no because that's a rule. So it's not just Willy nilly, you're making it sounds so care free and dirty. You do it smart and safely and talk about it. #3 the oxytocin wears off fairly quickly, so if the bond is built around sex, once the sex gets old, it will break apart (hence the lust or love question of relationships) so unless the agreement is broken and you start trying to attain a deeper bond with someone else, no. That shouldn't be a serious problem.

[hellionthesage]

1. jealousy isn't controllable. It happens and it happens more frequently in open relationships this is something that is observablly true. 2. The fact that you need to set ground rules and rules for multiple scenarios and situations shows that its not really an effective system, this is why cheating in an open relationship is incredibly common and why most open relationships fall apart rather quickly. It is kind of dirty you are allowing some one into your primary relationship and help pry it apart. 3. Oxytocins affects do wear off, but they come on strong and last enough that it will result in the person having sex outside the primary relationship to begin developing feelings for the other non primary partner the reason why they have rules that state you can only be with a person a certain number of times, in the hopes of avoiding the attachment issue.(this is usually broken first resulting in cheating) This is why cheating is so common in open relationships.

[hellionthesage]

divorcehelp360.com/9-pitfalls-of-an-open-marriage/
www.psychologytoday.com/.../the-slippery-slope-open-marriage
just because it sounds nice in theory doesn't mean it will function that way in real life.

[Betwyn]

I've been in a couple..

but, they all seem to revolve around extenuating circumstances..

The ones that fared the best, were the LDR where our emotional was good.. but physical needs not being met...

and the ones where it played right into his fetish.

[ksoma]

An open relationship is a recipe for disaster, 9 times out of 10. I have no desire to sleep with other people (unless it was like a threesome, and it was someone we brought in, to share, together).
Now, there is an exception to this. If my girlfriend/wife was attracted to other women, but was threatened by bringing the women into our relationship as a threesome, or the woman she was into had no desire for a guy to be part of it, even just watching?
I do not feel my masculinity is threatened by her finding feminine comfort with other women. as long as i know who, and when, and it is the sort of thing we discussed before hand, I would be OK with it.
if i were to just walk in on her with another woman, though, and we had never talked about this? that would be the same as cheating. i would never cheat, i have no tolerance for being cheated on.

[FreeThinking]

Thanks for sharing

[justbanANNAz]

no never.

[AzureGirl]

I believe in commitment and being faithful to my SO in a relationship. Open relationships don't seem to be about that.

[Punkin45]

I don't expect men to be faithful so yeah... I'd probably let him if he was safe. Why pretend?

[caitlayninside]

id like it if you came back to me explaining all the detail of how he fucked you and what you liked and what you wish he did better and it would be my turn after you make me lick you out.

[JuicyBrain]

They are hypocrites. They want to sleep with other girls, but they don't want YOU to sleep with other guys...

[Berethor]

I see open relationship as not much better then friends with benefits, and not as truly an serious relationship. As someone who don't look for friends with benefits and one night stands, it's not for me.

Open relationship is still better then cheating behind the back but I am not okey with disloyalty and sluttiness in my relationship. As for only one side being disloyal, its not fair, but I am quite sure that most man would prefer to be one who allow to be with others and not the other way around.

tvtropes.org/.../MyGirlIsNotASlut

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MyGirlIsASlut

[FreeThinking]

How is it disloyal if it is honest and up front and agreed that it is happening? Seems you have a bit of possessive problems

[Berethor]

I am not saying that it's disloyal on the same level as cheating behind, and I said that already, but even the fact itself that both sides can go and have sex with other people is disloyal, and in the end of the day people in open relationship are acting almost as if they are single.

[FreeThinking]

That is not disloyalty. Disloyalty is where you failed to uphold an agreement. An oath if you will. If it is agreed, it is not disloyalty to do what is agreed upon

[Berethor]

Disloyalty is lack of faithfulness, and some one who is not sexualy faithful to his wife is not truly loyal to her, and that why I called it disloyalty and not cheating, in this case.

www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/disloyalty

[FreeThinking]

Faithful just means being true to your word. It does not mean "only having sex with you" if your word is not that, then having sex with someone else is being faithful. That link only proves it.

[FreeThinking]

Faithful means to have faith or to remain true. It does not mean you are only allowed to sleep with your significant other.

[Berethor]

Faithfulness has many meanings, and being true to the obligations that you make is only one of them. I want not saying that you break your word in open relationship, but even by not taking an obligation for being only with your partner, you are in pact have almost no loyalty to him, so open relationship is in fact very similar to friends with benefits.

[FreeThinking]

So does a knight have to have sex with a king to be completely loyal to him? Does a soldier have to have sex with his brothers in arms for them to have a deep connection and die for each other? No? Then why is it that in your mind, sex only between two people means complete loyalty?

[Berethor]

The relationship with an country leader and with brothers in arm is not based on sex at all, while an intimate relationship between man with an woman is based on sex for the most part, and so it's totally logical that an sexual loyalty also known as monogamy is an good indicator of loyalty in the relationship as whole. An knight is not specifically loyal to one king if he go and serve many other kings, while some of them or even all of them might be an rival kings, and for me those are rival kings.

