Take it easy, Dan. It's starting to sound like you're advertising non-monogamy to everyone. It's a little embarrassing.

Sounds great, but I have a suspicion that things will eventually end badly...

I hope the feelings of sperm competition her husband was enjoying weren't based on actual sperm competition, because it seems like potentially falling pregnant by your lover would be one of the most egregious faux pas in a nonmonogamous relationship.

@1

He's just doing it to convince himself, don't worry. He's clearly got some issues about being a failed monogamist.

@ 1, you probably already know enough to ignore @ 4.

That said, Dan is the kind of person who gets worked up about something, and it becomes all he can talk about - especially if he's been challenged in print or online in a major way, as has been happening lately. Expect it to continue for a while.

I think it promotes honesty about what a couple wants their relationship to be. There's nothing wrong with them wanting strict monogamy if it's an equally satisfying decision. But when two people discover after they are married that the situation is no longer mutually satisfying, it doesn't necessarily mean divorce. It could mean just changing the arrangement. Dan, it's a great place to write a book about marriage and honesty between couples.

@5: ...
If anyone needs me, I'll be in Montana for the next two weeks, in a place where I can't read any of this.

Yeah, this woman's story of an open marriage isn't yet written. Sex with a co-worker is complex enough on its own. The odds of this ending well cannot statistically be in her favor.

@ 7, have fun!

@5

Right, exactly. Ya know, just like the closeted homo priests who harp on with anti-gay rhetoric. See, it's just that they have the type of personality where they get worked up about certain things especially if challenged. That's all, Silly! Dan's immune to that sort of thing, didn't you know? He's been on the TeeVee and This American Life and everything!

@11, yeah, totally, Dan's just jealous of you. That's it exactly.

Its actually sort of crazy. All Dan is really trying to do, is point out, from his bigger "stage", that adults should be making responsible adult decisions, in their relationships with each other. That is all. It absolutely befuddles me why anyone would get their panties in a bunch @11over something so obvious.

I didn't hear about him getting to be "hyper sexual"...so he basically pimped her out for a few years.

meh.
Should've been "(coff)@11(coff)".

stoopid html

I guess this could end well... If it's not the husband's kid... yikes.

Non-monogamy seems to be working pretty well for some of my friends. I don't think it would work too well for me or my girlfriend though.

Wow. You people can't just be happy for a couple enjoying their marriage? Haters gonna hate, I guess.

@ 13, Confluence has some bug up her ass and trolls posts like this. I don't know what it is, just that it's nothing rational.

I'm disappointed. I was hoping for a pompous lecture from Seattleblah, and all I get is the troll and some hysterical woman who probably fears her husband might be stepping out on her?

@21 - the period troll is also a hysterical woman who is terrified of being cheated on. This wasn't clear before, but seems pretty obvious now.

I'm among those who are a little sick of Dan posting these letters from people who opened up their marriages in the past couple of years and are REALLY HAPPY. I want more letters from people who opened up their marriages in the 1970s, and how happy they are or aren't, forty years later.

Dan used to post about how he didn't know any polyamorous marriages that had reached their third anniversary. See, now that's the other side of the story.

What are the pitfalls of opening up? What should people be careful about? Couldn't we get some "sex columnist" wisdom about that -- instead of just a booster club atmosphere?

@19 - And as long as she's open and honest with the bug, who are we to judge?

Yep, it's not simply that some people want to say "this wouldn't work for me"; they have to say "this won't even work for them -- it's gonna end badly, just wait..."

As if there weren't sufficiently many monogamous relationships that end badly already... not sufficiently many for the same people to claim that monogamous relationships are all doomed. "It's gonna end badly, wait..."

As for Dan talking too much about this: well, it's what they're going to pin on him now. At some point it was not liking bisexuals, or lesbians, or feminists, or whatever. He talked a lot about it, people saw how his opinions were actually nuanced (or maybe they evolved), and all was for the best: we got to hear more ideas and arguments. What's the problem?

Those who say talking about non-monogamy is boring or just Dan's fad may simply move on to other blog posts. You don't have to post 'I don't like this' in every topic that you don't like, you know; you can just skip it and look for one you do like.

As for myself, I'm pretty monogamous (at least now), and so is my wife. But we have several friends who are living non-monogamously (about half of the cases openly so), and I don't see that they have more problems than those who aren't.

