@99- it is weird. Maybe part of it is knowing that you have other options, too. The passion is perceived as diluted because you've got a wife, other play partners, etc. If you can't have a specific person, it's no loss to you, you'll still be getting laid with multiple people regularly while an other not in a relationship (or not in an open one) doesn't have that luxury. It's not necessarily good logic, but we're talking about feelings, insecurities, etc. These are the things rolling about in my head as I navigate these new waters, and I imagine some other women might be the same, though certainly not all.

Of course, I would never respond to an online cheater, the cheating was with friends during particularly wretched dry spells- a necessary evil, as it were.

S-Lo....your post makes no sense at all. Your logic would apply to married cheating men as well and you made it about sex, which I most certainly never make it about. I get that some people thing monogamy the only real option, but we aren't talking about these people.

No loss to me? Are you kidding? Of course losing a friend is a loss to me. A friend that is also a lover, even more so. What a silly thing to say.

@90 - Not all women who cheat actually wreck homes, but the women LW is talking about, ones who get off on the idea of being chosen over a married man's wife and won't sleep with him once they realize he has his wife's blessing, could be fairly described as homewreckers. And not everyone who cheats is automatically a bad person, but using Dan's own terminology, most of them are CPOS.

@90. Sorry, meg, but yes. It does automatically make you bad people, except in the narrowest of circumstances. That part of you (and your friends and sisters) called ethics is broken in this way. You could choose to fix it - behave ethically - but you'd rather not.

I think its okay for the guy to lie by omission ethically here. Unlike 35 suggests, he'll never be a bigger SOB that the women who want him cheating. But I also think it would be a very bad choice for him to have sex with such a woman. Trouble, drama, and a proven lack of ethics. Not something to really get mixed up with.

If he is anything but a 0 on the Kinsey scale, he really should explore a little bicuriousity. He will feel really wanted really fast.

Amanda - comment 103

I used to be, long ago, a man that justified my lying and cheating. All women that get involved with a man that is lying to his wife/gf/partner, regardless of the reasons, are potential home wreckers, as is any man that does the same. The problem with getting involved with a man that would lie to the person they claim to love and are committed to, is that in reality, you are dismissing all the evidence in the world that they are in fact not trust worthy. It's rationalizing your actions to the nth degree.

If a man, or woman can't be honest with their spouse/partner there is no reason to ever believe you are getting the truth, and every evidence that they will in fact lie to you when convenient as well.

This is the whole gaping logical fallacy that seems to be eluding people discussing this today.

@91 re insecurities:
We can never know for sure why someone is in our bed, because people are complicated, and we're not mind-readers. So you can trust their words, you can trust common-sense, or you can trust your insecurities.

@99 Well said; thanks for sharing.

@104 "he should explore a little bicuriousity ... [if he wants to] feel really wanted." You are correct, sir. Either that, or learn bass guitar, as noted @42.

@100 EricaP
The ever lovely Mr. V may have meant that $500 is a lot of money to most Americans thus excluding them from this option.

@94 EricaP
Mrs. J doesn't buy intimacy with sex and I certainly don't buy sex with intimacy. I can't remember the last time we had sex -- not how long ago it was nor whether it was even good. Yet we have profound intimacy with each other. Perhaps you'll say I'm putting out for free or being taken advantage of but it doesn't feel that way.

@107 (also Marrena @97) - I didn't say these were universals; I said it was a vast generalization. I think you two are far from the middle of the bell curve on this issue.

As to why you stay and offer her intimacy when she doesn't have (much) sex with you... you obviously have your reasons. I'm in no position to guess at them.

Good god. You've all convinced me to just never have sex with anyone ever again, of any gender.

Thanks.

WTFO - comment 109

Screw the ethics question. Seriously. The issue isn't if lying to get laid in your situation is ethical, the issue is "is it going to be fulfilling?" And given what you just wrote back, it isn't. Please take my advice. Join OKCupid. where there are thousands upon thousands of possible women to choose from and one of the questions that is asked there is "Are you open to open relationships". If you take the time to find their response to that....then write a well thought out email to them and have a ton of patience, you will find women interested in your honesty.

Don't be honest for anyone but yourself. It is the only way to live drama free. It's not an ethics thing as much as a "well being" thing.

AJ

So-Lo - 110

You feel the way you think (REBT/Cognitive psychology). Your comment seems to suggest that you think your emotions just happen. They don't. Take control of your emotions by understanding the self-talk that leads to them, and changing the negative self talk that leads to negative emotions.

"From a purely logical perspective" is a damn good place to start.

AJ

@EricaP, @Mr J, etc.
FWIW, $500 and up is what you'd pay for an escort who looks like a professional swimsuit model and is specifically marketing herself to wealthy men. There are plenty of perfectly lovely and talented escorts in the $250/hour range. Once you hit that price level, the quality of the experience you'll have is more a function of chemistry than money.

