Why do people engage in "open" relationships? Isn't it just an excuse to cheat rather than just have friends with benefits or better yet, causal flings?

[WiccanLady2023]

I'm honestly curious why people think open relationships are good or even healthy.

What when

Open relationships = an excuse for cheating

The term "open" relationships originated with cheaters who wanted an excuse. A means to lessen guilt, avoid issues (such as conflict by saying partner "agreed"), etc.

From the start there was nothing respectful or healthy about the concept.

.

More often than not "open" relationships involve someone who wants to cheat and someone who is a doormat - believing they can't get better than loser - that says sure.

You google "open" relationships from a psychological standpoint and there are numerous websites recounting the damning effects that this foul idea has. In fact there's articles written by people involved in "open" relationships which blatantly say that it diminished their self esteem, self respect, confidence, etc. and other facets that are NOT healthy.

.

On a rare occasion you'll find both people are gunho about an "open" relationship but then they don't have any respect for themselves or each other & should just break up.

[AlbantheGreat]

I think there are at least 2 causes: for the guys, it's the PUA stuff, the red pill content, which isn't really new: the man is polygamous in nature, but it's because he's a high value man he deserves more than other men: more money, more ladies...

As for the women, it's the love triangle trope in stories for women, and Twilight from Stephanie Meyer is a good example. Bella is a female teenager/young adult who is courted by two hot men: Edward and Jacob. She hesitates: Edward or Jacob... Jacob or Edward... So it becomes a possibility, for many readers, a fantasy. It's soft-porn, erotism (she sleeps with Jacob, even she marries with Edward after).

It's the principle of debauchery: doing what you want with whom you want. There are other things which are debauchery:orgies, BDSM... I think also pornography provokes, because it's unregulated, creates sexual fantasies within the watcher.

I think these people have a polygamous mindset, opposite to the monogamous mindset.

I think also many have just a lack of success with people they like, so they have to accept that kind of thing from their "loved ones", they're just too weak to set their boundaries and make your partner respect them.

[Screenwriter]

People want to eat their cake and have it too. I think the marriage is their rock, their stability, and others who go in and out of the revolving door are flings that keep the spice in their particular relationship.

However, what I think this is, is a case of laziness and lack of imagination.

Instead of bringing other people into a marriage, which, I believe is a danger to the bedrock itself, why not reinvent yourselves and your lives?

Relationships need to grow and change. Other people distract you from that growth and change, since you're spending time involved with them instead of feeding your primary relationship.

If you don't want to be a couple, and want to have multiple partners, my feeling is you don't truthfully want to be married. Marriage is about two people. There are plenty of relationships that are partnerships but not marriage, and are open-ended.

However, they don't develop the depth and breath of a good, long-term marriage. There are also couples who aren't married, such as Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell, but actually ARE a married couple: faithful, involved, loving and committed to growth together and mutual goals, yet independent and interdependent.

Either have the beautiful cake sitting there prettily, or eat the cake and enjoy it. Trying to have it both ways ruins a delicious idea.

[Anonymous]

You may not understand or want an open relationship, I know I certainly don't, but for the people who truly ascribe to them, we can't judge their level of happiness for being in one. There is a lot of s--t I don't get in this world, but who am I or who are you to say, one can't be happy and fulfilled in an open relationship? I think, from what I heard, there are three main factors heavily involved in their success---consent and approval, no judgement, and continuing to put your partner first (aka, they come home to you only). Unlike straight cheating, this would be something that these people openly discuss with one another and agree to. It's not sneaking behind one anothers backs and doing whatever you want, and trying not to get caught. I think people engage in these relationships because they treat sex as "just sex," but have a need for variety there. They too want that solid relationship with someone who equally gets that, but that they can say go furniture shopping with their partner, and spend Christmas with, and be with one who will be there for them when they are sick. I clearly don't think an open relationship is for everyone, but for the ones that make it work, do that, be happy.

[WiccanLady2023]

And why many websites & people will say most "open" relationships are just toxic even before they became "open". Usually it is someone with low self esteem / respect that believes they can't get anyone else & agrees with "open" to keep their toxic partner.