I hope this lady's success story continues on, just as successful as it's been thus far. I can't know what the future is, but I'm glad she's pregant and being satisfied by two hot men without apparent problems. I hope she'll enjoy it for all it's worth, and, should there be problems in the future, that she, her husband and her lover(s) will be wise and grow-up enough to face them and solve them for the best.

I'm with EricaP on this one. I read these "my life is so awesome with my open marriage" letters, and while I can be happy for them, I suspect sometimes people write these letters to 1) convince themselves and others that things are really good and 2) try to convince people to come over to their side and share the pain (similar to what so many people do when telling people how awesome it is to have kids).
I want to hear more about the other side, where open marriages have caused more pain than pleasure.
Balance. I want to hear the balance.

@24 - As it happens, I do know of multiple poly marriages that have survived three years. With child-bearing, too.

I also know of a couple that haven't, mind you, but sometimes for reasons unrelated to the non-monogamy. It could be valuable to hear stories of open marriages gone wrong, but one problem is that, in such situations, everything suddenly gets seen as a function of the openness of the marriage. There are often other factors involved as well. And somehow, nobody seems to zoom in on monogamy as the reason that any given "conventional" marriage failed.

Are you absolutely and completely certain sure that you know who the father is? NO BIRTH CONTROL IS ABSOLUTELY EFFECTIVE IN PREVENTING PREGNANCY. Unless you were only having sex with your husband before you got pregnant there could be some doubt about the paternity. If you don't know with absolute certainty, have you been tested or discussed the issue with your husband. Sensible people should probably include this in any conservation about opening a relationship. At the same time, what people say and how they feel about a theoretical question and how they will react to the reality may be completely different. It is sort of like getting married. You want to get married and think you are prepared for it, but I was in a complete daze during the ceremony and I have no memory of it. The same thing was true with parenthood. It was planned and I even joked with my wife that she was pregnant before I went to work, but I was absolutely stunned to come home and have it confirmed.

For those proponents of non-monogamy, how many of you have had to deal with the issue of questioned paternity? In general, the incidence of nonpaternity varies greatly from 0.8% to 30%. However the incidence of nonpaternity increases to between 17% and 33% in cases of disputed paternity, which would seem (that is disputed paternity) more applicable to nonmonagomous relationships because it is known or suspected that there were multiple partners . Yeah, I know cheating happens,.

No-one's duct-taping your face to the screen and forcing you to read every one of Dan Savage's blog posts. Complaining about "being sick" of seeing more commentary from him in favor of non-monogamy is clearly just a feint disguising some other discomfort. You just want his voice muted; you want there to be no discussion on the relative merits of sexual monofidelity.

@32

Reading first-hand accounts from unapologetic sexist women reinforces my world-view.

@30 - I'll grant you that open marriages can fail for reasons besides the openness; and people in weak marriages may try opening up as a last-ditch effort. So I'll agree not to blame non-monogamy when open marriages end. Okay?

But isn't it legitimate to ask for advice on how to be careful, beyond reading Opening Up and the Ethical Slut and trying to be honest about one's feelings while not giving jealousy too much power... This stuff is hard.

@32 - do you believe that men are an undifferentiated mass with no individual variation, or not? You may hate that assertion, but it sounds like you've internalized it anyway.

To everyone who has their panties in a twist about the paternity of the child- why does it matter?
Sorry to be a broken record with this story but my little sister's dad isn't my dad. He raised her since birth and considers her his daughter just the same as me and my little brother who are his genetic material.
Everyone knows this, she still talks with her siblings from her other dad (who died when she was still in elementary school, which has nothing to do with our dad raising her).
So who was traumatized in this situation? Why does it matter if the genetic parent doesn't raise the kid?

For what it's worth, I know several couples who had knowingly allowed sex outside of marriage back in the 70's or 80's and are still together now in the old-fart phase of life. I have no idea whether they struggled with any negative consequences of the outside sex, but on the surface at least, there are certainly people who did it openly and stayed together into old age afterward. When I compare those relationships to marriages that were broken up by secret cheating... well, there's no comparison! The secret cheating destroyed people and caused untold pain. At least the non-monogamous were trying to take measures not to hurt anyone, and everything was above board.

@35: My parents didn't have an open relationship per se. However, women really seem to like my dad, and he ended up taking up a couple of the many offers he used to receive. I know my mom found out about at least one, yet they are still together to this day, two peas in a pod.