You don't actually need actual experience with escorts to figure this stuff out (my personal experience with sex for hire is limited to lap dances). Just go poke around on www.thereviewboard.net and read the detailed reviews left by johns.

@94 --

Women use sex to buy intimacy with men.
Men use intimacy to buy sex with women.

In my (admittedly sad) case it's more something like this: I can't find intimacy so I make do with paid-for-with-money sex, which is a lot easier to find. Or it could be that I'm not willing to work hard enough to find intimacy. Entirely possible.

@113- Totally get that. I'm working through/around these feelings as I go through this and I'm a big fan of logic.

The feelings do "just happen" sometimes, the thoughts pop into my head and I wonder where the hell they came from since they're not something I consciously think or believe. I notice, acknowledge, and consider it, but that's a far cry from embracing it and allowing it to control me. (Otherwise I wouldn't be involving myself with the open guy at all at this point.) Often that helps me figure out the root of it, dig it up and toss it out.

The Letter Writer's women want someone who is hiding the truth. Seems to me that if he pretends to be a CPOS for them, they are getting exactly what they asked for.

If they are in it for the emotional thrill (Dan's scenarios 1 and 3), I don't see this as any worse than learning how to talk dirty to turn your partner on. If they are hoping to steal you, there isn't any practical difference (for them) between a man who will never leave his wife while keeping secrets, and one who will never leave his wife while telling her everything.

The only real concern I see is the ones who want the Mutually Assured Destruction pact. I'm guessing that they figure if your relationship is open, then it is expected that you tell your wife about your partners, and word might get out through her.

@81: "It's very human to bond and love more than one person - we've just all been taught that one love must be dead before another can grow."

Either that or the practical situation that most people start looking when (indeed, because) the previous love is sickening and dying, so the fact that one is pursuing a second relationship implies the first relationship is not long for this world. It's not that it _has_ to be dead, merely that it so often _is_. A threatening prospect, not surprisingly.

@108 EricaP
My Love is my life.

I know it's popular to view monogamy as a repressive and unnecessary straightjacket, but lordy, I don't see what WTFO got by pursuing non-monogamy as a strategy.

It sounds like he was insecure about his lack of mating success prior to meeting his wife, so he asked to open the marriage. Now that the marriage is open, he's been reminded of his lack of mating success prior to meeting his wife. Now the one success he did have (courting and marrying his wife) is undermined by the fact that the woman he loves and who presumably loves him back is out having sex with other people while he struggles to do the same.

He would have been far better off confronting his own insecurities and looking on the bright side - he established a wonderful trusting relationship with his wife. Wouldn't his energy have been better rewarded reinvesting in that than trying to open the relationship?

Rather than embarrassing himself in the pursuit of the semblance of intimacy with cheating strangers, he'd be better off pursuing the reality of intimacy with his wife, with whom it sounds like he has a strong and authentic bond. And he should focus on that bond as the reason to re-close the marriage, not sex or his lack of success trying to get it outside the marriage (otherwise, he's going to continue to view himself as a failure, instead of a guy with a successful marriage).

His situation is so backwards and the lengths he's willing to go to to bang randoms are so humiliating - stuff like this makes me really baffled why people think monogamy is so hard.

WTFO - Not sure what area you are on, but that question is yes in a decently large part of the population. However, I am in MA, so results might vary.

If it is just getting laid, then by all means say whatever it takes. If someone is begging you to lie to them, then I don't see a problem with it either. I just think you'll probably be disappointed with how you feel after.

Your situation is vastly different than mine.

@121 - Why do you need to be desirable to more than one person? Look on the bright side - your relationship with your wife is a glass more than half-full, not partially empty. In my experience, people who are motivated by insecurity and fear make self-defeating decisions. If you truly love other people, believe that love is to be shared, feel that you and your wife's lives are enriched by sex with others, keep the open marriage. If you just have some feeling that you're worthless unless you stick your penis in more than one vagina, your open marriage won't solve anything for you. You'll still feel like shit after the Nth to the power of a gajillion strange you nail.

I'm looking for intimacy as well as sex. I can't divorce the two and wouldn't want to.

WTFO, ethics or not, I don't think lying is going to work for you because it's going to be a barrier to intimacy.

Sure, you could trick a woman into having sex with you, and maybe that wouldn't make you a bad person, but would it make you feel truly wanted, knowing that she doesn't really know you? You seem like a caring man who gives a shit about doing the right thing - wouldn't the lie always be at the back of your mind, nagging you?

Sphinx002's advice seems good for you. And what @86 said - if your ad is clear that you're in an open marriage, you won't get so many responses from women who want you to be cheating. And get out there in the community and make friends! Are there any cool art projects in your area that need volunteers? Bicycle coalitions? Political campaigns?

Seems to me that you're a lucky man who can have it all. You've got your wife's permission, now you just need patience and persistence.

