Open relationships

[Dewt]

imagine having a lifestyle and an identity! absolute madness

jesus fucking christ

I am specifically talking about the identity of being an abusive squirm-inducing cunt

[bgmnts]

What is squirm inducing about people who want to follow a lifestyle of ethical non monogamy without judgement?

[Dewt]

What is squirm inducing about people who want to follow a lifestyle of ethical non monogamy without judgement?

iiii aaammm noottt taallllkiinnngggg abbooouotttt ttheeemmmmmmmmmm

[MinnieTimperley]

There's a practical fact which is that the more time you consciously make yourself available and see an open relationship as an opportunity to meet new people, the more and more likely it is that you will meet someone who feels 'better' than the person you're in the relationship with.

People in conventional relationships still meet people of course and there is always cheating going on whichever type of relationship you're in. Perhaps open relationships are judged overly harshly when you consider the level of dysfunction is already quite high in the vanilla type.

Might be my character or lack.of prowess and small.willy but I know I'd be racked with jealousy 24 hours a day. Could not handle it

[bgmnts]

iiii aaammm noottt taallllkiinnngggg abbooouotttt ttheeemmmmmmmmmm

Oh alright then.

[chveik]

jesus fucking christ

I am specifically talking about the identity of being an abusive squirm-inducing cunt

you can be quite tedious at times

[phes]

Might be my character or lack.of prowess and small.willy but I know I'd be racked with jealousy 24 hours a day. Could not handle it

I feel like a lot depends on how you set the terms of a relationship out. I have never transitioned a monogamous relationship into a NMR, like an open relationship. That is really hard to get my head around, such monumental and conflicting changes. Not just that, but all of the judgement you'd face from everyone who felt like they owned a part of that old relationship.

If you haven't tried this before, entering into a relationship with different rules from the start is quite different. I discovered that underneath my jealousy was just fear of being left and when that was revealed it was a lot easier for me to be less dysfunctional in my behaviour and to be clearer and more direct about what it is I actually want from a relationship. Just to be clear, I'm not calling your jealousy dysfunctional, just describing my own experience

[Retinend]

Well I guess I just don't know the same quiet, non-sociopathic buddyfuckers that you're so familiar with phes. Due to them being quiet. It's probably unnecessary to defend them with the same tone you'd reserve for an oppressed societal grouping especially when they're clearly not the subject of my post, but it seems like you enjoyed yourself and that's the important thing.

dang, you're cold

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Might be my character or lack.of prowess and small.willy but I know I'd be racked with jealousy 24 hours a day. Could not handle it

One element I am suspicious of is the power balance. How many open relationships truly are mutual decisions of like-minded people and how many are coercive where one of them wants to have their cake and eat it while the other is scared to lose the slice they have been permitted? Even conventional relationships suffer from these issues. How do you sail uncharted seas while also knowing objectively what you're doing is right and healthy for all involved? It's impossible to know.

On a personal note, such an arrangement wouldn't be for me either. Finding a relationship itself was a long struggle. Whether I'm right I wrong about this, I think when you pour your heart and soul into caring for someone, I would feel inadequate if the same person wasn't fulfilled by that and crestfallen in the most profound way. I would see it as an equivalent of them ending the relationship. But that will be to do with my ego and what my brain tells me will keep me happy. I am sure there are plenty of people who don't have that mentality which is why the emphasis should probably be on communicating and making sure both sides are aware of the pitfalls and absolutely sure it's what they want.

[Dewt]

One element I am suspicious of is the power balance. How many open relationships truly are mutual decisions of like-minded people and how many are coercive where one of them wants to have their cake and eat it while the other is scared to lose the slice they have been permitted?

This is my essential point. Lots of people have been in technically polyamorous situations including myself but it's the need for people who are basically this guy



to formalise it into a framework they can use to abuse people that should be shunned. There is an incredibly good reason to at least question people who are part of the scene as opposed to just doing the things that are a natural part of living life their own way.

I suspicious about when polyamory stops being something organic and starts developing rules beyond "let's just not give each other STDs" because it is a substrate for abuse.

If somebody complains about a David Koresh figure and your reaction is to pretend that it's an attack on all communities then FFS, basically.

[Dewt]

No I am not comparing people in polyamorous relationships to Branch Davidians

[chveik]

I just want to read stories I can wank to.