We are acting like we invented non-monogamy when it is one of the oldest stories in the book. What's different is bringing it out of the closet and introducing it as a viable relationship option. I can tell you that it can bring greater contentment and love into a marriage. It reminds one that "love begets love." I'm sure it can also do the opposite. But while my marriage is open, I am not open to my kids or most of my friends, or the community at large so I'm still in the closet. The more acceptable it get, the more people hear it, then maybe the more successful it will be.

@35 - EricaP, your point is completely valid. However, realize that Dan is a political figure of sorts on this and other positions. As such, he's kind of obligated to be "on message" to the extent that he's an advocate for a certain truth - i.e. that monogamy works for some people. That's hardly a revelation to you and me, but even in SLOG I think he figures he's writing to address more than just us regular readers/posters. It gets redundant for us, but that's the price of consistently representing a point of view.

@ 41, you're poor dad! All those hotties just throwing themselves at him. He was helpless. Helpless!

Couldn't resist. Anyway, hooray for forgiveness? Is that your point? Because it doesn't sound like your parents were practicing what Dan is preaching.

@35: You're asking a very vague question, so it's hard to give answers less vague than "communicate and check in regularly to see how your partner is doing." More specific answers would probably require more specific knowledge of the details of the relationship.

@38: It matters a lot to some people. A lot of men don't want to spend time and money on a kid who isn't theirs (genetically). It seems kind of unfair for the sperm donor to reproduce without having to put in the effort to raise his (genetic) kid. It's similar to the child support issue. Also, what if they break up: he might then have to pay child support for a kid that's not his, which would be unfair.

@32/40 - You noticed this letter came from a woman, right? Open non-monogamy isn't about A Man Has His Needs, and honest non-monogamists aren't scum.

If you're looking for monogamy, you should cheer for honest non-monogamy! You want the non-monogamous people to come out of the closet so that you don't accidentally marry one of them! Right??!

@24 what are the chances that a polygamous 50- or 60-something has the internet, knows who Dan Savage is, reads the column, and cares enough to send in a letter? I know if I had 2 or 3 boyfriends/husbands, I'd have a LOT less time to fuck around on the internet.

Besides, even poly marriages are subject to the OTHER failures causing divorces these days: financial arguments, kids out of the house, little in common between you anymore, blahblah. Sexual incompatibility isn't the only thing driving divorces in America.

@45 - I'm asking to hear from people with decades of experience, what works well for them, and what leads to trouble. I'd love it if Dan started a site like It Gets Better, where he encouraged people to post stories of their long-term experiences with non-monogamy.

We just don't have a lot of models to follow. Monogamous people get lots of advice from our culture. ("He won't buy the cow if he gets the milk for free" "Once a cheater, always a cheater" "Just lie back and think of England") Be nice to have some advice for open marriages as well.

@50: Thanks so much, and that sounds like the perfect way to deal with having a kid. Best wishes and I hope things keep going well: I think we'd all love to hear what worked and what didn't.

Let's say that the husband isn't as cool about the non-monogamy situation as he says he is. Then (still in the first tri-mester), the wife tells him that she is pregnant. He begins wondering whether the child is his and hems and haws for a while on whether or not to divorce her.

If he files for divorce immediately and the divorce date arrives before the child's birth then:
1) If the baby was his, he is still responsible for child support.
2) If the baby was the co-worker's, then he is not responsible for child support.

If the divorce date arrives after the birth:
It doesn't matter whether or not he was the biological father; he is still responsible for 18 or 19 years of child support.

@52--read post #50. The letter-writer explains that the kid is definitely her husband's.

@52: also, that depends on state law: some states allow a certain period of time after the birth of a child to challenge the presumption that the husband is the father.

Kudos to NMM @50 for the family planning. I shall give the benefit of the doubt that, "I also stopped having sex with the lover," was to make paternity as incontrovertible as possible/make things as comfortable as possible for the husband rather than a manifestation of various -isms in which sex only "counts" if pregnancy might result.

It would be interesting to compare the husband's story, but not necessary.

FYI, As someone whose done scholarly research into false paternity, the rate in the US is well under 3%. And that 3% is highly skewed to people who are already separated or in openly poly relationships. So, it's not like it's a surprise. The whole "raising someone else's child" b/c of mother fraudulently passing kid off happens in under 1% of the cases. In those cases, it is usually later-born children and skewed toward girls (b/c later-born children are skewed toward girls).

