Since I've never cheated on anyone and am a perfect angel, I don't have anything to contribute to the cheating conversation. But one conversation I have had constantly with my friends is why, when it seems like nearly everyone has either cheated or been cheated on, open relationships aren't more common. After dating a particularly possessive psychodude, I decided that I didn't want to tether myself to another human being for a long time. I was single for six years. I dated a bunch of people, and dated some of those people while I was dating others. It wasn't a secret, I wasn't lying, I wasn't getting off on thinking I was hot shit because I had (this is probably a bad time to say something like "two irons in the fire," right?) more than one date at a time. One person, who I liked significantly better than many of the others, I even dated for 3 years. But we weren't exclusive -- he saw other people, I saw other people, and although we never talked about those other people to each other, we were both being honest about what we wanted. And for those six years, I watched as friends cheated on their lovers, found out they'd been cheated on, and cried and cursed and were crushed and all the while I doled out sympathy to them while living a comparitively stress-free life and shopping for condoms. If I ever said "open relationship" to anyone, I got the same response: "I couldn't do that. I'd be too jealous." Breaking news: jealousy can be overcome. Your insecurities can be overcome. If you feel like you're going to want to screw a bunch of other people while you're in a relationship, then why honor the monogamy charade? In my experience, it's been rare to find someone I've wanted to be monogamous with; rather than lie to myself and to someone I'm supposed to care about, I prefer to be honest, be safe, and (maybe) be a little jealous while I'm being true to myself and the person I choose to spend time with.Why am I alone on this one? And this time, the question's not rhetorical...
(photo courtesy of stuffflypeoplelike.com -- punny!)
RATING: OBSESSEDWMYSELF% (translation: roughly 64%)
Posts
72 comments:
Pathologizing jealousy as insecurity doesn't make it go away, it just makes the jealous partner ashamed of their already shameful feelings. For men, at least, the peptide hormones that regulate sexual behaviour are the very same ones that regulate territorial behaviour, and there's good reason to think that the two neurological functions are heavily "cross-wired." The mating rituals of many higher animals are actually sexual elaborations of combative territorial rituals. Two greylag geese will charge each other, only to turn aside at the last second and direct their attack at a make-believe third goose, which they ritually peck to death, and then abandon themselves to freaky goose sex.
Depending on the personalities of the people involved, I think there's room within a normative monogamous framework for all kinds of weird stuff, but I think it's an issue that's better dealt with by finesse than outright legislation. Announcing to the world that your relationship is "open" diminishes its seriousness. I also wonder how often both partners are totally happy with the arrangement. I'm guessing not that often.
Still, it takes all kinds to make the world go round. If my wife really, really wanted to sleep with some other guy, I guess I'd either slam his head in a car door 70 times or tell her it was OK with me.
Well if it's not okay with both partners, then of course it's not okay. My bafflement comes from knowing there are so many people for whom it would not be okay, but who would be more than happy to cheat.
Maybe you'd view an open relationship as less "serious" than a monogamous one, but when I see people in "monogamous" relationships cheating on each other, well, I kind of view the seriousness of that relationship as significantly diminished.
And how do you peck an imaginary goose to death?
I completely see where you're coming from because this is more or less been my M.O. for the past three years (since Mr. Cheater). I've dated people, some of them for extended periods of time, but have rarely attempted the big monogamy charade. It just wasn't what I wanted at that point in my life.
I even dated one guy, a nice Jamaican man who grew up in the Bronx (we can call him Dave, because that is his name), for close to a year. We set our rules (wear condoms, no one from work [because we worked together]), but we kept dating other people. It worked for us and we were both pretty satisfied with the arrangement (but we didn't call it an "open" relationship, we just said we were dating and left it at that). Eventually we drifted apart (mostly because I went to law school and he lived way uptown and I didn't have time to go to his apt anymore [a very NYC reason, I know, I know]), but it was fun while it lasted and we're on good terms now.
And you know, I've been exclusive with a couple of guys during this time, too (like the nice prosecutor who I dated for about half of last year). I guess what I'm getting at here is that every relationship is different and you have to be honest with each other about what you want and then decide together what works for both people.
In conclusion loco, I know where you're coming from and I think you're a real smart lady.
You drive your beak into its imaginary eyes, over and over again.
PSHAW. Thank you Laurie. From what I've seen, that logic has not reached anywhere within hundreds of miles of my current zip code.
And while men may have a genetic predisposition to act like geese or whatever, I think women have a genetic predisposition to want to kick it with more appealing guys when the one they're with acts like a possessive nut.
Yeah, dating in NYC is very different from dating any other place I have ever lived. Maybe because there are so many people here? I mean, a guy has to be pretty damn special for me to date only him when there are 4 million other people out there for me to screw.