Why does this discussion always include (EricaP saying) "hire a sex worker"? What am I missing?

Is that as easy and affordable as you make it sound? It seems to me sex workers cost hundreds and hundreds of dollars, and tend to get busted by cops in shitty edge-community apartment complexes. Unless you're talking about strippers, who don't fuck customers. Or "happy ending" massages? Which also get busted.

What the LW wants is an ongoing series of sex encounters that feed his self-esteem. I really doubt his wife's willingness would extend into the (tens of?) thousands of dollars annually this would cost.

Post 122 -

While I agree that I think he's reasons for being non-monogamist seem misplaced (I do not share them), your equating it to why people should be monogamous is faulty logic at it's finest.

People do many things for many different reasons. Using one specific case to make a point proves nothing other than you like cherry picking cases to make a very non-valid point. Yeah some people open their relationship for dubious reasons just like so many people choose monogamy for dubious reasons...so what?

@126
It's a suggestion that really doesn't align with the frequency of sex that people here generally say they need. I have trouble understanding how it would be much help. (for this and other reasons)

LW, I am deeply sorry for the situation you are in. I won't lie, it will be a rough road going forward for you.

If you go to freaksexual.wordpress.com and click on the article titled "Nonmonogamy for Men" there is an essay by a poly activist that should be able to help out.

I hope that you are able to resolve the situation in a way that works out well for all parties involved.

In the meantime, I would recommend perhaps getting involved with hobbies that can keep you busy or if you have a religious tradition perhaps getting more involved with that.

Will it really help WTFO’s ego to have to lie to get sex? I thought that was part of his problem, how is deluding himself and other people going to help. I’m not a fan of lying to get laid, but as they say there wouldn’t be enough bricks to build the prisons if that were deemed unacceptable I guess. But it just seems sad and low. Does WTFO actually want to get laid or does he just want to whine about all the women out there who don’t want to.

@27-

You don't get it.

The hookup game is so easy for women precisely because it's a game the vast majority of them have little or no desire to play. They want to get into an LTR with a quality man. The number of quality relationship-oriented men out there is far fewer than the number of women who want LTRs with them - and THAT's why women resort to boob jobs, push-up bras and makeup. Most women playing the hookup game are actually trying to use hookups as a hook to start an LTR. The hetero mating game makes both sexes feel deeply disadvantaged, because you simultaneously have lots of men competing for a small supply of hot hookups and lots of women competing for a small supply of good LTRs - and in practice, the vast majority end up having to settle for a lot less than they hoped for.

With that said, however, I don't have a problem with WTFO allowing his hookups to assume he's a CPOS. Trying to steal someone else's husband is low and getting lied to is a perfectly reasonable penalty for attempted homewrecking. If you acted unethically, you have no right to complain about your counterparty's unethical behavior.

@127 - Exactly what you're arguing I'm doing is what I think goes on in relation to monogamy. People say: lots of people fail at being monogamous, so monogamy must be bad. Or monogamy is hard, so it must be unnatural. I say monogamy is a strategy, with plusses and minuses, just like any other approach to life.

I'm not generalizing solely on the basis of WTFO's experience - and I'm NOT suggesting that everyone should be monogamous. I'm just putting an ad jingle out there: "Monogamy, not as hard as you might think!" Or "Monogamy - it's not always worse than the alternative!" I really think people overestimate the plusses of non-monogamy. Or mis-apply it, as in this guy's case. It's not that he wants to be with other women - it's that he's scared he's not worth as much if he can't make them want to be with him. That's messed up.

Post 132 -

Another equally ridiculous post. You were doing exactly what I said, reread your post. I haven't seen anyone say monogamy is bad. That is a straw-man argument. I've seen it said it is hard...and it is. Now, unlike you I'll give you evidence. If it were easy, then why do so many (and statistics say that an overwhelming majority) fail at it when they try? You also bring up that it's unnatural. Well so are many things, however evidence again seems to point that human primates are not wired to be monogamous...on the whole. Are their exceptions? Obviously.

Yes it's a choice, all of life is. Stop being so damn defensive of your choice by coming onto a post that has nothing to do with monogamy and ranting that this is a good reason to be monogamous and that monogamists are somehow persecuted. They aren't, not here or anywhere else.

And you said "His situation is so backwards and the lengths he's willing to go to to bang randoms are so humiliating - stuff like this makes me really baffled why people think monogamy is so hard. " So stop trying to pretend you don't have an agenda and aren't generalizing.

@109: "my only currency...[was] the 'married man who would risk it all for me' fantasy"

Why not come up with a better fantasy to offer, one that isn't based on a crucial lie? Be unconventional, be larger than life. Become a master of something (art, music, gaming, blogging, etc.), demonstrate your mastery in mixed-gender groups, and some number of women will fall for that fantasy.

avast@118, "If they are in it for the emotional thrill... I don't see this as any worse than learning how to talk dirty..."
But WTFO would probably have to give details about his imaginary marriage. He wants to just quietly let them assume he's cheating -- that works for a one time event, but not for an ongoing pseudo-intimate relationship.