[ZamerZ]

That sounds like people who agree to open relationships without truly wanting to commit to what they entail, or having a good idea what that even means. I also strongly believe that many of those you mentioned here like the idea of having more free reign, but also don't like their partner having the same right. So double standards. In those cases, judgement and jealousy easily take over. I know two couples in open relationships, one of them happily married since 5 years and the other dating for 3, with one year of an open relationship. Obviously, this relationship model isn't for everyone.

[Opinion Owner]

I can sit here and pull up charts and graphs of all the straight, monogamous relationships that have failed because someone is cheating behind the others back, but it doesn't make all straight relationships awful and not worthy. In order for any to work, both partners have to be on board...that is the crux of any good, solid relationship, that stands the test of time. If you both feel the same way and operate with the parameters you've set for one another, then it can work, right? Again, this is NOT my jam, and I would never seek this out for myself, but I'm not going to judge a couple out there, who's relationship I am not in, for them saying it works for them. F'n be happy, do you, everyone else around you is just opinions.

[Kingship]

To long to read.

I read the question. That is enough. And I'll tell you why, that is enough to really know why.

Many people engage in open relationships because they are scared to go back/be by themselves-alone.

And second of all, that is correct. It is an excuse to cheat, and whatever it was, was not a relationship.

Because true meaningful sexual relationships don't have open relationships.

Why do you think that most fullfilling relationships don't involve 'open' relationships.

[Anpu23]

I don't kink shame. So a couple is comfortable with seeing or sleeping with other people. As long as all parties involved are okay with it it's not cheating its just the way they are. It becomes an issue when someone feels the need to lie or to sneak around.

[WiccanLady2023]

And why many websites & people will say most "open" relationships are just toxic even before they became "open". Usually it is someone with low self esteem / respect that believes they can't get anyone else & agrees with "open" to keep their toxic partner.

[WiccanLady2023]

Do you even know what a kink is? Tying a partner to the bed is a kink. This is simply trashy behavior.

[Anpu23]

How many poly people do you know? I have been in an open relationships, have friends who are currently in sn open relationship and have known quite a few poly people. Just because its not for you doesn't mean its wrong. As long as everyone involved is over age, consents and understands the situation its really no one's business but their own.

I used the word kink as in outside of the accepted social norms. Or as Google puts it "unconventional sexual taste or behavior" this certainly falls within that definition

[WiccanLady2023]

@Anpu23 And why many websites & people will say most "open" relationships are just toxic even before they became "open". Usually it is someone with low self esteem / respect that believes they can't get anyone else & agrees with "open" to keep their toxic partner.

[Anpu23]

Not in my experience, but okay I'll take yourwordforit.

[MikeTheBartender]

Some people monogamy is just not in their genetics. Some are weak and would rather share their partner than be honest and lose them, and some psychological disconnected from a monogamous LTR. As a guy that's slept w over 200 women, I can tell you anyone that engages in behavior like me or people in open relationships has gone through some other sort of psychological pain or trauma.

[WiccanLady2023]

@MikeTheBartender - usually psychological pain or tramua brought on by your own actions. Do you honestly think sleeping with dozens to hundreds of people helps you? No. Because it is meaningless and valueless and does nothing but feed on your insecurities, etc.

[MikeTheBartender]

Do you think all one night stands are bad?

[EricSummer]

My ex-wife suggested an open relationship after 18 years of being together. That when she had already found a different guy. Naturally, I refused but she went ahead anyway. I think she was hoping to make it ok so that the family could stay together.

While divorce proceedings are still ongoing I'm already living with a wonderful woman now so I cannot really complain. Still, I'm glad that loyalty is very important to my new partner.

[Lionman95]

Because it makes them feel better when they can say they are in a relationship than saying to someone you´re friends with that person. It´s a way of fooling yourself and other people. That´s similar like saying I´m working in the adult movie industry instead of saying I´m a porn star. It´s the same scenario it´s way of sugarcoating and fooling yourself and others.

[djmzes]

Because they do not want to commit. . but it is their life and do what they wish. At the end they will bear the consequences of their choice.