[FreeThinking]

Relationships shouldn't be based on sex at all. Like AT ALL. If you need to feel like sex is what makes your relationship worth anything, I definitely don't feel very secure with your relationship ideals. Also, then that knights loyalty isn't very good because their job is to defend the throne. Make sure the king is safe and secure. Running around to other kingdoms and fighting the knights own brethren would be treason. However, the knight doing the part that is agreed on, (Staying loyal to the throne, protecting only one king) but deciding to buy his swords and chainmail from somewhere else is not treason. If the king cannot supply sufficient service to the knight, the knight should make sure that he has what he needs to make sure the king can be protected with the best.

[Berethor]

You got an point with the "if the king cannot supply sufficient service to the knight." But the same can be said about about cheating, some cheating come out of an true lack of sex in the relationship, while other cheating come out of an pure greediness. Obviously our views about sex are almost totally different, and it had become even more obvious with own different analogies. I am quite sure that my views about sex is much more common, after all open relationship is not an common thing. I don't think that we going to agree but I would answer to your claims anyway. For me having sex with another is the equivalent of serving another, sex is not the tools, sex is the main thing. For you sex is like going to the toilet, for me sex is very significant thing. Sex is the most important thing in a relationship, having sex is the difference only friends and more then friends, and that is one of the reasons to why sex should happen only with the significant other.

[FreeThinking]

For me sex is an experience, not using the toilet. It is sharing something fun and pleasurable with someone. Not just willy nilly but not love either.

[Berethor]

Experience can be bad as well you know, and sex known to have an very large dark side, and things like rape and licentiousness are part of the dark side of sex. Sex are in fact more important then love, and even if it don't make you secure with my relationship ideals, it's the hard truth. In animal kingdom there is no romance at all, there is only sex, sex is the main reason that an male want to be with an female, and sex is the only thing that help making an offsprings, the bloodline can't survive with only feeling and no love, but it can survive with only sex and no love, so I don't care if an girl saying that she love me with she giving her vagina for other guys, but if she keeps herself only to me, then she is truly my, and she is truly loyal to me, I am not wanting to share my girl just as I don't wanting to share my toothbrush, if other guy would use my toothbrush then it would disgust me to use this toothbrush ever again.

[Berethor]

I meant to say that the bloodline can't survive with only love and no sex, but it can survive with only sex and no love.

[FreeThinking]

Yes, but monogamy isn't really a thing in the animal kingdom so... there goes your entire argument...

[Berethor]

You mean not an common thing, but monogamy still existent among decent number of species, interestingly enough the wolves are among them, but not the dogs, even though the dogs comes from the wolves, and it's shows, how some animal become corrupted when it's comes to relationship between males and females, used as the human was much more monogamous in the classic western society, in comparison to one night stands, friends with benefits and open relationship in the modern western society. Also among animals, if the female is not monogamous then there is no relationship at all, the male simple get the female pregnan and then leave her, and she rise the offspring alone, and many human sluts had the same fate as well, and rightfully so, as almost no male want to help rising an offspring who might not be his own, and also having sex with many guys, makes the girl slutty even if her "main guy" had agree to that.

tvtropes.org/.../MamasBabyPapasMaybe

[FreeThinking]

Having sex with many women makes men just as disgusting... I can clearly see what your beliefs are based around. Also, wolves, especially males, will have sex with other female wolves if they're the dominant. It's not as frequent but it happens. Actually, throughout history monogamy has been thrown out the window during any time of progression. Greece, rome, egypt... all the advanced civilizations had very free standing rules on sex... hell even the chinese had concubines. So in all actuality no. According to history, all the great civilizations were extremely free thinking and liberal in their societal structure.

[FreeThinking]

And actually, it used to be extremely common that if a womans husband died for some reason or another, a man would simply take over and marry her. Vice versa for men. Particularly in royalty.

[FreeThinking]

I never said monogamy didn't exist in the animal kingdom. It just isn't really a thing. "A thing" is like saying an oddity when it occurs. It's not really a trend/thing, but they happen. Also, here's another point I'd like to make, how many fathers and mothers walk out on their families for no good reason? How many people never cheat or get cheated on and still end up unhappy? Sex is an experience to humans and dolphins. Seriously look up what sex is to dolphins, then try to sit there and say how humans are supposed to be monogamous. Dolphins are the only other known species to my knowledge that has sex for pleasure like we do.

[Berethor]

Sex for pleasure don't mean that it should be with many people. Polygamy is common mainly in third world societies, polygamy was not popular in the western civilization, romans and greeks did not have multiple wives. Wolves are having alpha male and alpha female, and the alpha couple are monogamous. I said if the female is not monogamous then there is no relationship at all, polygamy is usually man with many women and not the other way around. Even in my first comment I said that I am quite sure that most man would prefer to be one who allow to be with others and not the other way around. It's not like I can't understand the appeal of having many women, but it's unfair for women, unless they are bisexuals, and men are are much less willing to let there woman to be with other man, and those who do are usually henpecked.

www.mirror.co.uk/.../polyamorous-mans-two-wives-who-5306573

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy

[FreeThinking]

Are you serious right now? Do you have any idea who Alexander the Great was? Please do some research before trying to tell me my facts are incorrect. Also, in wolves it is not always monogamous. It's not frequent but it happens. Finally, you said it makes a girl slutty if she has sex with multiple guys. Implying that it's not wrong for men.