None of the studies alleging higher figures hold up to scrutiny b/c they are either dated, biased, or based on bad scientific methods. Or they are based in small sub-populations in the US or not in the US at all.

In days gone by, the figure may have been more b/c of (1) people having to stay married "no matter what", (2) less out-of-wedlock births, (3) less access to birth control, (4) less access to abortion, (5) no DNA testing, etc.

At this point in history, it's so rare you probably have better odds of being struck by lightening and winning the lottery on the same day.

WRT to the issue of open relationships, my 2cents is that the problem isn't women, it's heterosexual men.

Most women I know are remarkably open to it, so long as it is equal and respectful. This is true particularly among younger and richer women. But they can't find men to get on board. I think American male heterosexuals actually have stronger conditioning that makes honest monogomish or poly relationships a no go. Many men I've know would not want a poly or even monogomish relationship because either (1) they want to be cakemen having their piece on the side but not wanting their SO to do so (2) Like the LW's husband who couldn't handle it and wanted DADT or (3) get a thrill out of having an affair b/c it's thrilling or belittling to their SO (which would go away w/equity and permission).

I've many male friends scattered across the US and I'd say more men have this attitude than not.

In this regard, I think the problem with the OP is that her situation isn't the ideal because her husband isn't fully on board. Yes, its great she's sexually open. Unfortunately, he's still got some conditioning that can't allow her to have other lovers out in the open.

If we really want to encourage poly relationships, I think we actually have to do some work on the social-sexual constraints on heterosexual men. If and men can allow their women equality of opportunity wrt to extracurricular sex, then you'll see a lot of women on board. Until then, you're going to see a lot of women saying no.

BTW, the straw poll among my female friends (mostly educated on West Coast) is that the ideal man would be bisexual and monogomish. He'd be GGG and let her do what she wanted with others and he could do what he wanted...but he'd have to keep to the rules and stay committed to her. None of the women I asked think such a man exists. And not because of the bisexuality, but because of the men being able to be open, equal, and still giving the primary relationship what it needs.

I am in a marriage with a partner that I deeply love and we have been "open" mostly during the times when we were living long distance for school. That is, we could mess around with others except no sex. Since we have been together it has not come up. We are now trying to have a kid and I am nearly infertile. Over the past many years, she has been more proactive than I have about being with other people and each time something happens, I am always left feeling shitty. Recently she messed around with someone in her professional community and during this time while I already feel like shit for being infertile, I thought it was very inconsiderate even though she did it all the while telling this other person about me and how in love we were and how there was no possibility of having a relationship with him. Afterward, I told her that really I have never been comfortable being open, that it was merely something that I felt was supposed to be liberating, or perhaps more sexually mature, or more natural even, but for me it always brought heartache in some form. She really wants to be open and wants me to be ok with it, but also is respectful of my wishes to not want to be open at least right now. Yet, I don't want to be that guy - the one who is caging her. I really feel like I want monogamy, it is what feels right for me and I feel pressured by my wife, by my generation of young exploratory singles and couples to do this and I hate it. She told me to read this blog and that in itself felt like more inconsiderateness - to read the blog written by someone who is pro-open marriage/relationships. Why do I have to feel like a degenerate for not wanting to have my heart broken in little ways. I always get over that feeling of hurt because in the end, it is not that big of a deal, but all of the little hurts add up. Why can't monogamy still be cool too?

@56: I'm interested in hearing more about this, because everything I've read has said 10%-30%. Why do the higher figures not hold up to scrutiny? Do you have more information on this? Under 3% seems far too low.

@57: That's contrary to my experience: almost all of the women I've dated have been very much against the idea of non-monogamy. I would be totally cool with having a girlfriend who openly had other lovers, but most women seem very uncomfortable with the idea of combining a close intimate relationship with non-monogamy (even if either one by itself is all right). Women who are ok with non-monogamy are rare and almost impossible to find unless you're specifically looking; your friends are an unusual crew.

@Erica P. Although not 'decades' my relationship has been polyamorous (not 'open') for 16 years of a 20 year relationship, and still very strong and happy.

I have not had a group marriage lasting more than three years, however, which was, I think, what Dan was referring to in the previous posts referenced by other commentors. My group marriage is only 2 years old at present, though successful so far.