124/126 – ordinary people cannot use high-priced escorts for maintenance sex – that is what one's wife is for. Ordinary people can use high-priced escorts like a vacation in Hawaii – an adventure one looks forward to for months, and then savors afterwards.

Also, Sphinx002 - thank you for your excellent posts. Where have you been my whole life?

whoops, @134, my third comment should be addressed to 126/128.

"52% of women have had sex with a married man."

I seriously doubt the validity of that statistic even if you include women who didn't know the man was married.

To be brutally honest here--a woman looking for random hot hookups is not going to want to hook up with an inexperienced guy, because there is always the danger said guy is going to flip out on her. Players are reassuring to fuck because you know they aren't going to end up stalking you. A guy doesn't have to be George Clooneyesque (a man who really pings my gaydar) to get strange. And I'm not saying to read The Game or whatever, but try to follow the social cues of men who are fucking random pieces of meat, if that's what you are looking for. That Ryan Gosling/Steven Carell movie gives the flavor.

And yes, a married guy is technically not inexperienced, but just reading this guy's posts gives me a run away vibe.

Sphinx002 - Reread my post. I didn't say monogamy was easy. I said it's not as hard as the alternative the letter writer is pursuing. And as you yourself said, you don't agree with his reasons for non-monogamy.

I'm not saying non-monogamy is always the answer, but monogamy has gotten very unpopular on the Slog. In this case, I actually think monogamy IS the answer for WTFO. I think he opened his marriage for the wrong reasons and put himself in a worse position for it.

If you're taking my comments as an attack on ALL non-monogamy (and it seems like you're reading it as an attack on YOUR non-monogamy), you're mis-reading them.

God this is tiresome.

@139 No, monogamy is not the answer for this guy. Take his word for how he feels. He wants to prove to himself he can be a player, at least on a small level. So now he has to do that. His real question is, "how do I become a player?" It sounds to me that he wants to be able to walk into a bar and pick up a woman looking for a one-night stand, and he doesn't sound all that choosy about appearance or whatnot. He should be able to do that, and if he does it right, the question of whether he's even married or not shouldn't come up. That's the answer he needs to hear.

139 - I couldn't read it as an attack on my non-monogamy since you have no idea my reasons for what I do with my life, and thus how could you be attacking them? Yes you did comment on all non-monogamy and you were defending monogamy and it wasn't being attacked. I don't have to reread, I quoted in my last post exactly where you generalized. Just own up to having an agenda when you wrote, and move on, really.

I agree that this guys reason for non-monogamy are sketch, however that is not agreeing that monogamy for this couple would be better. In fact, I'll say I don't agree with that at all. There are options that are not one or the other.

EricaP

I've been here having a sane rational life.

AJ

As an aside to WTFO -

There are no right and wrong answers to why to have an open relationship, but I'd say that there are reasons for doing so that are self defeating and not good for you emotionally. You really have to be in a certain place to make these things work long term. Let me copy and paste something I just wrote to a woman that asked me why I am in an open relationship

"Well I use the term open relationship because it's what most people can wrap their heads around, although to me it isn't anything defined so much as it is a product of the way I, and my partner Karla think. I don't believe that love or a relationship is about control or ownership and I also think that rules in a relationship set up blame. What I mean is this - telling your partner, be it a b/f or hubby that he can and can't do ______ is the best way on earth for making sure two things happen. One, if he ever thinks of doing _____ he's never going to share his thoughts with you, and two, if he ever does _____ he's never going to tell you or lie to you. I don't think this is a good foundation for a relationship.

Now what does that have to do with an open relationship? This; I don't control Karla and I don't want to. I love her...really love her, not lip service love and not a love that is "me" centric. I want her to do and experience anything and everything she ever wants to without exception. That means that if she finds some man, or woman, worthy of her time and friendship, that I encourage her to explore that. I don't make a difference between that friendship being platonic or not, as I understand that as a human, she might well find herself physically and emotionally attracted to others...and that attraction has nothing what-so-ever to do with her feelings and commitment to me. In fact, I love seeing others see in Karla what I do. It's fascinating to see from the outside looking in.

She feels the same with me. That only works if her and I talk constantly and have a communication system between us that other couples probably couldn't fathom. Since we have no "rules" between us, it has also meant that we are free to be 100% honest about anything without fear of blame or consequences of our actions or mistakes. "

If you are in the open relationship thing because of what you want for yourself, then I'd say maybe you need to reexamine why you are doing it. As Centrist said above, this might not turn out the way you want.