[Berethor]

I was talking on the general level, there is always exceptions, there are some polyamorous/polygamous man in the united states, even though polygamy is very uncommon and not legal in the united states, the man with two wives from my previous link living in the united states. Alexander the Great is very poor example and justification, for those who know the full story, like me, Alexander the Great was an great military leader, but he was not so great in his personal life and in his governing, and it's likely to be one of the main reasons that his empire was very short lived, the polygamy Alexander was because he was very influenced by the persian/eastern customs after he win the war and conquered the lands of the persian empire, and many greek subjects and comrades of Alexander started to highly dislike him because of the fact that he didn't stay true the the greek/western culture.

[Berethor]

The reason for Alexander death might had been an illness or an assassination by his men, so clearly greeks didn't support Alexander's lifestyle, later in his short life, and that was it's such an poor choice to try and use Alexander as some kind of representative of the greek culture, also from the very start, Alexander's motives for the war against the persian empire was to get more personal glory, and not to fight for his country and way of life, so it's not such an surprise that he turn out to be unfaithful to the greek culture, people who are too self-centered are usually not reliable, both in relationship and overall. The main reasons for loyalty are honor and thoughtfulness. The vast majority of wolves are monogamous, there is some weirdo wolves don't change this fact.

[Berethor]

Actually I was not implying that it's not wrong for man to have sex with multiple women, I was implying that it's worse for woman to be promiscuous/unfaithful, and that an women would have much harder time to find an man who is okey with that in comparison to man, and that there is an good reasons to why most polyamorous/polygamous relationships in the world are male with many females and not the other way around. I am not supporter of polygamy because it's unfair for many women, and because it's unwestern, and only in rare cases I might give it an pass, like in the case of the man who is married to two bisexuals women, it's more fair in that case because those women are enjoying each other as well and because many bisexuals want to be with both man and a woman at the same time, even if they don't admit it.

[Berethor]

There is also cases when an man's woman it too dry, and wanting to have sex like once a month, then it's make sense for the man to have an another woman, but as long as an woman can satisfy her man, there is no legitimate reason for him to be with other woman, they both have a vagina. Your main question is too unfocused, of course most the vast majority of people are preferring monogamy, but if you was asking if people and man in particular are preferring one-way "polyamory" or two-way "polyamory", it's most likely that you was going to find that one-way "polyamory" with only the man being allow to sleep with others as the most popular answer, and my question to you is why do you even ask about one-way open relationship, are you really okey with that, even though it's mainly you who is compromising in this case.

[Berethor]

It's safe to assume that your faithful ex-boyfriends didn't want an open relationship, because they didn't wanted you to be with other guys, so if you was offering him to be with other girls, while you staying only theirs, then they was agree to that, because they are doing almost the same in any case, and all you care about is if it's legalized, and not about how moral or not is the act itself. There are many people who didn't want to do yo an prostitute even in a countries where it's legal, and the same goes for having sex with many people, whether it's in cheating or in open relationship. By the way, with the fact that you got cheated and didn't cheat yourself, did you imply that you was okey with being with "only" one guy? and those who want to be with other people are mainly the guys who you end up with? anyway I hope that I helped you to understand why they turn down your idea, they wanted you to stay only theirs.

[Answerdude]

Maybe they thought that using a condom was good enough and getting checked out every time they have sex was a bit much. Other than that, it doesn't sound so unreasonable.

[ElissaDido]

I ain't about that life 🙅🏻

[MOSTLYunCOOL42]

I don't really think there is anything wrong with open relationships, if done right. I am just not interested.

[ThisDudeHere]

Chances are they declined you because instinctively they thought that if you were to sleep with another man, the chances that you would get pregnant by the other man were far too high. The vast majority of men would never want to take care of some other guy's child.

[FreeThinking]

I'm infertile so your hypothesis is incorrect.

[ThisDudeHere]

Still, that kind of mentality is unhealthy.

[FreeThinking]

How exactly is that unhealthy?

[ThisDudeHere]

Because it just goes to show you can't 100% commit to the other person.

[FreeThinking]

What does sex have to do with commitment?

[ThisDudeHere]

Everything.

[ThisDudeHere]

But I don't see a point in arguing over this. I'm obviously monogomously inclined so I don't see poly-relationsips as viable.

[FreeThinking]

True. Our opinions are obviously very different. But anyways, thanks for giving yours.

[ThisDudeHere]

No problem. Have a nice day.

[Supergirl0812]

I feel like if that's what he wanted I would be down but at the same time I know that it would never be a serious relationship, he would kind of become a friends with benefits kind of thing

[Mesonfielde]

It's already expensive to date one person, I don't see why I should want to date multiple people whom I don't actually want to date.