Abusive behaviour is never OK. A biological explanation isn't tantamount to an excuse--our sexual foreplay instinct and our infant care instinct are cross-wired via our primate grooming instinct, but if they get too cross-wired, you end up with pedophilia. Which there's really no excuse for.
I think you have a good point, and I'm not saying you're wrong. I am saying that perhaps you're exceptional, which I mean as a compliment.
"Americans and Canadians are friends again. So lets all join hands and knock oppression down!"
Laurie and Loco are not exceptional. Many women feel this way, but they don't flaunt it. It is easier to just say "we are dating," rather than "it's an open relationship." But either way it does seem to be the normative relationship in the 21st century, and a far better situation than the cheating route. Cross wired or not, (which I find bull shit) it sure the hell doesn't make a girl a pedophile. Multiple partners does not tantamount to 12 year olds. And anyway, it all comes down to honesty. How honest are you with your partner? Jealousy can be over come; being straight forward is the way.
Anonymous, I'm afraid neuroanatomy and neurochemistry aren't just a matter of opinion. If you've done some research in this area that you'd like to share, I'd love for you to share it. If you haven't, I recommend On Aggression by Konrad Lorenz as a good place to start. You could also google "oxytocin" and "vasporessin." I think you've misunderstood my reference to pedophilia--all I meant was that all kinds of bad behaviours have a sound biological basis (some, like rape, may even have been adaptive for certain males, although pedophilia almost certainly wasn't), and that doesn't make them OK.
You've also confused "normative" and "normal," neither of which, unfortunately, refer to the status of the open relationship among average folks at the beginning of the 21st century. It would be interesting to do a study correlating people's opinions of open relationship with their "openness" scores on a Goldberg personality questionnaire. I hypothesize that high IQ gender-benders will score high in both categories, while more average men and women will not.
How on earth did we start talking about pedophiles? Because I don't keep a "boyfriend" I'm a pedophile now? I think not.
Are you saying loco and I are "high IQ gender-benders." Well there is probably some truth to that, actually.
No one here's a pedophile, Laurie, and no one said anyone was.
My previous comment should have read, "For example, our sexual foreplay instinct and our infant care instinct are cross-wired blah blah blah"
I didn't write the comment carefully enough, and Anonymous didn't read it carefully enough either.
I didn't really think you called me a pedophile, I just wanted to make it clear that your comment could be interpreted that way. And I was trying to make trouble. As usual.
Don't touch my kids, bitch.
One of these days we are seriously going to fight.
Also, Lorenz's On Aggression has nothing to do with neuranatomy--it's about ethology. But it suggests from a different angle how sexual behaviour and territoriality are connected.
My bad.
"High-IQ gender-bender" might be the best compliment anyone's ever given me. I am going to put that on my business cards. And I think Anon is wrong; I think Laurie and I are clearly exceptional. L2!
Why do people post anonymously? Why not use a name, even a fake one, like Sue, so we can tell all youse guys apart?
-Exceptional High-IQ gender-bending Loco
I think I must be wired differently. I've never understood the appeal.
That said, if both parties are cool with it, I don't see a problem.
As much as it pains me to recommend a book by John "I'm pretentious as fuck so people think I'm actually a serious writer" Irving, The 158 Pound Marriage is a decent depiction of an open relationship, and how everything seems cool at first but then people start getting hurt.
Not saying that's always what happens, but it's believable.
And still, everything seems cool in a "regular" relationship until people start getting hurt, too. I don't think open relationships are this dangerous, volatile thing any more than 'nilla relationships are.
To me the essence of an open relationship is having your partner available for sex when no one else wants to fuck you. And ideally your partner likes to clean the apartment as well. I can honestly say that I’d be extremely happy in a relationship like that. Sadly, I haven’t found a lady willing to share this bliss.
And no I don't want to learn about the downside of this by reading a book called "The 158 Pound Marriage."
I disagree. There's potential for getting hurt in both cases, yes, but I'm almost certain the success rate of open relationships, especially open marriages, is far lower than their vanilla counterparts. It's one thing when it's just about sex and fun and hanging out, and a total other thing when it involves heavy mutual financial commitments, long term plans, marriage and/or children.
No matter how much we wish it to be otherwise, sex makes babies and elicits powerful emotions from its participants, especially emotional attachments. I reiterate my original point: if you're very creative and resourceful, you may be able to finesse human nature. But you'll never make it go away.
Just a notice to any of our fine, attached or unattached female readers:
Anytime anyplace. I'll even tell you you're the only one if you want.
@Chris
You mean you're not gay?
Damn it!
Not that I am, but since you're so beautiful I was hoping you were so that we won't be competing for the same playmates.
McTavish, I aim to disappoint.