Just telling him "seek out the local poly community" is not necessarily going to work for him. It's a dirty little secret of many poly communities that the women basically can have as many sex partners as they have time for - and committed boyfriends, too - while there are countless number of men floating around, both married and single, who can't get laid to save their lives. There's just more men available and interested in open relationships than there are women. And telling them, well, fine, then go the swinger route and do couple swaps, isn't necessarily any kind of answer either. I have a full dance card. My husband doesn't. If we go to a swinger thing, it's going to be in the hopes of him hooking up with someone - and he wants a girlfriend, anyway, not just a fuck-buddy - and I don't particularly want any more partners. My dance card is FULL. I don't want to do a couple swap and have sex with some guy who isn't my thing just so my husband can get laid. I may have to, though - OKCupid was a total bust for him. Guys who are a bit older (we're both past 50) who are in open relationships - well, they get crickets for responses. I'm past 50 too, but the minute I said "open relationship" on OKCupid, I was inundated.

A lot of poly folks don't talk about that, but it's true. It's MUCH easier for most poly women to find men, either for NSA sex or actual relationships, than it is for men. And I am so not interested in the quid-pro-quo couple swap thing - I'll sleep with you if your wife will sleep with my husband. I would seriously rather hire a pro. But my husband wants a girlfriend, not just some random vagina.

Geni - Very well said and 100% accurate. The past 50 thing on OKC would be very hard (I'm not there yet). See my post above - as a man, if you don't have the right mind set going in, the whole thing might very well destroy your self confidence.

WTFO @ 109 "I'm looking for intimacy as well as sex."

WTFO @ 121 "find the off switch on my self-sabotaging honesty long enough to get laid."

Which is it?

My question is...why would you WANT to fuck women like that? Ugh.

Get ye to a poly meetup.

@137: Maybe that statistic includes all the married women who never have sex with their spouses anymore?

(ducks and runs)

Scoring through online encounters will ALWAYS be easier for women than for men. That's what my husband and I discovered when we opened up our marriage and started cruising for dates online. I had more promising responses than I could read within hours, and well...any guy knows that the best you're going to get online is a few wary, picky women every once in a while who have probably decided they're not interested two words in.

It was a big hit to the husband's self-esteem and confidence, so we decided to wait on the extra-marital dating for the time being. Over the next couple of years, we instead developed our social circle as a couple and found friends we could be open with about our (theoretically) open marriage. The result? Female friends started throwing themselves at my husband, including women who never would have considered themselves poly or considered dating a married man. I had male friends interested in me, too, but the ladies go for hubby a lot more, it seems. In this case, our marriage isn't an obstacle and they don't feel threatened by me because I don't feel threatened by them. They're my friends, I love them dearly and I'm happy to share my man with them. For them, it's a safe, but exciting fling with emotional connection but no commitment strings attached. In all of these encounters, the friendship comes first, sex second, and any given sexual encounter is sort of spur-of-the-moment, nothing's obligated.

So, WTFO, consider this: your relationship with your wife actually CAN be a sort of currency. Some women might want to feel like they're "beaten" her, but other women - better women - will see her love for you, your respect and love for her, as just the sort of sterling recommendation they need to hop in bed with you.

As a matter of ethical relativism, I think the most functional way to pursue ethical behavior when interacting with people with widely varied ideas of what is ethical is to cue off of them. Barring any obvious universalities (I don't actually know of any - for example, if lying is always wrong, then lying to Nazi death squads about the Jewish family hiding in the attic was wrong of all the people who did it; I certainly don't think that was wrong, so that torpedoes the idea that honesty is always best, putting us into some degree of relativist territory) or convoluted systems of relative evaluations of behaviors for relativistic ethics (I try for an impact-based ethics if I can, in my estimation, predict the possible outcomes of my actions with a high enough degree of accuracy, else I default to the status quo, unless the status quo is so obviously more harmful than helpful), the inversion of 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' is a pretty good heuristic (the Golden Rule itself is actually terrible, as it makes one seriously prone to exploitation): do unto others as they do unto others. While it's difficult to read motivations or know the full context of another's actions, how one behaves can give a reasonable general sense of what others find to be right and wrong. Also, no one is owed a consideration that person does not give to others, as such a demand is privileged behavior, not ethical behavior.

Basically, I'm with Dan. If someone thinks cheating is okay (good, even), that person is implicitly signing off on dishonesty in sexual relationships. In terms of the severity and impact of the lies in question, cheating involves lying to someone to whom one made an explicit monogamous commitment and exposing that person to the risk of physical and psychological harm of, given how much value most people ascribe to partnered sexual behavior, a potentially severe degree. Claiming to be cheating when one is in fact in an open relationship involves lying to someone in a circumstance when one has not made an explicit commitment of any sort to that person with only low to moderate (unknown) psychological risk (as the person with whom one is 'cheating' knows about the primary partner and is therefore voluntarily assuming the physical risks of having sex with someone with multiple active sexual partners, as well as singing up to not be a primary partner, irrespective of any designs to 'steal' the guy). In terms of both scope and impact, the lie to the person who wants to be cheating with the husband is of the same sort but less severe than the lie implicit in cheating on which the person with whom the husband is 'cheating' is already signing off, so that person can have no reasonable expectation of honesty, and it is, by hir own ethical framework, perfectly acceptable behavior.