[Retinend]

No I am not comparing people in polyamorous relationships to Branch Davidians

as I understand it you are objecting to the very worst of people in polyamorous relationships, who you say resemble Branch Davidians, or something near to

[Dewt]

No. I am saying that acting as if I am comparing all people in open relationships to the worst people in open relationships is as ridiculous as saying that I'm attacking the concept of a community if I criticise David Koresh. Or all religion because I say Scientology is shit.

A bit laboured TBH

[Retinend]

ok so David Koresh corresponds to the subset of the very worst of people in polyamorous relationships, in the comparison?

[Dewt]

Yes

but not qualitatively. It was a bad analogy because Koresh had multiple partners in abusive relationships and that wasn't the connection I was trying to make.

Could you drop it because we're in the presence of somebody who just suggested that criticising opportunistic abusers is the same thing as attacking the LGBTQ+ community and I don't want to open up more avenues of misinterpretation.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Can I tentatively suggest the discussion on this topic doesn't need to be held so close to boiling point like this?

No, no right. It does. Off I fuck.

[phes]

No. I am saying that acting as if I am comparing all people in open relationships to the worst people in open relationships is as ridiculous as saying that I'm attacking the concept of a community if I criticise David Koresh. Or all religion because I say Scientology is shit.

A bit laboured TBH

If you find you are frustrated by people responding to you like you're indiscriminately targeting a population then just avoid opening posts with generalisations like this

I cannot tolerate the formality of it all.

and you're misrepresenting me as 'pretending you are attacking all' for being these shadey types. I said you were zoning in on and exaggerating that behaviour with language like 'very fucking often '

[Dewt]

Please do not tell my parents that I used the F word.

[Dewt]

I said you were zoning in on and exaggerating that behaviour with language like 'very fucking often '

It's very fucking often that the overly-friendly secondary school teacher takes things too far with an underage student. I would argue that you should be suspicious of that specific archetype. When something becomes the kind of thing that you can reasonably expect to hear a personal anecdote about in a casual conversation then it meets the criteria for very fucking often. Did I just make an attack on all teachers, or through an absolute masterclass in circuitous pettiness, the LGBTQ+ community?

[phes]

Could you drop it because we're in the presence of somebody who just suggested that criticising opportunistic abusers is the same thing as attacking the LGBTQ+ community and I don't want to open up more avenues of misinterpretation.

Just to be clear, there is no misrepresentation intended whatsoever.

I cannot tolerate the formality of it all. It being a lifestyle and an identity and ugh. Can't even have sex without writing up some kind of contract.

Very often it's all driven by an imbalanced power dynamic. Usually men who wouldn't be able to have promiscuous sex outside of this construct with women who have been damaged by other men and will settle for any situation where they are wanted and ostensibly treated well, even if not realistically. Obviously not always the case and not always with that gender balance, but very fucking often.

You're right, it's obviously not always the case. A majority of polyamorous relationships involve LGBTQ people. You are zoning in on and exaggerating a specific kind of gendered, exploitative and arguably abusive minority behaviours that can be found in any type of relationship

I raised LGBTQ to make the point that non-monogamous relationships between a man and a woman such as the dynamic you describe, e.g an open heterosexual relationship, already occupy only x% of the available configurations. My problem is with your language:

very often, it's all, very often, usually, not always, not always, very fucking often

which are odd choices of words for someone who doesn't want to be told to stop generalising

[Pijlstaart]

I haven't been invited into one of these, but it's very lateral to most people's thinking when they define a relationship, if the taboo has to be explained to us, then yes our subsequent shocked gasps may sound a little forced. For most people the relationship isn't about the people in it, it is about the context.
Take me for instance, I am not a strong man and so I have to select an environment that empowers me, predominantly in the riparian zone, where treacherous hidden banks, quagmires and ennobling pot-stilts give me the leverage I need to become the person I was born to be. A formidable bulrush jabber, slick with frog guts, hangs from my birchbark tummy sash, but my wise crinkled eyes are warm and welcoming and my fat hand proffers a bowl of tasty mollusc treats. The context, not the people, and I think most mature adults see it that way.