So if you agree with it, you go in it. If you do not agree , you do not.

Understand why and etc, will change nothing.

[HelpfulWoman]

You see it as cheating. But it's not? Framing your whole argument like that just shows your ignorance.
Frankly, there's no point even trying to explain it to you as like an incel, you won't actually accept any other narrative.
Hope you have a good day tho.

[ShellyB]

I think open relationships and friends with benefits are the same in that one partner wants a relationshp and the other partner is not ready for one or does not want one. So I think the partner who wants a relationship will do whatever the other partner wants hoping it'll improve later. If you can't tell I do not think open relationships or friends with benefits are generally good ideas, I think one person is taking advantage of the other person even if they don't mean to. JMO!

[Billlewis]

Here we go again, with yet another challenge as to the validity and practicality of a poly/open/cuckold relationship. I don't know about the rest of you, but if I'm not interested in a particular kind of arrangement, I don't think about it all that much, nor do I publicly announce my opposition to it. To the contrary, I find something else to talk about. Just sayin'.

[VikingWarLord]

We are NOT naturally monogamous creatures, the divorce rate and infidelity rates prove this.

Before the White, Christian INVADERS came to the Americas, most of the Native Tribes were polygamous.

If you want to understand more on this topic, go read the book "SEX AT DAWN" by Cacilda Jetha and Christopher Ryan

[WiccanLady2023]

@VikingWarLord - Native tribes were monogamous. They STILL are, many natives have MORE respect for themselves and their women then YOU can even begin to comprehend.

[WiccanLady2023]

@VikingWarLord furthermore among some tribes - as like in Islamic countries - cheating WAS punishable by DEATH. The eastern plains tribes, as example, would and DID kill people who cheated. It was only among a handful of western plains tribes that polyogamous behavior was accepted and ONLY among the chiefs and high ranking warriors, NOT everyone.

[VikingWarLord]

I did my Thesis on this, most native tribes were POLYAMOROUS. Here are a few examples below

1. SENECA NATIVE American TRIBE ON SEX AND MARRIAGE*

The Seneca tribe of the Iroquois Nation is one of the many indigenous societies to practice polygamy and polyandry as the standard for human relationships. It was normal for men and women to have more than one life partner, creating a family structure that wasn’t simply dependent upon two-parent child-rearing or relationships, but rather a network of support between all partners. Having more than one husband or wife wasn’t simply about sexual relations, as many contemporary critics of polygamy and polyandry tend to assume. But rather it was about love, partnership, and sex being experiences that didn’t have to remain restricted between two individuals. And yes, women valued these experiences too. For more on the Iroquois, read Barbara Mann’s book entitled, “Iroquoian Women.”

[VikingWarLord]

2. COMANCHE NATIVE American TRIBE*

Weyodi O’Clerc Stern says this about her own Comanche Tribe :
“My tribe, the Comanches, for instance were traditionally polyamorous, with both women and men free to take more than one spouse. As it was explained to me by my elders when a woman married a man she also married his brothers.

Instead of the hokey “blood brother” (which is actually a European tradition) nonsense, a Comanche man would be considered the brother of any man who had had sexual relations with his wife. Women also made men brothers without their consent. Even when approaching the other man for redress of wrongs in such a case, the first husband had to address his wife’s paramour as “brother”.

The deed was done, the men would be brothers for the rest of their lives. On the other side women were sisters who had sexual relations with the same man and when a man married a woman he also married her sisters. When speaking to my husband my grandmother consistently referred to my sisters as “your other wives” and to my sisters and me she would indiscriminately refer to any one of her grandson-in-laws as “your husband”. I always had to ask her ‘Which one?’”

[VikingWarLord]

3. NAVAJO NATIVE American TRIBE*

Former Navajo tribal chairman Peter MacDonald explains Navajo polygyny this way: “A man would marry a woman, then work hard for his family. If she had a sister who was not married, and if the man proved to be caring, a good provider, and a good husband, he would be gifted with his wife’s sister, marrying her as well.”