But really, I'm not certain open relationships are a sign of personal security. I'm not suggesting Loco is, because I personally know her and know she isn't, but I think for some open relationships are a red flag for insecurity. Open relationships really release you from dealing with a lot of personal issues.
Which brings me to said notice above.
John, what do you define as "success rate"? Not getting divorced?
I think regular relationships often keep the participants safe from dealing with issues. It's just easier to stay "safe" with one person, even if they're not right for you, because you're afraid to be alone, explore your identity, or be rejected. Hence all the serial monogamists, that Anonymous mentioned, who only leave a relationship when they have another relationship to step into. Plenty of people are terrified to be single, or terrified to try something with someone new and staying in a sub-par relationship even though you're bored, unhappy, or under-stimulated is a way to avoid that. For what it's worth, I've never left someone I was dating for someone else. I leave when I'm ready to leave, regardless of who else is or isn't around.
Loco, you're a fucking genius this week. You are exactly right. I would be inclined to argue that most people are terrified of being alone and that co-dependency is rampant in our society. This seems like an unlikely cultural reference, but I've always really loved that part at the end of Waiting to Exhale where Angela Bassett lays it out for her mom and says something to the effect of, "Look mom, I have a wonderful life. I have a great career, wonderful friends, and I'm happy. And I may never get married, but your just going to have to deal with that." My mom is about thisclose to getting a similar lecture, and I really wish more women could see it this way. What I'm really getting at here is this, if you find someone that works for you and you want to get married and have babies and all that then great. Do it. But don't stay with someone just because you are afraid of being alone.
I completely agree that monogamous relationships are a safety net for a lot of people.
But we can't dismiss the idea that insecurity possibly manifests itself in open relationships as well.
How many guys do you think head to the bar on any given night looking to fuck someone?
How many of those guys do you think refuse to engage in a monogamous relationship because they're insecure?
I'm willing to bet a lot.
Here's a thought experiment. Let's say there's a couple who live together. And one of them, let's say the man, is unemployed, while the woman works all week. What if, on Friday night, the man said, "Listen, hon, I know you worked hard all week, and it's nice to see you, but I'm actually meeting someone else tonight. Uh, don't wait up."
Would the woman in our thought experiment think, "It's good to be strong and alone, and being jealous is just a matter of insecurity. I'm just gonna rent a movie and put my feet up, and I won't have any images running through my head all night of the man I love fucking some slutty undergraduate with pigtails in twenty different positions"?
Screw men, I think laurie and loco should get it on.
I would define "success rate" as not breaking up if you're not married, not getting divorced if you are. Maybe that's bourgeois of me.
"You don't have to be afraid to be alone" is a great thing to tell a woman with 2 black eyes who's financially and emotionally dependent on an abusive man. However, it's kind of glib to quote Waiting to Exhale to someone who's parents just died in a car accident, or who has bowel cancer and needs a $15,000 colostomy. Being alone sucks, and another person can save your life. Co-dependency, divested of its psychobabbling 12 step baggage, is kind of the idea
hahahaha. for a number of different reasons, that is not a possibility.
john: where'd you go, buddy? i'm not talking about women who are abused and afraid to leave their abuser because they have eight black eyes or whatever. i'm talking about people, not just women, who dread going alone to a wedding or being alone of valemtimes or eating chinese food alone while watching Love Actually.
no one has to financially support another person if they don't want to. does spouse automatically equal Sugar Mama/Daddy/Parent-type thing? I am sure plenty of married couples have separate finances. And if someone is practicing monogamy so that their S.O. will pick up the bill, that's a whole other issue, too.
chris, plenty o'guys are certainly fucked up, and so are plenty of girls. i don't think that Open Relationships are practiced exclusively by the well-balanced and extremely secure. All sorts of people in all sorts of relationships have all sorts of problems. All it comes down to is I'm surprised that, in a world where so many people cheat, open relationships are not more popular or more desirable.
It occurs to me that each of us has this relationship in our head that we're arguing for or against, and they just don't match up at all.
Actually my wife said that, but I told her to go to bed.
Actually, John, what I usually tell the victims of domestic violence that I help through the women's legal association that I am president of to get restraining orders against their husbands is more along the lines of, "I know you're afraid to be alone, but you have to protect you and your children and I can put you in touch with some wonderful organizations here in the city who can help you get on your feet."
I feel like you're throwing out a bunch of extreme situations to prove your point, but you've lost sight of what I'm really arguing here. I'm not saying everyone should be alone forever. I'm saying, everyone should be fucking patient and wait for someone who is a good fit rather than marrying the first warm body that comes along because they are terrified to be single until they find someone. And yeah, I think that if no one who's right ever comes along, you should be prepared to be single forever.