@151 "if all it takes is not mentioning my open marriage..." Good luck with that (sincerely). My feeling is that women who want you to be cheating will also want you to badmouth your wife, but I'd be happy to learn that I'm wrong.

What are some of your favorite accomplishments? Can you polish them and bring them to the attention of women who might take an interest? With me, it really helps a guy's chances if it looks like he has a life beyond work and marriage. For one thing, it means he might have time to see me more than once a month.

I remember in some old column, Dan told a girl whose boyfriend had removed the condom during sex that she was right about feeling violated, because she had agree to have sex with him as long as it was safe, and him removing the condom in the middle of sex changed the conditions under which she had consented to the act in the first place, therefore he had violated her (as the guy removing the condom without checking with her annulled her consent to the sex). I wonder why that rule doesn't apply here for the woman who thinks the guy is cheating: if he lies, she can't make an informed decision; if he has sex with her under false pretenses, he is violating her because she can't consent to something she is being unaware of.

@36 . . .

. . . upscale sex workers are actually better at making a guy feel desired than other women are. That's their job.

That's sort of the point. It's a job; it has nothing to do with desire. Now, I don't begrudge people use of such services if that will satisfy, but if a guy wants to feel desired--and make no mistake, feeling desired (not like you've been manipulated effectively enough into feeling desired, but like the person you're with is, in all likelihood, actually desirous of what you have to offer) is a big part of what drives any man into any bed at any given time--an effective performance isn't really going to provide that.

This is not to say anything one way or another on whether or not it's acceptable to lie under the conditions at hand, but to suggest that a reasonable portrayal of desire is a passable substitute for being desired seems myopic.

You guys are NEVER going to get that feeling of being honestly, sincerely desired for your hot body, except in your dreams. Or with a man. With women, there's always some way you're paying for it (or your insecurities say that you are.)

Yeah, but most of those ways are far easier to bear than your $500/hr. figure (I barely gross that in a week, and half of it goes to rent); it may even be something any hypothetical man in this situation is willing to give. The ways in which we pay, the amounts we pay, and the transparency and negotiability of "costs" still leaves most of the sex those of us who have never utilized the services of a sex worker have had to be essentially, if not exclusively, desire-based (give or take a time or two that we might have just been used for revenge on someone else--and revenge is way, way, sexier than fee-for-service).

Women use sex to buy intimacy with men.
Men use intimacy to buy sex with women.

Accepting that premise arguendo, if a woman desires intimacy with me, that says something about me aside from how much corporate ass I'm willing to suck to make the kind of money a sex worker costs. Whether it's my body, my personality, my familiarity with the works of Pablo Neruda, there is actually something in and of me (in a way that my paltry earnings are not in and of me) that is desired.

This is all hypothetical from here, since I'm married and not engaged in anything so complicated (lest any who know me in the meat world should be unduly confused). :)

@156 If you're happy with your sex life and happy with whatever "price of admission" you pay -- then I'm happy for you.

@157 WTFO was trying to buy real sex with fake intimacy. That's not your situation.

@154: Lack of a condom can result in permanent consequences such as STDs or pregnancy. Pretending that your wife doesn't know about your philandering when in reality she is totally on board with it results in...what, exactly?

Conceptually, what these women are asking for is, "I never would have agreed to do it if I had known that all concerned parties were in agreement." That concept is absurd on its face. If you even attempt to take it seriously, it becomes downright sociopathic. What, I have to make sure that at least one concerned party would be heartbroken before I'm willing to engage? What kind of monster would that make me?

Couple that with the fact that they are asking for a level of honesty for themselves that they are at the same time expecting their partner to deny his spouse, and you see that they are requesting something to which they are not entitled by their own ethical framework. (Well said, John Horstman @152)

@WTFO - you said you joined OKC a few weeks ago. Patience is definitely in order. It took me at least that and I'm a young, attractive female.

I really, really think you should get a female friend to review your profile and tell you what she thinks. A woman who knows you can let you know why you aren't getting what you want far better than strangers. I'd be happy to do it myself - is there a private message feature here? Many men don't get a second look because of some easily fixable profile issue or unflattering photo. It makes a lot of sense to really put some effort in, especially if you are a niche market.

I also think that your wife could help here by making friends with poly people with you. An unaccompanied male at a poly event is not reassuring to solo women. The wife/female partner does have substantially more access in these situations and she should be willing to meet new people so that you can too.

I can also tell you that an Eeyore attitude dries up your chances faster than an open wound. Happy women want happy men. Go out for a while without trying to get laid. Try and have one interesting conversation and call that a success. Being attractive to women has a lot to do with enjoying friendships with women, and seeking them out with laser focus will definitely give off the wrong vibe. If you're having fun, other people will want to be part of it. Enjoying your time out with your wife will go a long way towards making you an appealing prospect. Personally, I scope out men at these events at least a few times before I approach them - I want to get a sense of whether they're happy with their partner and this is a fun and fulfilling addition or if they're using other women to prop up a fading love life or damaged ego. The latter is too much pressure - if I hook up with them once and never again I feel like they are hugely disappointed and potentially very awkward when I run into them again.

Best of luck!

@158/@159 - The point being that intimacy, even fake intimacy, is of me. My money (or subsequent lack thereof) is not.

I'm not the letter writer, so I can't say whether it's within him to want sex more than he wants to feel that someone else wants to have sex with him. For me, and for not a few men with whom I've conversed, the former is always a matter of the latter; the sex is very nearly incidental to being found worthy of sex.

You guys are NEVER going to get that feeling of being honestly, sincerely desired for your hot body, except in your dreams. Or with a man. With women, there's always some way you're paying for it (or your insecurities say that you are.)

This sounds very dogmatic, and I don't buy it.

I desire some men for their hot bodies. If what you're saying above is true, then wouldn't it follow that women don't feel sexual desire?

Am I missing some context for this seemingly-nonsensical quote?

Don't mean to be rude. Just don't understand why this is out there without much comment.

Why do you need to be desirable to more than one person?

To me, the need to be desired is so reflexive and so integral to my being that I quite literally don't understand the question, and I'm not even in any sort of "open relationship" (though my wife and I may have given out a spare key to the relationship once or twice). Needing to be desired is primary; fruition of desire is, now that I'm happily married, an unnecessary nicety, secondary to the reminder that I'm off the market because I choose to be, not because I don't currently have any trading value.

Look at it this way--I have evidence that my wife finds me attractive. I imagine that, say, Carrot Top also has evidence that someone or other finds him funny. Being attractive to more than one person (and I've no idea whether I am; I can only hope) simply gives me some evidence that my wife is not confused or deluded about what's attractive in the same way that Carrot Top fans are confused and deluded about what's funny.

@51 and 58: We should start a club. :|

@WTFO,

Stop looking for reasons to be unsuccessful, and recalibrate your self-standards. If you truly are a part of a "cup runneth over" marriage, then you have lots of experience to bring to your search. If you don't feel comfortable with the bar scene, then don't go. You have 18 years experience of what works, and it isn't cheating to stick to the kind of environments you feel comfortable with.

Personally I'd recommend some tune up time with a therapist to deal with some of your negativism. A "cup runneth over" 18 year marriage is a huge accomplishment!

Peace.

@163, it's not that "women don't feel sexual desire" -- it's that one person can never be sure why another person is eager for sex. People are complicated. Only in dreams can you know for sure that your partner is there because of pure desire.

But hey, if people want to say that all sex with non-prostitutes is holy and hot, and all sex with prostitutes is degrading, well, I'll just say that doesn't fit with my experience, on either side.

@167 I think I get you on the sex with prostitutes thing.

I agree that people are complicated. I've been in many situations where it was pretty obvious to all parties involved that the woman (me) was under the power of pure animal lust.

Cock worship. It's not just for men.

Sometimes things become clear and simple.

@168 Thanks for the hot image :-)

Oh yeah, you are welcome. Some men, at least, have no doubt about the power they have over women.

Only in dreams can you know for sure that your partner is there because of pure desire.

True. Being a broke stage actor, though, I can at least be certain that nothing else I have to offer beyond desirability would be enough; thus I can be confident that I am receiving such gifts largely because of desire.

But hey, if people want to say that all sex with non-prostitutes is holy and hot, and all sex with prostitutes is degrading, well, I'll just say that doesn't fit with my experience, on either side.

Certainly not degrading; I hope that wasn't inferred from anything I said. But sex with a prostitute isn't indicative of any property of me but my economic solvency (which, in my hierarchy of values, isn't a measure of any quality whatsoever, aside, perhaps, from a pragmatic willingness to grovel before the right people).

To me, the services of a prostitute are like the "unconditional" love of a mother or a deity. I can see why it might be a net positive, but it says nothing of the value of the recipient. Maybe there are people who can function outside the need to reaffirm their own value. I do so envy them.

@27

"As a straight guy, you have to work every angle you can. Instead of asking yourself "Is this right?" ask yourself, "Is this legal?" "

And you wonder why women don't want to have sex with you.

Do it! You're preventing some home wrecker from actually wrecking a home.

If you were an adult who looked like a child, and a pedophile wanted to have sex with you, but only if you're a child, and you wanted to have sex with this adult, because you want to, go ahead! Lie about your age! For the sake of some kid(s) somewhere.

What a post-modern problem to have. Can I pretend to cheat on my wife so that the women I contact will have the impression I'm really cheating on her -- when in fact I'm not, because she knows everything and is OK with it?

I'm with the gang who says that it's not OK to lie to them, not simply out of respect for sincerity rules (I do think there are situations in which it is better not to tell the truth, or even to lie), but also for yourself. If you're thinking about it as an ego-boost, WTFO, wouldn't it continue to damage your self-esteem if you thought this woman who slept with you only did so because she thought you were cheating on your wife -- and would have walked away if she knew the truth? Would you really feel so good about it? If you're avoiding sex workers because paying for sex doesn't help you feel better, then why would lying -- especially since you say you're very honest?

I suggest you do what many others suggested and find the local poly community.

The imbalance with your wife getting more attention is to be expected, given that men tend to (in average, with strong cultural influences, etc. etc. etc.) want sex more strongly than women, and also that women tend to risk more, physically and socially, when they decide to take a lover. It comes with the game. I hope you're not comparing yourself to your wife on numbers alone. In case you are, perhaps you should talk to her about that, and about how this difference makes you feel.

@thelyamhound - I think you (and most people) don't really know what it's like to be with a good high-class escort. It's not usually a one hour (ha!) sex session - it's usually several hours of conversation, drinks/dinner, then sex. More like a date. Except it's a date with someone who is a pro at making you feel like you are the most entertaining, interesting, attractive and charming man in the universe.

Most men (people, actually) are capable of a good deal of suspension of disbelief, especially in the face of several hours with a talented, worldly, attractive and intelligent woman. Most escorts do not HAVE to have to be escorts - we're not talking about survival sex here. They are educated, with higher degrees, are smart, charismatic, and obviously very good looking. They choose to do what they do because they have an affinity for men, love sex, and enjoy the financial freedom escorting offers them.

Aside from the sex, you leave feeling like the king of the world. At least, that's the way it's supposed to work.

I vehemently disagree with Dan this time: it's not ethically okay. Whatever the woman's reason for not wanting to be the third in an open relationship -- it is not up to you to decide that if she's into deception [=deceiving your/her partner], then she must be into deception [=you deceiving her].

For some, it will be the lure of the forbidden, or possibly mutually assured destruction for CPOS. Some might not want to date you knowing they don't have a shot -- a guy willing to cheat is, to some women, a guy willing to leave his partner (never mind that a CPOS usually stays a CPOS in the future), a guy she has a shot at.

Still, it's definitely not okay to mislead people. One night stands when such information is not going to come up, well, it doesn't need to be brought up. But if you are building any sort of long term relationship with someone, man up and be honest. There are some women (many!) who are exactly in your boat, WTFO, and want a stable partner outside of their relationship.

Perhaps he should try asking the women why they stopped being interested after he was honest. Maybe they thought he only wanted a threesome with the wife, or that she would be a big part of their "relationship"? Perhaps they were worried he would not be as discreet? Whatever it is, there is no point speculating: just ask.

@thelyamhound - I think you (and most people) don't really know what it's like to be with a good high-class escort.

Well, no; I've been married for over 15 years to a woman I met in college; it's never been a necessity. My observations are born of the fact that it still remains important to me that I am attractive to other people, and of my experiences during the three or four years that I was single and sexually active.

It's not usually a one hour (ha!) sex session - it's usually several hours of conversation, drinks/dinner, then sex. More like a date. Except it's a date with someone who is a pro at making you feel like you are the most entertaining, interesting, attractive and charming man in the universe.

Yes . . . because she's paid to make me feel that way. See, I'm not (necessarily) entertaining, attractive, and charming in this scenario, or at least her "making me feel" that way is not evidence that I am any of those things. It's evidence that my money is well spent, and that she's good at her job. When I'm looking to be found entertaining, attractive, and charming, it's my skill and attributes I'm hoping to confirm, not someone else's.

Most men (people, actually) are capable of a good deal of suspension of disbelief, especially in the face of several hours with a talented, worldly, attractive and intelligent woman.

Perhaps I'm more hopelessly bolted to the real than most.

Most escorts do not HAVE to have to be escorts - we're not talking about survival sex here. They are educated, with higher degrees, are smart, charismatic, and obviously very good looking. They choose to do what they do because they have an affinity for men, love sex, and enjoy the financial freedom escorting offers them.

Let's be clear about something: I am implying nothing whatsoever about the worth or skill of the escorts in question. The simple fact remains that the person with an escort is paying that escort to find him charming, attractive, etc.; if his issue is that he does not find himself such, the efforts of an escort to make him feel like he is are clearly efforts, undertaken for money.

I'm surprised at the level of disagreement with the advice Dan gave. I can see the point... dishonesty of any kind has a price. But... as long as your wife is in on the dishonesty then how bad can that price be? I guess he'll find out.