[VikingWarLord]

4. PAWNEE NATIVE American TRIBE*

Polyandry (the marriage of one woman to more than one man at the same time) was found among many of the tribes. This practice was often not recognized by Europeans, including many ethnographers, as it seemed so alien to them. The Pawnee, for example, practiced a form of temporary polyandry. When a boy reached puberty, his mother’s brother’s wife would take charge of him and initiate him into sex. He would continue having sex with her until he married. For a period of four or five years, the young man, and perhaps his brothers as well, would be a junior husband for this woman, creating a temporary state of polyandry. Polyandry also occurred as a form of an anticipatory levirate.

In Native American cultures, marriage was neither religious nor civil. There was usually no religious ceremony involved, only a public recognition of the fact of marriage. In most cases there was no formal ceremony. The couple simply started living together. In most Native American cultures, nearly all adults were married, yet marriage was not seen as permanent. It was recognized that people would be together in a married state for a while and then separate. Divorce was accomplished easily since the couple did not own property in common. Each partner simply picked up his or her personal property and left.

Divorce was neither a civil nor a religious concern-this was a private matter among the people involved. While some American commentators bemoan the negative impact of divorce upon children, in Native cultures, each child had many fathers, many mothers, and many siblings. A child was not property but a member of a large family and thus had rights. Since divorce was accepted and the raising of the child was the responsibility of many relatives, not just the biological mother and father, divorce does not appear to have had negative impact on the children.

[VikingWarLord]

5. HAWAI'I / INUIT / YANOMAMO NATIVE TRIBES*

Informal polyandry is a feature of some hunter-gatherer societies, such as the Inuit of northern North America, or the Yanomamo of the Orinoco river basin in South America. The concepts of premarital and extramarital sexual activities were absent, and it was probably true of Hawai‘i, as it was said to have been true of much of Polynesia, that “there are no people in the world who indulge themselves more in their sensual appetites than these”
(Ellis, 1782, Vol. 2, p. 153).

[VikingWarLord]

6. AMAZONIAN NATIVE TRIBES*

Few cultures are as sexually liberated as those of the ancient Amazon rainforest. Nearly 70 percent of the tribes practiced multiple paternity, in which all of a woman’s sexual partners were fathers to her children. It was commonplace for people to be open about having multiple sexual partners in the ancient Amazon. Open sexual arrangements were socially accepted, even expected, according to anthropologist Robert Walker. And these multiple attachments were anything but casual. Men acted as father figures to the children of any and all of their partners. A woman could marry one man, making him the primary father to her children, but all the other men in her life would be considered vital secondary fathers.

As Walker explains, this was partly because of the ancient Amazonians’ rather unique take on genetics:

*“In these cultures, if the mother had sexual relations with multiple men, people believed that each of the men was, in part, the child’s biological father. It was socially acceptable for children to have multiple fathers, and secondary fathers often contributed to their children’s upbringing. In some Amazonian cultures, it was bad manners for a husband to be jealous of his wife’s extramarital partner. It was also considered strange if you did not have multiple sexual partners. Cousins were often preferred partners, so it was especially rude to shun their advances.”* (end quote)

[VikingWarLord]

6. CONTINUED...

For children, having as many fathers as possible had its advantages. More dads meant more gifts and support for the child, which is known to increase a youngster’s odds of reaching adulthood. Besides, it was a rather pragmatic solution to a basic fact of life in a culture where warfare was all too common and brutal. If a child’s primary father died, he or she would have other males around to step in and act as father figures, easing the newly widowed mother’s burden.

Men also benefited from this system. Sharing paternity brought men together, cementing bonds and friendships (basically, just like Three Men and a Baby, just with less Steve Guttenberg). Indeed, one of the best ways for two men to cement an alliance was to share wives, often in a family – brothers were some of the most frequent wife-sharers According to Walker’s new research, of 128 indigenous groups in lowland South America, 53 are known to practice multiple paternity, while only 23 are known to practice single paternity. The remaining 52 don’t have clear conception beliefs, making it difficult to know whether they once possessed this custom. That means at least 40% and perhaps as much as 70% of these groups once practiced multiple paternity, which definitely means it was a common feature of Amazonian civilization.