[MinnieTimperley]

Words. On. A. Screen

[Dewt]

Yes, I think it's very fucking often. This thread is full of anecdotes of those situations going badly.

which are odd choices of words for someone who doesn't want to be told to stop generalising

I do not want to generalise people in open relationships. But I absolutely am saying that if a woman's dating pool consisted of men who were members of "the polyamory community" then I would expect their odds of experiencing emotional abuse to be greatly increased. It's fair to say I'm generalising those specific people. I see how that is regrettable too, as it's conceivable that such a thing as "the polyamory community" exists to support people in open relationships. I hope that exists as something other than "the good side of a thing that contains an immense population of absolute turds".

[Dewt]

Words. On. A. Screen

That's not fair, Pijlstaart's posts are very good.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I haven't been invited into one of these, but it's very lateral to most people's thinking when they define a relationship, if the taboo has to be explained to us, then yes our subsequent shocked gasps may sound a little forced. For most people the relationship isn't about the people in it, it is about the context.
Take me for instance, I am not a strong man and so I have to select an environment that empowers me, predominantly in the riparian zone, where treacherous hidden banks, quagmires and ennobling pot-stilts give me the leverage I need to become the person I was born to be. A formidable bulrush jabber, slick with frog guts, hangs from my birchbark tummy sash, but my wise crinkled eyes are warm and welcoming and my fat hand proffers a bowl of tasty mollusc treats. The context, not the people, and I think most mature adults see it that way.

A Riparian Forest is an interesting environment indeed.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

I just want to read stories I can wank to.

I write my own.

[phes]

Yes, I think it's very fucking often. This thread is full of anecdotes of those situations going badly.
I do not want to generalise people in open relationships. But I absolutely am saying that if a woman's dating pool consisted of men who were members of "the polyamory community" then I would expect their odds of experiencing emotional abuse to be greatly increased. It's fair to say I'm generalising those specific people. I see how that is regrettable too, as it's conceivable that such a thing as "the polyamory community" exists to support people in open relationships. I hope that exists as something other than "the good side of a thing that contains an immense population of absolute turds".

What is conceivable to you is something that is real to others. The polyamory community has been talking and talking and talking and fucking talking endlessly as is their way, for years, in meetings, conferences, networks, on forums, writing essays, books and online resources about the characteristics, history and personal experiences of polyamory, oppression, narcissism, sociopathy, love addiction, gaslighting. They are well aware abuse exists across any style of relationship you wish to name

So this

This is my essential point. Lots of people have been in technically polyamorous situations including myself but it's the need for people who are basically this guy to formalise it into a framework they can use to abuse people that should be shunned. There is an incredibly good reason to at least question people who are part of the scene as opposed to just doing the things that are a natural part of living life their own way.

What are you saying? Who is 'this guy' you just dreamed up, why is this guy the person you chose as the arbiter of any increment of formalisation beyond young, free people unconsciously doing something 'organic', fucking about a bit. Should polyamorous people not be allowed language that can be used to describe their relationships and share and debate their feelings and experiences, because of this guy?. That's what it sounds like you're suggesting. And why do they become freaks once they have a identity?

I know you're taking the piss here

Well I guess I just don't know the same quiet, non-sociopathic buddyfuckers that you're so familiar with phes

But yes, it feels like you don't have much familiarity with many poly people at all.

[Mister Six]

I was in an open relationship for a couple of years. My girlfriend was a virgin when we met (not for long though, eh lads? Weeyyyyy) and was clearly uncomfortable with the idea of never having the opportunity to experience sex with anyone else ever again.

I sat down and thought - would I care if she'd had sex before we met? No. Would it make any difference when she had sex with someone else? Not really.

So with a few conditions (not allowed to sleep with the same person more than once, don't show me their pictures, keep it purely physical always practice safe sex - of course) we ventured off on a mutual open relationship that I spectacularly failed to take advantage of.

(We were also doing a long-distance relationship at the time, which may have made the whole thing a bit less complicated than it could have been.)

On the whole, I think it was a good thing for her, and for our relationship (helps that she only slept with blokes who were a bit shit in bed, at least so she said). She's not my girlfriend any more, but not because she ran off with some fella with a massive wanger. Honest.

[Bronzy]

Dance like no one is watching, sing like no-one is listening, love like you've never been hurt,
and fuck like a goddamn retard