This thread has been fascinating. I wonder how much is social conditioning and how much is more innate, like hetero-/homo-sexuality. Seems like BlackRose needs to match greener12 with his circle of women, and vice versa.

I don't understand this.

What part of 'marriage means something' do you folks not get? Want to screw around without the limits of fidelity? Okay, it's certainly not MY business or any other persons. Call it marriage amongst yourselves, but please don't inflict that definition on others. Want to choose homosexuality? Again, if you're a grown up doing so with other grown ups, it's no ones business but your own. But having made that choice, don't ask that others take the responsibility for it, or alter millenia old social structures for your convenience.

Want to tell me you're 'saving marriage' by removing every salient thing which defines it from the equation? That's a bit more of a problem. Reminds me of an episode of a Britcom where a street-sweeper tells his buddies he's had the same broom for 40 years. The secret is taking care of it, he says. It's had 22 handles and 18 heads.

Just a note for @52 - in some states (for example, Kentucky) it's not legal for a pregnant woman to get a divorce. I found this out the hard way when my husband and I decided to divorce when I was five months pregnant and we had to wait until after I gave birth to file. I'm not sure what exactly the point is (to discourage a couple from divorcing if the woman gets all hormonal during pregnancy or the man decided he's just not up for it?) but it is a paternalistic pain in the ass for sure.

OK I don't get it. I have tried to imagine it but I don't get it. How can people have outside sexual relationships without any emotional investment? It just seems to me, and I have seen it a countless times, someone, somewhere gets hurt. I have seen poly relationships and except for a ones that I have only heard about, it's usually the man who is getting the action and the women are putting on brave cool with it faces so they don't lose the guy. I knew a couple that took on a new 'wife'...the old wife was, well, old, the new wife was much younger and attractive. The false smile pasted on the old wife explained it all. What was she going to do at that stage of her life? Interestingly, I will say, the new wife only lasted a couple years. As for me the thought of my husband inside someone else makes me sick. Please explain it to me how one separates their feelings?

SB, no one is "inflicting" the current definition of marriage on you or anyone else. Like others, you are free to define your marriage as you see fit, and if you want to conform to a particular church's definition of marriage, that is your right. You need not feel so threatened by the interpersonal dynamics of other marriages or traditions.

@58 a good example of the cost of involuntary openness, just another piece of his soul

Maybe this situation works for her. But who is to say the next man NMM has a spouse-approved fling with doesn't stimulate her emotionally, mentally, spirtitually, and yes, physically more than her husband?

Unless you are a robot, sex outside of a committed relationship is going to allow you to compare a whole person as a potential life partner in place of the one you already, er, committed to.

@38 Could you clarify. Is she your half sister (same mom) and was she a product of cheating or an open marriage? If yes, did your dad know before she was born that he wasn't the father? Do you know how he reacted and were you privy to your parents conversations? For some men it matters a whole lot and would be a deal breaker. Some men won't enter into or continue a relationship when they find out a woman has children. I'm glad things worked out well for your family, but I'm sure you can makes generalizations based your positive experiences. You obviously feel passionate and protective about your little. Parenthood is a lifetime commitment that requires significant sacrifices that a lot of men who are unwilling or incapable of them even when they are the biological father. There are well publicized stories of men who kill their girlfriend's children another man and even cases of a mother killing her own children to be free to be with a new boyfriend.

@68

But who is to say the next man NMM has a spouse-approved fling with doesn't stimulate her emotionally, mentally, spirtitually, and yes, physically more than her husband?

Nobody can say that. But people leave monogamous marriages to be with other people, too, all the time. What's the difference?

@24 My first partner and I are poly and have been together 14 years. 6 years ago I started dating my second partner. We all live together and, other than the usual ups and downs of any relationships, are very happy.

@58: I didn't know that some states would not issue a divorce if the wife is currently pregnant. Thanks for the the insight. My point was that people need to really think about when they want to have children, and that everyone should be informed and give consent.

The letter writer explains (@50) that she is certain that the child is her husband's, but can any of us guarantee that to 100% certainty. Can the husband believe that?

As I said in my first post at the top, sounds like it's going to end badly.

@65: If you separate your feelings, you're doing polyamory (which literally means "many loves") wrong. The point is more love, not less.

