?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Relationships

Does anyone these days have a straight forward one-on-one relationship?

It seems that everyone and their dog are currently involved in 'Open Relationships'!!! It's striking me as an increasingly popular fad that everyone feels they should be involved in. A bit like being bi-sexual was a number of years ago, or having threesomes (apparantly - although that 'fad' sadly passed me by dammit!)

Now whilst I have had 'open relationships' of a sort in the past the sudden boom is a bit disconcerting. I can see a lot of people getting hurt emotionally or via catching nasty things due to 'safe' relationships actually not being so 'safe' afterall.

It also says something about society where open relationships are becoming increasingly a lot more common. Communal living and not having a clue who your kids fathers are here we come!

Seriously though, I hope people are doing this because they are comfortable with it and not because 'all my mates are doing it' which it seems to be a bit of at present. Also nothing beats the closeness of a good, strong, one-on-one relationship. Sorry guys and gals. No amount of 'free' sex beats a strong loving relationship.

Comments

( 55 comments — Leave a comment )
tooth_fairy
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:09 pm (UTC)
I don't think I have ever been in an open relationship, the idea really doesn't appeal to me
scimon
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:10 pm (UTC)
I'm married and very happy with it.
angusabranson
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:11 pm (UTC)
The thing is that if I am in love with someone. Proper love, then there is no way I'd want to either share myself or that person physically and emotionally with anyone else.

They would be all I need and (hopefully) vice versa.

Open relationships are all fair well and good if you're just really 'fucking a friend' who you have some feelings for but if you truly loved them I doubt people would be able to.
mooncadet
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:15 pm (UTC)
god your first statement there rings true. im having to deal with my mass of insecurity with regard to that. realising no matter what, i am loved by the person i am in love with, regardless of what he might want other than me, because i cant give him somethings, and realising that if he wants other stuff, it doesnt mean he loves me any less is really difficult to deal with.

but then i love him so much i have to deal with it! there isnt a choice for me personally i guess but it does weird my head out alot.

wow we is gonna have loads to chat about tomorrow! i reckon ill be at yours between half seven and eight xxx
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 01:30 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cookwitch - Jun. 30th, 2005 03:40 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabby2600 - Jun. 30th, 2005 05:03 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 04:27 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - angusabranson - Jun. 30th, 2005 04:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 05:24 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
pond823
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:18 pm (UTC)
I agree. I often think that open relationships are pushed for by one person and the other, in an attempt to maintain some kind of relationship, agrees to it. Not always - there are of course successful open relationships.

I also think you have to be a very well grounded person to not get jealous and Jealousy builds resentment and mistrust. That happens even in one-off threesomes and can really ruin friendships.

Are open relationships trying to overcome the modern guilt of sleeping around, by tacking on a 'relationship' to make you feel less slutty?

On a positive note though, as you say it does seem to be a fad and generally such things, once they have settled down, seem to make it easy being accepted in society for people who generally do find open relationships best . As was seen my the bisexual and gay 'fads'.






serpentstar
Jun. 30th, 2005 04:29 pm (UTC)
You have to be a very well-grounded person to make even a conventional one-man, one-woman relationship succeed too. Adding polyamorous components on top doesn't require a great deal *more* well-groundedness, IME.
(no subject) - pond823 - Jun. 30th, 2005 04:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bridiep - Jun. 30th, 2005 09:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - pond823 - Jul. 1st, 2005 09:38 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jul. 1st, 2005 01:10 pm (UTC) - Expand
luciddestiny
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:18 pm (UTC)
Does anyone these days have a straight forward one-on-one relationship?

Yes... :)

I really don't understand how anyone can have any other sort of relationship...
gabby2600
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:11 pm (UTC)
I can understand why, and from the people I have met they only get in to polyamory to have lots of sex with people. Rarely are they in it for the relationship aspect.

IMO: If you go into polyamory for lots of sex with differant people then you doing it for the wrong reasons. Polyamory is not about sex alone, it's about work a relationship and a group dynamic at the same time. It's a very triccky balance to maintain, becasue if you life lone love perfers spending more time with someone else and haveing fun and lost of great sex with them, will you be happy for them or will the little green demons start to work their evil magic.
jonnynexus
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:20 pm (UTC)
I'm afraid that for me, reading about the problems of open relationships is like reading about the problems of owning two Ferraris.
scimon
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:26 pm (UTC)
Well you can't drive both at the same time. So it's actually worse.
(no subject) - daver2323 - Jun. 30th, 2005 02:27 pm (UTC) - Expand
bridiep
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:22 pm (UTC)
You need to join vanilla_pride :)

Not that I'm one to talk...
davywavy
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:22 pm (UTC)
As I said only recently on someone else's LJ
There’s an LJ meme which went round a few weeks ago – the ‘How polyamory tolerant are you’ test. This test would ask questions like: “One of your friends tells you they are Polyamorous. How do you react?” and then give you a limited choice of potential answers like:

A: “I am a good, understanding, wonderful human being who loves bunny rabbits and rainbows and so I would accept my friend’s personal choice.”