You pretend that a person has to have this one other person to fill every role in their lives, but that's not the case. If I have a personal tragedy, I have at least five friends who I can call and they will come right over and be emotionally supportive. And do you know how I got those friends? Because I wasn't fucking sitting on my couch every night watching tv with my husband, I was out making friends and getting to know them.
I'm not saying I'm totally opposed to marriage or coupleness in general, I'm just saying it should be for better reasons than "because I'm supposed to" or "I don't know how to be alone."''
And as to your other example, the breadwinner lady in your example probably shouldn't have agreed to that relationship arrangement if it makes her unhappy. And that is totally different from what loco and I described.
I suppose. And the relationship I'm "arguing for" isn't reflective of the relationship I'm in. Irony! My friends from home are shocked that I'm in a committed relationship. But it just takes someone very very very awesome to break you out of your comfort zone.
Laurie: I thought this post was about open relationships. Are we talking about waiting for Mr. Right, and being picky, or serious relationships in which people are in love but decide to still see other people?
I think this whole conversation sort of drifted in the middle, and now its participants are talking past each other to some degree.
Good times, though. Beats reading.
BTW, Loco, all men love going to weddings alone, for the same reason all women hate going to weddings alone. Didn't you see Wedding Crashers? I thought that was your favorite movie.
Thank you, good night.
Well if you want me to get back to open relationships I guess I will say it's better to be in a good open relationship than a shitty closed one. And if open relationships work, I think they are a-ok. But not how John imagines them, because those are the crazy involuntary miserable kinds of open relationships. Also, Wedding Crashers is the biggest piece of shit ever put to film. And I am including The Doom Generation in that assessment.
Ah. Point taken, but is it better to be in a great open relationship, or a great closed one?
I know I said goodnight. I'm putting away the computer in 3 2 1 now.
I guess that depends on what kind of relationship you want.
I keep getting comments emailed to me all out of order. It's like I'm reading a choose your own adventure book from beginning to end. Or an elliptical poem, but I guess most of our readers don't care about poetry analogies ps I am including myself in that bracket.
I keep saying I'm going to bed then I don't.
Laurie: All other things being equal, what kind of relationship do you want?
Laurie, save that information for your inaugural post on VaginasVaginasVaginas. I want lots of page hits.
You'll all be sorry when I get PenisesPenisesPenises up and running.
Wait... Maybe not.
Ya and what's wrong with wedding crashers?
Point well made, Loco.
I'm just saying even though we live in a world filled with unsuccessful monogamous relationships, I don't know if open relationships (given the fact they could have the same success rate) are any better.
There are some people who do have the need to be with someone. There are also some people who are completely terrified of being committed. I just think it works both ways.
But you're right, it's interesting open relationships aren't discussed more considering the divorce rate.
P3!
What really sucks are the people who are terrified to be alone but also afraid of commitment. That's where a lot of cheaters come from, I imagine.
Did you guys even look at P3? I spent like half an hour on it!
I can't look at that, I'm in the school library.
Wonder what kind of visitors you'll have to that site.
Anyhow, my vagina refuses to click on that link.
Homophobe.
U click links with your vagina?
Duh. Men don't know anything.
Duh. What else would she click them with?
I think this comment section has an echo in it.
I thought the site was funny. Maybe since everybody else on this site has multiple personae I need to create a few for myself.
man i leave r3 for like a day and look at what happen
p3 is p ef*ing suhweet though
I wonder if those guys who make "ugly women" their wives have any trouble for the rest of their lives.
John from Daejeon
I'm pretty sure ugly people get laid all the time. Because where else would ugly babies come from?
So I would like to take this opportunity to say, in summation, that everything Laurie & I have said on this thread is right, and everything that John has said is wrong. Thanks for your time.
Oh we were definitely right about everything. High five, loco! V3 power!
Sneaky.
I'm afraid I disagree, ladies. I think the lynchpin of this whole interminable morass of a discussion is the question of whether either of you would prefer an open relationship with Mr. Right to a non-open relationship with him. Since the answer, it seems, in both cases is "No," what's left is just posturing. Sort of like someone who's in favour of public transportation but doesn't take the bus herself.
Looks like someone is having trouble focusing on his reading...
lolz.
Johnnnnnnn. "The answer is no"? Did I say I would prefer a closed relationship with Mr. Right? I did not. Did I even say I want to ever meet anyone who I deem to be a "Mr. Right"? I also did not. Not everyone enters relationships thinking "Oh golly gee I hope this is Forever I hope he's Mr. Right." I've taken the bus, the subway, the light-rail. Just because I know how to drive doesn't mean I don't still own a MetroCard.
Wait, wait...
The Pinkett-Smiths are in an open relationship? He doesn't even cuss on his records!
Post a Comment