That's not to say that everyone in an open relationship feels a deep emotional connection with everyone they have sex with. This will vary depending on the people: sometimes a relationship is more of a casual friendship with sex. Nothing wrong with that, but the idea of trying to artificially and forcibly separate your feelings, rather than just let them happen, seems unhealthy to me.

But if you're asking how to deal with jealousy, there are a lot of poly resources on that topic. I have personally found it helpful to ask my partner for reassurance that she likes me, to tell each other all the things we like about each other, and to make sure to schedule time for us together. You can deal with jealousy just like any other emotion -- anger, say -- by looking at what exactly it is that makes you jealous, what thoughts you're having that trigger it, and then counteract those negative thoughts with positive ones instead, like "my partner's love for someone else doesn't take anything away from her love for me."

Hi all,

Emotionally there is no way I could handle an open situation. Possessiveness, protectiveness, whatever, I can't do it. Just like the times I have been asked out by men. I'm wired the way I am, and have been blessed to find a wife that makes my life a joy (we're holed up in a 4 seasons, testing the sound proofing and the supply of towels. I swear my undies were soaked w. Precum all day yesterday). I just hope that however, and with whomever, you(all) can find what you need and want. I'm not willing to share, but if it works for you...

Peace.

Jealousy be damned. Its the emotional pain, loss of self respect, and doubt about you worth as a person that are hard to deal with. Self hatred and loathing.

Being able to marry more than one person
you love can make a marriage stronger.
Not all marriages,
of course,
not yours Danny maybe,
certainly.
But some.

Danny, why are you such a bigot about marriage?

Why do you insist that EVERYONE conform to your stale model of two person marriage?

@72

The letter writer explains (@50) that she is certain that the child is her husband's, but can any of us guarantee that to 100% certainty. Can the husband believe that?

As I said in my first post at the top, sounds like it's going to end badly.

Of course you can guarantee paternity with 100% certainty. We have DNA tests now that do just that.

But it doesn't look like this couple needs a DNA test. Why wouldn't the husband "believe" that the baby is his if he was the only man she had sex with in the cycle she conceived? It's not physically possible to conceive a baby with a man you haven't slept with. Be logical.

Lots of relationships "end badly"--I agree--but what about this particular arrangement sounds ominous to you? What do you predict will go wrong?

@75: Sounds like you have some serious self-esteem issues, which would make nonmonogamous relationships especially difficult for you - and, in fact, ANY relationship difficult for you, until you successfully address those issues.

Nonmonogamy isn't for everyone - it shouldn't be compulsory, just as monogamy shouldn't be compulsory. And having a preference for nonmonogamous relationships doesn't inherently mean you're a more evolved or better developed person. But successfully participating in a relationship requires a healthy self-respect, and this is especially true for nonmonogamous relationships.

@58: I believe each soul on this planet has a certain set of issues it is dealing with which are determined by a combination of genetic and societal imprinting/conditioning as well as spiritual urge, reason or goal of the higher self to incarnate. Even if you don't believe in past life incarnation, it makes a great metaphor for how some people have "already dealt with certain issues in past lives" and are no longer interested in pursuing those issues.

It could be that non-monogamous people are "younger" souls who are searching, and the monogamous ones are those "old souls" who realize that the pneuma (i.e. connection to the source) exists in every person. From the perspective of an old soul who has incarnated thousands of times over the ages, constantly searching for new experiences is deleterious to a sort of quiet connection to this "love energy" present in everyone, that just needs to be coaxed out through intimacy. Constantly bringing in new partners may shatter that intimacy and make it more difficult to connect to that loving energy. (What some people call "God's love" but could equally be called the paradoxically universal yet extremely personal feeling of love we all have access to).

On the other hand, I will say that facing the pain that an open relationship brings and working through it _will_ bring you closer to your life partner. You will achieve ever greater intimacy and acceptance of each other. But, your relationship connection must be able to withstand the intense energy. It's like running thousands of volts through something rated for a home appliance. From this perspective, using the "past life" analogy, it almost seems as though monogamous people are the "new souls" who are having a hard enough time making the stable connection to _one_ person, let alone allowing other people into that. Following this analogy, it almost seems humanity is on an upward trajectory to more and more acceptance of multiple sex partners as physical expression of love and connection to the divine. And perhaps some of the pain associated with it is because of how vulgar and violent most sex is -- no more than mutual masturbation really! If you research Tantric sexual practices or other 'sacred sexuality' you will find that it is much more loving and inclusive, and most sex appears to be violent masturbation masquerading as union in comparison.