B: “I an worthless, subhuman scum who tortures puppies. I do not approve of Polyamory. Oh, and something about the Bible as well.”

Obviously I’m exaggerating for effect here, but the prejudices of the test author were pretty clear from the wordings. At no point did it give me the option of answering in the way I wanted which was:

C: I really couldn’t give a toss so long as they don’t bang on about it on LJ like every other boring sod who has nothing better to talk about.”



There’s been a lot of mention of Polyamory in the press recently, and a number of my Poly acquaintances seem to think that this indicates a new social acceptance of the lifestyle. Perhaps these people don’t normally read the papers very often, or something, because the rest of us realise the newspapers aren’t in the business of writing feature articles about things that they consider normal parts of mainstream society. The feature I read mentioned that the owner of an internet site dedicated to polyamory now had more than 300 UK-based subscribers, and presented this as evidence that the lifestyle choice was growing.

300.

From a population of 60,000,000.

Wheee.

Train-spotting websites have more subscribers than that, and I don’t see anyone claiming that this makes their lifestyle choice interesting.



The reason that the papers have picked upon on Polyamory isn’t because it is ‘gaining acceptance’, or growing. It’s because it’s a fashion which the mainstream has just noticed, and the reason the mainstream has just noticed is because it is very much last years fad. Two years ago, all the cool kids were bisexual. Last year, they were all Polyamorous. This yall the cool kids are talking about self-harm. There’ll be hang-wringing articles about it in the Daily Mail in about six months, by which time something else will be trendy.

I can only hope that the next trendy lifestyle choice is one of stoicism in the face of adversity and doing charitable works.

After all, nobody seems to have tried that yet.

silver_blue
Jun. 30th, 2005 02:58 pm (UTC)
Re: As I said only recently on someone else's LJ
I find the whole idea of polyamory strange. At least, for those who take the love definition of polyamory. My personal feeling is that if you are claiming to be in love with more than one person then you are in love with neither of them. Hence, for me at least, "love" polyamory doesn't truly exist.

Being fond of and sleeping with more than one person at the same time of course does exist, but that's different from love.

As for me, yes, I have a pretty much straight forward one to one relationship (well, apart from that we live on different continents) that I'm very happy with.
_grimtales_
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:28 pm (UTC)
I concur
Especially on the fad thing and I've never seen it cause anything but harm, to at least ONE involved person.
sea_cucumber
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:28 pm (UTC)
hoorah for celibacy and chastity - the non-complicated option! :) :) :)
ok... will stop being strange now...
daver2323
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:31 pm (UTC)
hey, I've got a cool new fad that nobody seems to be trying:-

how's about wearing a fucking rubber
pond823
Jun. 30th, 2005 01:34 pm (UTC)
Tried it, but everytime it rained the cellotape got wet and it fell off.
davedevil
Jun. 30th, 2005 02:20 pm (UTC)
Yes I do thank you :)
kostika
Jun. 30th, 2005 03:19 pm (UTC)
I've never been in an "open" relationship. Sure I have had friends I fucked, but we were never stupid enough to delude ourselves that we were in a real relationship. If i commit, its to that person and that person only.

Too often the real reason for 1 person in the "open" relationship wanting it is because they have found someone else they wanna screw. Only once EVER have I seen a successful poly relationship. But that was 4 consenting adults who agreed to be with only each other. None of this going to a club and picking up a bint to screw.

Poly isn't bad its jsut misinterpreted in its current use. What people think it isn't and the truth are differant. Poly people these days use it as an axcuse to not commit and screw around.

Sorry subject annoys me alot. I'll shut up now.
serpentstar
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:47 pm (UTC)
If you fucked a friend, you had a sexual relationship with them. Calling it "real" or "not real" is just opinion unrelated to that fact.

There are thousands of successful poly relationships out there. The plural of anecdote is not data.

How do you think the 4 consenting adults who agreed to be with only each other *met* in the first place? At what point does a "bint to screw" become a partner? Does a 4-way that started out with bint-screwing but ended up stable somehow become less valid because of its "screwing around" origins?