[VikingWarLord]

7. MOCHE, MEHINKU AND GUAJIRO NATIVE TRIBES*

The Moche Tribe existed along north coast of Peru from 200 AD to 850 AD. It was a complex, state level society that covered a large geographical area. Their cities, temples, and agriculture dotted the northern Peruvian coastline in what are considered two factions of the Moche: the Northern and Southern. The Moche are probably best known and recognized for their complex pottery styles.

The Moche erotic pottery is characterized by the various sexual acts depicted, which include acts of oral, vaginal, and anal sex as well as masturbation. These acts are most commonly shown between a man and a woman, although male on male homosexual acts are present, too. Although heterosexual sexual relations are the most common it is interesting to note that vaginal sexual acts are the most rarely depicted. Common sexual acts demonstrated in Moche erotic pottery are (in order of most common to least common) heterosexual anal sex, acts of masturbation, and heterosexual oral sex. There are also several vases that portray males with their erect penises. These pieces are known as phallic libations. These are functional ceramics used as pouring vessels, with the erect penis being used as the spout.

There are some other oddities in Latin America when it comes to mating. A small village in Brazil called Mehinaku is a place where size really does matter. This refers not to the size of your package, but rather the size of your catch. There, men compete for partners and sex by presenting women with fish. The man with the largest fish wins the girl. Among those in the Guajiro tribe of Colombia, much like singles in the US, this indigenous group scores on the dance floor. The Guajiro ladies catch a fella by tripping him during their ceremonial dances. If she trips him, they must have sex.

[marish01]

Only a cuck would preach women having multiple husbands abd baby daddies.
This whole time you hid you're a cuck pretending to be possessive and the only man for your sluts.

[provokeesmokee]

Nah, some people just love differently than you do/you were raised to.

Polyamory and non-monogamous relationships are much more common than you realize.

[Honeysuckle12345]

You are a s***

[WiccanLady2023]

And why many websites & people will say most "open" relationships are just toxic even before they became "open". Usually it is someone with low self esteem / respect that believes they can't get anyone else & agrees with "open" to keep their toxic partner.

[Anonymous]

I don’t really get why people do it either. The term “open relationship” is an oxymoron. Relationships (marriage and dating) are literally designed to be exclusive. It’s consensual adultery, which goes against the natural order of human relations, and I’ve never met or heard about any “open” relationship that ended well.

[Alexz0]

Open relationships are the best and the only type of marriage I'd accept. Monogamy is an awful practice and two people willing to accept it's impractical and restrictive will have a far better relationship with each other.

[Honeysuckle12345]

You're a slut

[marish01]

@Honeysuckle12345 with a lower than average body

[Honeysuckle12345]

@marish01 nightmare troll

[marish01]

@Honeysuckle12345 nightmare of sluts

[Honeysuckle12345]

@marish01 but I've only been was one man in my life which is more than you can say whore

[marish01]

@Honeysuckle12345 I didn't say you are one

[Anonymous]

There is being in a relationship. That has exclusivity to living a life together, sharing resources, raising kids, etc.

For some, sex does not have to in that mix. Just because I have a primary partner does not mean I do not want or enjoy the physical act with others. And physical with others does not take away from the bond or life with my relationship.

[catarecute]

open relationships are basicaly for two cheaters using eacher for companionship and sex to agree that there cheating tendencies won't ruin their relationship.

[Miah05]

I mean to me if both people are cool wit, it's not my business why they do it.

I would never do it, but hey that's why i wouldn't date someone into that

[jshm2]

Actually the proper legal term is "polyamory".

So called "open relationship" is just a nicer way of saying "fuck buddies"

[inhua]

anything non-monogamous can be used for cheating

[slatyb]

If they are honest with each other, it's not cheating.

[Anonymous]

It's an excuse to be promiscuous, no more no less. And it's mostly women asking for open relationships.. Not men. And no I'm not saying it doesn't happen from men I'm just saying it happens FAR more often from women.

[Mansearching]

in my opinion... open relationships are an excuse to cheat. I can't and won't cheat. Thats just me.