@79: Ignoring the whole souls/past life bit, I don't really think either monogamy or non-monogamy is necessarily a better or more advanced path. On one hand, people are wired differently: it's like asking whether it's more advanced to be gay or straight. On the other, monogamy does seem a little strange in terms of possession and control: is it really that much of a big deal if your partner has sex with someone else? I think we can all agree it's not healthy to control who your partner is friends with, so insisting on controlling who your partner has sex with is a little suspect.

If people honestly prefer monogamy, have thought about the alternatives, and are doing it because they really want to -- because they feel they gain more than they lose -- then I don't think it's an inferior option. But I tend to think most people who practice monogamy tend not to do this, or they do it out of fear rather than because it's what they really want. If we lived in a society where open relationships were the norm, possibly the monogamous people would be the healthier ones, the ones who challenged the norm and took time and effort to build the relationships they wanted, and most people would just practice open relationships unthinkingly and unhealthily.

@61 & 71 - thanks!

Being honest with your spouse is better than cheating, but you can still be making a terribly stupid and reckless decision. Porking your co-worker while pregnant seems like it's fraught with even more than the baseline risks of sex to begin with - there's a lot of powerful emotions swirling around in everyone's head with a child on the way, ones you can't always talk your way out of. Also, Let's not forget that while it's against the law to fire someone just because she's pregnant, it's not *always* against the law to fire someone (pregnant or otherwise) for fucking someone else in the workplace. She's gonna have bills to pay, and shitting where you eat (and where your little one will soon be eating too) is a bad idea.

And not to get all right-to-lifey here, but there is a non-consenting individual in the middle of all this: a viable, near-term infant who has not consented to the risks of getting gonorrhea or herpes or syphilis or HIV or HPV or who knows what else spooged all over him if the condom breaks. We all know people lie.

I suggest: buy a vibrator, and for these last few critical months of development put your child first. If you want to fuck around later, find someone who isn't deeply enmeshed with your ability to earn a living and don't have to see every day in case things get unpleasant and complicated.

@49 - I talked last night to two couples, both married for more than 25 years, both marriages open from nearly the beginning. Believe me, they're out there. I've been married nearly 13 years myself, it's been a negotiated open marriage from the beginning (since before we were married, actually), and we're doing pretty well so far.

@57 - your female friends are describing my husband. Bisexual, monogamish, and GGG. They do exist. I have other (male) friends who are similarly inclined as well. I think we still have too much societal condemnation of a man who's bisexual or "cuckolded" for most men to be open about their bi fantasies or hotwifing fantasies. It's a lot easier for a woman to be out about being bisexually inclined than it is for a man.

@Geni - any tips, for those starting out on this path, besides the standard advice to communicate well?

@69 Yes, she's my half-sister from my mom. I guess you can describe my parents as on the 'hippie' side of relationships. They never married, never really wanted to marry, and both had relationships on the side.
From what I remember about the situation (I was 5 when the little sister was conceived), my dad worked on oil and fishing rigs all throughout my childhood. He would be gone for long periods and knew my mom stayed with my sister's dad on occasion. My dad and sister's dad were buddies according to him, and everyone knew what was up.
I don't know all the details, cause I never really wanted to know cause they are my parents.

And yeah, I know my family is a bit of an anomaly, but I think there are more people out there that care more about relationships than blood than these conversations let on.
When people talk about a man raising another man's child, they do so with derision or puzzlement. To me that's like how people used to treat adoptive kids, you ask adoptive parents if they're any less a child's parent cause they aren't related by blood and see what kind of reaction you get.

@88 - There are books that are helpful - Open, and Opening Up are both good. The Ethical Slut, of course. What I'd recommend for most folks is to find others who've made a success of this, and talk to them. Most major metropolitan areas have something akin to a poly potluck or poly meet & greet group that facilitates discussions, and that can be a really great place to air one's issues and find out what's worked for others. There are tons of websites and forums for polyfolk - do a search on polyamory and you'll find some of the better ones.

The A #1 tip, of course, is to make sure you're both on the same page as to what constitutes your boundaries. "Open" doesn't mean "no rules." What an open marriage is to John and Jane Doe is going to be very different from Mary and Mark Homeowner down the block. You have to establish boundaries with which you are both comfortable, discuss how you'll deal with flirting, insecurities, what kinds of sex/relationships are out of bounds, how public you'll be, etc. Basically, everything. Have a plan for when one of you needs to pull back for a time. Find a poly-experienced counselor if you can (they do exist). Decide how you'll handle safer sex rules, fluid bonding, polyfidelity, all that sort of thing.

DADT doesn't work that differently from cheating, but I don't know many long-term DADT relationships. It seems to last just until one partner gets overwhelmed with new relationship energy, which is the #1 thing to watch out for when you're new in poly. It's very easy to let a new relationship, which is all fun and games and romance and totally devoid of the boring minutiae with which we weigh down our regular relationships, become the focus of all your romantic energies. That is a terrible thing to do to your primary relationship.

And getting into poly because there are problems in your primary relationship is generally a bad idea ("relationship broken, add more people"). You should be as secure as you can be that your primary partner loves you, wants you, and will stay with you. My preference is to only play with others who are in strong, committed primary relationships. That way, the likelihood that you'll screw up your own relationship (or someone else's) is greatly lessened.

EricaP, I was under the impression that your marriage had been open for some time, but it sounds like recently you've hit some nasty shoals. Has this made you rethink the whole idea of poly? From what I've gleaned - which, granted, is a very incomplete picture - it sounds like your primary changed the rules on you midstream, which is just another form of cheating. And that just plain sucks.

I don't think being honest that he wants something different now involves the same kind of betrayal as cheating. I don't feel betrayed, I just feel worried that he is letting himself get emotionally involved with someone else. But thanks for the advice. It's always helpful to get different perspectives.

@91: What is it that specifically worries you? Worried you'll have less of him? Worried he'll leave? Worried it means you're not desirable enough? I find it helps to be specific as a way of dealing with worries.

@92,

If your worry is of being dismissed, does it really matter why?

I hope Erica's husband has been reading this, 'cause distressing your wife isn't cool.

Peace.

@89 Thank you for the clarification. As you seem to realize there is a broad spectrum of individual and social reaction/acceptance about this type of situation. You got real lucky in who you have for a father.

@92, I worry he will bond with someone else and our relationship will matter less to him. And, yes, I worry that he may leave. I understand intellectually that all that can happen without a girlfriend too, but emotionally I still connect the two (new girlfriend leads to one foot out the door).

@93 You could also say, "airing one's marital problems on the internet isn't cool." We're both doing the best we can.

@95,@96,

Amen.

@97 You "expect that open relationships are less stable compared to monogamy-intended ones." You're right that it's just speculation, because we haven't seen numbers, but it could go the opposite way, too!

As a person with an open relationship, I have the opposite perspective from yours. I see closed relationships break down all the time because the partners aren't communicating, and they're terrified of being cheated on, which adds this sort of constant anxiety in their relationship. Because cheating is considered a deal-breaker, when all those inevitable martial drudgeries you describe creep in, someone cheats and they split up.

Whereas in my relationship, cheating is allowed, so we don't have that same worry. That can be a comfort by itself.

But I have to say that you paint a picture of the carefree, bohemian "other woman" or "other man" which doesn't seem realistic. You have a theory that when times in the marriage get tough, it's so easy to retreat to your affair. But in practice, it sort of often works out the opposite way.

We find our marriage to be safe and comforting, and it's the extra people we sleep with who are difficult and stressful to manage. Sleeping around is something we only attempt if we have lots of energy and some spare time. In times emotional distress, we retreat into our marriage.

The dating scene is hard! The uncertainty of new relationships sucks! People get married to avoid all that stress, to STOP ever having to go looking for a new partner again. When you open up your marriage, you invite all that strain back into your life, and sometimes (most times?) it seems like way too much work.

People in open relationships are likely not sleeping around all the time. Most of the time, they are just sleeping with each other, content with the idea that they *could*, if they wanted to, cheat. But they won't. Because they can't be arsed.

@95: #90's suggestion to talk to a bunch of poly people is a good one. One idea about jealousy worries that I've found helpful is to try to turn them around: for instance, think about him bonding with someone else, and because your relationship allows him the freedom to form that bond, your relationship matters *more* to him; or think about the extra love/sex/pleasure that he gets from an additional relationship amplifying and bouncing back towards you; or think about how he might be *more* likely to stay with you because he has another partner.