The definition of poly is an extraordinarily wide one that encompasses everything from stable 3- or 4-way relationships all the way to having one or more regular partners and picking up bints to screw on the side (although not usually in such pejorative terms as you used). See the alt.polyamory FAQ, or the relevant wikipedia entry, if you need more information.
(no subject) - kostika - Jun. 30th, 2005 05:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 05:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kostika - Jun. 30th, 2005 05:59 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 06:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kostika - Jun. 30th, 2005 06:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 06:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:57 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - pond823 - Jul. 1st, 2005 09:44 am (UTC) - Expand
faerierhona
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:02 pm (UTC)
Well, I have two very close relationships - we're poly, not "open" so it's about love, trust, communication, not sex.

And nine months in? Happier than ever!
gabby2600
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:28 pm (UTC)
Sadly the male ego is a fragile creature, and it seeks dominance over the pack. Now if said males is even a little bit insecure about their sexuality, their urges and drives will make them want to prove it as much as possible. So having sex with lots of women is one way to show their straight alpha male. Now this is a prime example of the wrong person to have in any polyamourus relationship.

I would say for polyamory to work and work well everyone in that relationship need to be 100% confident of their sexuality. If not how do they know why are not trying to show they world they swing one way or the other.

IMO: Sexual confidence and knowing your own sex drives are the most important things to have in adn polyamourus relationship. With out them how do you know a man isn't trying to be the Alpha male.

For women it can be just as bad, as a womans hormonal drive is geared towards them haveing children. A Woman needs to be 100% sure what they want in the line of children, otherwise thigs get really messy.

Also look at it form the point of view of the children. Look at haad mesd up some children are who are from single parants or devorced families. Now having a poly relationship won't help this poor kid any will it. So agian if you wnt a poly relationship make sure you ideas about children are firm and solid and think about them before you go running of for a new lover.


serpentstar
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:54 pm (UTC)
A lot of poly relationships are very stable, and very good environments for bringing up children in. In fact, two of the soundest teenagers I know have parents who are still actively polyamorous and were during their childhood.

The behaviour of "running off for a new lover" is seen far more commonly in supposedly monogamous relationships than in poly ones.
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:24 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:41 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nesf - Jun. 30th, 2005 07:54 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - serpentstar - Jun. 30th, 2005 08:49 pm (UTC) - Expand
terheyt
Jun. 30th, 2005 05:58 pm (UTC)
"The more you love, the more you can love, --and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love." -Lazarus Long, c.o. R.A. Heinlein.

When I was still with my wife, there were two urges that made us want to be poly. The first was the opportunity to show our friends how much we (or I, or her) loved them in a physical way. We had few friends close enough, but the ones we did have that were open to it enjoyed it for what it was. Caring, sharing and loving.

The other was that I knew I could never be everything to her, and she knew the same in reverse. But I did know that we were meant to be, that she would always come home to me, and I would always go home to her. Just because you have a craving to go out to eat sometimes doesn't mean you'll never eat at home again. We were both bi women, and I don't have the right plumbing to help her with both...

And before you jump on me about how we aren't still together, we didn't have any other lovers for a year before the split, and for both of us, at least a year after.

I agree, it isn't for everyone, and every couple should work out some strict rules before bringing anyone else in, be it into their bed or into the relationship. Our rules were:

1. She and I always came first. That must be made clear to anyone involved.
2. We had to okay the other's lovers, both before the subject came up to the person, and before the first time.
3. If, at any point, one of us felt threatened by a side fling, it would stop, entirely, right away. No questions.

But YMMV. I've seen very successful relationships (14+ years and counting) with much less stringent rules, and one (7 years so far) with more. It's all a matter of the people involved.
anyeone
Jul. 6th, 2005 02:53 am (UTC)
While my own marriage is monogamous, I can see a lot of benefits in a polyamorous family. I've had discussions with a couple of my friends about the concept of two couples merging to form a family. The idea particularly makes sense to those folks who don't plan on having kids but think two people in a family is too few, or to those who live in very expensive area and could benefit by having more than two incomes to support the unit. Obviously those considerations are secondary to the relationship dynamics themselves which are more complicated. I know it is possible to love more than one person; I've done it. What I haven't done successfully is be able to pour myself into more than one at once. This is mainly because I've only been in monogamous relationships of the type where it would come across as awfully suspicious to suddenly say "hey, dear, howzabout we try this polyamory thang?" But if I were not in a monogamous relationship I think that I *personally* could handle a polyamorous one because I am not the jealous type. I'd have to find two other people who were similarly inclined though and had feelings for each other as well. I'd want a true trio/family unit rather than two separate relationships and I suspect (without any real evidence) that this would be exceptionally difficult to maintain.

All that said, I'm married, so it's all moot :)
( 55 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow