Move on L-dub. Yeah, it hurts. Yeah, it sucks. Yeah, you got played a little. That happens in life. From your description of your initial responses to an open relationship, the probability that trying it with this man will be an awful, gut-wrenching experience sounds way too high to give it the old college try.

From the sound of it, the ex-boyfriend seems like one of those guys who hasn't quite figured out that needing an open/poly relationship is just how his sexuality works and that he needs to start new relationships with that conversation/expectation. No attempt at deception, just one of those guys conditioned by the culture to try to force himself into monogamy for as long as he can.

For his sake and his future partners, I do sincerely hope he gets that figured out.

I know it's a big ask given that ITROW is still mourning the end of this relationship, but one thing I'm surprised Dan didn't say in his response is that she should work on disabusing herself of this idea that, because this guy was her "best-matched boyfriend ever", she'll never meet the like of him again. There are millions of guys out there, but the longer she keeps dwelling on this guy and this breakup, the longer it will take for her to find one who's funny, smart, sexy, on the same page politically, AND into monogamy.

Y'know, I'll bet there are at least a few people out there "in monogamous relationships who are happy and feel a true and deep intimacy with their only partners and who absolutely, positively did not want to be in a monogamous relationship when their partners first asked about making the relationship exclusive."

But for some reason they don't get a mention here.

I get it that monogamy is often assumed instead of discussed, and it shouldn't be that way, but it also sounds like the subject didn't even come up for the first nine months, and when it did only one person was expected to change themselves to preserve the relationship.

I do wonder if the ex is idealizing non- monogamy, thinking that it means "whatever he craves, he gets." If he has an uncontrolled sense of entitlement, adding more people won't fill up his need. He hasn't actually lived poly yet as I read this? Or maybe he does just have a clear sense of his needs. Regardless the LW is not likely to find happiness here.

Granted this is all via the LW, but for the ex's sake I hope he has a clearer picture himself than "needs adventure" and "still wanting other women". Like a concrete image of what arrangement would work for him, what kind of partners and what kind of agreements (or if his need is ANARCHY).

@5 yeah that struck me too, non-mention that sometimes people do take monogamy as their "price of admission" and find their way into happiness. But I think Dan might say that everybody's aware of the monogamy option, they've given it a look already.

These two sound young to me, still figuring out “what I need to be satisfied”. This is a hard phase, LW, but you are learning about who you are, and what you have to have so next time you can have the discussion earlier and find a partner who is on the same page. “Weed out the chaff from the wheat” as they used to say back in agrarian days when everyone was familiar with wheat and chaff. That doesn’t guarantee things WON’T ever change, but you can lower the chance of it happening. This is one of those “life lessons” we all have to learn, and it seems we have to learn them the hard way. EVERYBODY DOESN’T ALWAYS THINK THE WAY YOU NEED THEM TO THINK IN ORDER FOR YOU TO BE HAPPY. Take a deep breath. Let out a huge sigh. Be thankful for the good parts of what you experienced, and keep a weather-eye out for the next “funny, smart, sexy, on the same page politically” guy that comes along who will be happy in a monogamous relationship. THEN you’ll have ALL your boxes checked. One more thing. It’s all the IMPORTANT boxes that have to be checked, not ALL the boxes.

She sounded firm in what she needs, and it’s only agonizing heartache causing her to now question her own perfectly valid and reasonable needs. Getting back together would be a mistake that will end in a repetition of her current heartache...except magnified the second time.

Nah, I don't agree that wishfully thinking the trope about "when you really fall in love, you won't want anyone else" might be true. Oxytocin is strong; perhaps early on, he really felt like he wouldn't want anyone else. I think that's common. Then nine months in, it's wearing off, and what he really wants makes itself known. He gave it a shot, now he knows himself better than to think monogamy can work for him even when he really loves someone. There's a difference between finding other people attractive and needing more than one partner. He deserves credit for being honest with her. They both sound like they know themselves, and I hope they each find more compatible partners.

I think both sides deserve sympathy in this situation. It seems to me that bf was honest when saying he tried. Some believe that old habits of any kind will go away once you find “the one,” getting married, having a child, etc.

As for LW finding places to talk about her stuff, I would recommend shop around and find a suitable 12-step SLAA group. I’m not suggesting she is a love and sex addict, what I do suggest is a free place to go and listen to others at first and decide if she wants to talk or not.
For me those rooms helped figuring things out, anything from what I really want, looking into my past and my patterns, as well as learning from others.
Take what you want and leave the rest.

P.S. I had almost exactly the same thing happen to me. A couple years later, the right gal came along and I married her. 15 years after that, she wasn’t “the right gal” anymore and we divorced. Now I’m happier than ever, just about to celebrate 9 years with someone who really clicks with me. If at first you don’t succeed...

Robot @5: "it also sounds like the subject didn't even come up for the first nine months, and when it did only one person was expected to change themselves to preserve the relationship." As opposed to the other person being expected to change himself? No. Not "only one person was expected to change." Both people vocalised their needs and they were not compatible. So there was no choice but to move on.

Also, you're wrong about the subject not coming up until nine months in: "We'd briefly talked about the concept of 'monogamish' in the very beginning of dating, we both agreed it sounds great, so long as everyone is on the same page." So, given that this did come up early on, and given that she seemed positively inclined towards it, why did it then take nine -- edit, thank you Belle, SIX -- months to come up the second time? Did she say she wanted to be more secure in their relationship before opening up? A reasonable strategy, and isn't he to be commended for not "badgering" her?

Perhaps the reason the monogamous-not-by-choice didn't get a mention was because it would have been bad advice to get this woman's hopes up, to hint to her that she could change him into a happily monogamous person. If he thought he could be happily monogamous, he'd have stayed with her. He didn't. Why taunt her with the others who did make that choice? And while you're talking about who doesn't get a mention, don't forget the monogamous-under-duress who cheat.

Belle @4: Yes, good catch -- he told her at six months, and they discussed it for three more before realising they were at an impasse.

By the way, Morty, you look awfully familiar. Don’t I know you from somewhere?

ITROW says they talked about what it would look like in practice for him to go outside for extra sex. She doesn't say that her ex spelled out how it would work for her to go outside for extra whatever she wants-- sex, intimacy, fun. Maybe they did talk about it, but from my reading of the letter, this was never presented as something equal for both of them.

She says "He asked if bringing someone home for the both of us would work for me" which I interpreted as: they both have sex with the same relative stranger, probably a woman. If I'm misreading this, let me know, but it sounds to me like he didn't even give lipservice to a true open relationship where they'd both be free to have sex with other people. Instead, ITROW jumped straight to how she's "had enough of those experiences". I read that as meaning she's had enough of F-F-M threesomes. Again, if I'm reading that wrong, let me know. Granted she jumped straight to how she knows she'd need an emotional connection anyway.

I find it deeply disturbing that ITROW sounds like she thinks there's something wrong with her for desiring a monogamous commitment.

I want to know where one might date where monogamy is the fallback assumption. That is I want to know where to date that's not a fundamentalist-purity-crap-type church. I'm thinking of the good old days (yes, using that term ironically) where it was assumed that people had sex before marriage, learned what they liked, then settled down with a commitment to one person.

@14 +1. Ack.

“People in monogamous relationships are still attracted to other people.”

Yes, but for all we know, his original quote about a switch flipping meant he wanted to get to a point where she was always more attractive to him than the potential of having other partners, and that moment never arrived for him.

Other than that, I agree they need to end it. Neither can give the other what she or he needs, and therefore, they’re wasting time together.

“Switch to flip”, funny boy. No LW, no switch flips, monogamous people still find others sexually appealing. It’s a choice. Like being poly is a choice.
I didn’t read thru your letter once I sensed you were thinking of compromising what it is you want. Even if you find yourself interested in poly later on, don’t try it with this guy. Six months in and no prior indication things were awry, he sounds like a player. Leave him be.

There's also that thing terrible people do in which they force the other person to break up with them so they can exit the relationship still feeling like the "nice guy." Hopefully he was being honest and they can stay amicable, but it's certainly not unusual for people to realize they want out.

Either way, you wanted different things and it's best to move on.

@ LavaGirl, I agree that being in a polyamorous relationship is a choice, I’m not sure that “being poly” is.

My best friend and I are both women in our late 40s. We’ve known each other for over 20 years. She has always been more interested in monogamy, and more content in (serial) monogamous relationships. While I spent years in a monogamous marriage, I was never truly happy with it. After my marriage broke up, I finally accepted that maybe I’m just not cut out for monogamy. Realizing that was like finally tossing off a corset, and being able to truly breathe for the first time in years.

I’m not sure why my friend and I are different in this way. But I don’t think either of us made a conscious choice to “be poly” or “be monogamous.” We just are who we are.

I'm going to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and say no one was being an asshole and no one was being a player. The LW seems pretty clearheaded, and I feel like she would have mentioned any inkling that her boyfriend wasn't on the up-and-up. I trust her gut more than everyone else's inferences.

In any case, the two are simply non compatible. Though I know how much use it is to tell someone what they should or shouldn't feel, still I'll say: the LW shouldn't be doubting herself now. It seems like she knows herself very well, and she made the right decision. If everything is as presented, everyone was the epitome of maturity and self-awareness. I hope she doesn't let what-might-have-been cloud her judgement now.

*not compatible. Though I suppose "non-compatible" would work, too.

KillerSmile @20, I was thinking more it’s a conscious choice to stick within the parameters of one’s lifestyle. Poly people if they want to be ethical need to follow some restraints as does those who live monogomously.
Sexual response/ attraction to others doesn’t go away whatever lifestyle one lives.

I don’t read this man is searching for ethical anything. Letting himself slip into monogamy then he jumps out, without warning. To answer your question, LW, it’s a wise choice to let this go.
As he broke your heart so carelessly, he really wasn’t such a good catch, imo.

Sorry, I neglected to finish my thought @10: Nah, I don't agree that wishfully thinking the trope about "when you really fall in love, you won't want anyone else" might be true is "total bullshit," as Dan said. I think Mtn Beaver is bang on when he says that BF does not seem to have explored polyamorous relationships yet. They do sound young and it's not surprising he tried to follow the expectation of "finding The One." He should get on OKCupid and go to poly meetups and only date women who are ethically non-monogamous. That way he can find out for sure whether polyamory is for him, or whether he's being unrealistic in his expectations of what it will be.

Certainly, most people who choose monogamy are giving up other people they may desire, to some extent. Like everything else, it's a spectrum; on one end are people who really, truly don't want anyone else once they are happily partnered, and on the other the people who feel completely trapped and miserable in a monogamous relationship. Yes, Lava, some people truly are so naturally inclined this way that we cannot simplify mono vs poly as "a choice"; naturally monogamous people would be miserable "choosing" a poly relationship, and we seem to have far more sympathy towards them than the naturally poly ones we expect to "choose" to forsake all others for the sake of making one person happy. Killer @20, yes. Lava @23, poly typically does not mean free-for-all. If the freedom to be with multiple people will always be more important to you than any one person, no matter how great the relationship with that person, one is naturally inclined toward polyamory and should not be expected to "choose" monogamy any more than a person who does not want children should "choose" to become a parent to please their partner. To thine own self be true.

The bf should now i.e. after this experience look for poly partners from the outset.

Did he want a 'deeper and more intimate connection'? No--it would not have been more intimate; it would have been marked by resentment, in that you would not have been giving him what he wanted. Wouldn't it have been more 'intimate' just to have gratified him? To have entered imaginatively, and with pleasure, into his hookups?

But the lw can't do that--and why should she? She was right to accept a break-up. It isn't the case, further, that she 'wasn't enough'. I'm sure he thought their sex was great, too. It's as she said herself--he 'craves variety'. She should accept the difference and not implicitly moralise it with words like 'deep', 'intimate' and 'enough'. I wonder whether he is journaling or out scouting his next partner?

I explained what I meant by choice, Fan.
I make no judgements about why people want to be poly or monogamous. Within those boundaries, there are restrictions on one’s behaviour, it’s then one chooses.. to stick with whatever commitment one has made to others.
I’ve never thought or suggested ethical poly was some free for all.

Free for all is perhaps what this man is looking for. He needs to sort himself out before taking any more women down the falling in love monogamy route, then making an about face. That’s cruel and he’s left this woman heartbroken.

For your part in this sorry saga LW, maybe don’t invest in a man so heavily, in such a short time. And don’t assume monogamy, or any other relationship dynamic till you and the man have talked about it.

Yes, Lava @27, and that understanding of "choice" would allow, for example, for gay people to "choose" to stay closeted and to partner with opposite-sex people. A choice that leads only to misery is no choice at all.

Harriet @26, your comment is muddled as usual -- no, monogamous people would not consider it "more intimate" to share their partner, and there's no indication that LW is bi -- or, for that matter, that what BF wants is "hookups" -- but you do make one good observation regarding the language she chooses and its inherent moralisation. I too wondered, based on this obvious bias, whether she was accurately representing BF's words. "His sex drive is high, he craves variety and adventure" does not set him up as the most sympathetic person on the planet. Most men have higher sex drives than their female partners, particularly at the age we presume these two to be; most men "crave variety and adventure" but have little trouble giving that up for the right person. Framing his desires this way makes him appear selfish and callous; but is he really, or is that through the lens of her reaction to the idea of non-monogamy making her physically ill?

Also, Harriet @26, she didn't "accept" a breakup, she initiated it.

And lastly, he didn't engage in some bait and switch; I repeat that they discussed being monogamish at the very beginning. Most of us have hoped we could change to meet someone else's price of admission, in the throes of early love. I see this man as having tried to be what she wanted, then been honest when he realised he couldn't. No cruelty here.

@2 MythicFox & @3 UpandOver. Yes. I don't think this guy was her ideal bf either. The ideal guy is someone monogamous.

@7. Mtn Beaver. If her price of admission is monogamy and his is his nonmonogamy, they are incompatible. I see no reason to put it less flatly than that. That way leads to assuming, on resting on assumptions, that one is preferable to, more moral or natural than the other.

/break/
I think there are--know there are--straight young men, smart, hot, funny, able to 'talk female', who implicitly or explicitly suppose they will be able to have multiple female partners of the sort who are inclined to monogamy, who may be monogamous themselves and will be some variety of poly under duress. To the extent that this is observation, not a grotesque MRA fantasy on my part, this is a bad development: these guys should be consciously poly (and, more on the societal level, it would better conduct to 'assortative mating' if more women were poly).

I'm all sympathy, LW. It's sad to let someone so great go, but you've got a vital lack of compatability in a critical area. I'm exactly the same as you, and there would be no way people like us would be happy in an open relationship.

@30. Bi. The 'good point' for you is the only real point I made. Obviously a monogamous person would not consider it more 'intimate' to share or give away a partner, or to get off on the idea of them having sex with someone else.

But don't worry--I've said something more genuinely contentious later. Your button will be pressed. To hotness! You may even like it.

I would think he semi-bait and switched her.

What Fan? I’ve lost you and you’ve lost me. Sorry, my bad explanation.
We choose to respect our commitments, within a monogamous or poly relationship. How we get to why we bend one way or another is not what I’m talking about.
Whatever form we live, we choose daily to respect and nourish and protect those forms. Temptation is never far away, doesn’t matter what life you live.
What has monogamy or poly relationships got to do with coming out of the closet.. the latter is a sexual orientation, the former are social/ sexual structures.
Fair enough if the guy talked open ish.. I skimmed parts of the letter. A broken heart always needs some good broken heart music.
Grieve LW, and move on.

You poor girl, heartbreak is the worst. You have made the right decision though. Even though I'm sure right now it hurts like crazy and seems to make no sense, it would hurt you so much more to push yourself into doing stuff you know you don't want to do, and inevitably end up back in the same place you are now, except even more messed up. Go with the clean break for faster healing I'd say.

Be thankful it was only 9 months, I went through this scenario for years with my ex partner - each of us wanting opposite things, each of us taking turns to try to do it the other persons way, but it destroyed the relationship ultimately of course and caused a huge amount of unhapppiness. We had an incredible sexual connection and loved each other immensely but that basic incompatibility was insurmountable. Don't go back. Just treasure the good times you had together and free each other to find someone that truly suits you. He wasn't your best match ever, because of the discrepancy in your needs.

Spend the next while being really kind and gentle to yourself, and keep taking care of you. It sounds like you know what works for you, stick with it and you'll find happiness again.

Ms Fan - Would you like to borrow LMB?

Well said, sandwichesatbedtime./
@35 cont: which brings us back to this man thinking a switch would flip, Fan. It doesn’t flip, attraction to others doesn’t stop, doesn’t matter what your relationships structures are. This is where choice comes in, to follow or resist, depending on promises made to one or more people. My confusing words, sorry.
I hope this man has learnt and is more careful in future to not engage women in this way again. There is no switch, and he needs to say upfront what he’s offering.

Perhaps if BF had written the letter, Mr Savage (though I'm not sure, as Mr Savage's view of monogamy versus non-monogamy closely mirrors Miss Brodie's opinion on whether her set should enter the senior school on the Modern side or the Classical) would have mentioned all the monogamous-under-duress people who worked their way through to happiness and not gotten hopes up by mentioning the reverse.

The people Mr Savage isn't mentioning are those who cave under duress in either direction and don't either find breakup-inducing misery or bliss. I'll take exception to his inviting the inference that everyone who stays in a non-monogamous relationship entered under duress is blissful about non-monogamy instead of staying through inertia or a calculation that staying is marginally less bad than leaving.

Serendipitously, I happen at the moment to be re-reading The Message to the Planet, which gives a lengthy and leisurely treatment to the situation of non-monogamous-under-duress Franca Sheerwater, who stays but doesn't find non-monogamy at all blissful.

Ms Fichu's suggested situation is something I'd probably have thought I'd never be able to deserve. I got lucky, but never felt up to requiring monogamy.

I’ve told my story enough here to not belabor the details again, but I came here to say I think I’m just lucky that in the beginning I didn’t really discover my desire for non-monogamy until I was too far into my marriage to reverse engineer it into “price of admission”. Back then I chose to stick with what I knew was good and forgo the shiny object of non-monogamy. It wasn’t that hard really, and I can’t imagine having left my wife for the “promise” of adventure and variety. By the time I realized it was a desire, I was in too deep.

In truth I never really had any problem with having JUST my wife. Monogamy worked just fine for me, and probably would have continued to work just fine if I never went stumbling down the path to ENM and Poly. I’ve also often said that if this triad I find myself in went away I’d probably not seek to replicate it. I’d be totally ok giving up poly in the future, it just isn’t a requirement for me. The only shift for me at this stage, 28 years into the marriage, and 31 years into the relationship, is that some form of nonmonogamy (probably swinging in some form) is now pretty damned important to me. But I still consider swinging a team sport and if you can’t field a team, because one member doesn’t want to play, then you have to forfeit the match.

In assessing any relationship, you have to count the sum total of everything that makes up that relationship, and so the longer you stick around it only seems natural that the value would grow, and if that value doesn’t grow then it is likely the relationship won’t last anyway. So, the “price of admission” for my wife is quite different than someone new. If I were to find myself single today, non-monogamy would be the starting point.

I think this couple was right to break up. They both seem to know what they want, it just isn’t the same thing, and at 9 months moving on isn’t THAT big of a deal. It seems like they should be able to shake hands and even stay friends.

Lava @35, did you miss the "is polyamory a sexual orientation" discussion last week? The upshot is that many people who are poly believe that it is. Or, at least, that it is sufficiently hard wired into their psyches to be equivalent to a sexual orientation. For people who believe this to be true about themselves, you simply cannot tell them "everyone is tempted sometimes, choose monogamy." That would be like my saying to you, you admit that you admire the beauty of some women, so you can choose to be bisexual. We are either wired in a certain way or we are not.

And those of us who are wired for monogamy DO experience a "switch flipping" phenomenon, to some extent, in the early throes of a relationship. It's as if they feel the same way upon seeing an attractive member of their preferred gender that you do when you see an attractive woman. The appreciation is there, but not the desire. Now, most of us fall somewhere in between those two extremes, but that doesn't mean the extremes don't exist. A heterosexual person can choose to have queer sex, but that doesn't mean it's right for them, or that a relationship like that would last. This man says he is wired for non-monogamy. We have to take his word for that.

Harriet@34~ “...I would think he semi-bait and switched her...”

In my relationship experience, it’s hard to make any real evaluations in the first 3-4 months with a partner who is BASICALLY compatible with you. Everything is too fresh and exciting. Then, about month 4 you can start to notice things that don’t quite feel right, and by months 7 or 8 (or later-or sooner) those “things” can outweigh the initial headiness and become a “reluctantly admit this isn’t going to work” decision. Sounds like LW & BF were right on that timeline. Best intentions by both parties going in but not every relationship is destined for greatness, and if you don’t hate each other right off the bat, that takes time to figure out. Like I said @8, don’t hold grudges, admit reality without blaming and move on thankful for the good parts of what you had.

So if Polyamory is a sexual orientation, should it be added to the LGBTQ? Given that so many marriages end in divorce, and kids get all disrupted... I think it could be an easy sell...

Fichu @ 15
Granted, the letter is a bit vague on details. My interpretation of, “I've had enough of those experiences to know I need emotional connection to enjoy sex” as “sick to my stomach” just thinking about it when the subject was brought up. I took “we were never lacking in variety and adventure and we felt great pleasure and contentment with our sex life” in the context of a monogamous relationship, sex that involved only the two of them.
It is possible that the subject of “what’s in it for her” was indeed brought up yet being who she is and lack of interest was never mentioned in the letter.

LW comes across as very insecure on all fronts, not only on her desiring a monogamous commitment.
One of her questions was about group discussions that may help her. Anyone else has any suggestions besides my SLLA one?

As for the bf, I think he was acting in good faith, like she was. The cards were laid in advance, and assuming both are somewhat rookie navigators there are likely to be some unavoidable trials and errors.

@18, for example: "Six months in and no prior indication things were awry, he sounds like a player."

That seems to be a recurring refrain, but isn't what actually happened. They discussed nonmonogamy right at the very beginning of the relationship:

"We'd briefly talked about the concept of 'monogamish' in the very beginning of dating, we both agreed it sounds great, so long as everyone is on the same page."

(BiForDan appears to be one of the few -- only? -- commenter who has noticed this.)

So it sounds like "they" (read: he) floats the idea of a light form of nonmonogamy early on, and by her own admission, she seems willing to give it a go. To borrow BiForDan's description, that oxytocin begins wearing off around the six month mark, and he broaches the subject more seriously. After an additional three months, the relationship ends.

You can't pin this one on anybody -- this is a no-fault break-up. I'm not sure why others are so eager to blame the guy when the LW herself doesn't fault him for any wrongdoing. Very strange.

I think going back would probably be a mistake... It's an example of two people falling madly in love only to realize that it just can't work. It happens, and it sucks.

Surprised no one has mentioned this, but comments like...

"I would get heartsick and physically ill"

"sick to my stomach—at the thought of 'sharing,' at the thought of 'not being enough.'"

"I also worry about safety, about him getting someone pregnant by accident, about him becoming emotionally attached to someone else."

"choose just me, a deeper and more intimate relationship with one person, where we explore the variety of "extra" through each other"

...strike me as big 'ol red flags that LW might want to engage in some self-reflection. To be clear, I AM NOT SAYING SELF-REFLECTION WOULD LEAD TO EMBRACING NON-MONOGAMY. But the reasons LW gives for preferring monogamy--non-monogamy makes them ill, it means she is not enough, the safety concerns, choosing a "deeper" and "more intimate" relationship--suggest some not great views about both non-monogamy and monogamy.

As I'm fairly certain Dan has said numerous times, no one will ever be "enough" for another in any relationship, monogamous or not. Someone who thinks (non)monogamy says something about being enough for their partner is likely to think the same way when a partner needs to meet other, non-sexual needs outside of their relationship. Additionally, the depth and intimacy of a relationship has nothing to do with whether it is monogamous or not, as LW seems to be suggesting (I could be misreading here). As for safety, non-monogamy isn't inherently less safe, an idea that LW acknowledges is irrational and yet can't put aside, which kind of reads like they actually do think monogamy is safer, just not absolutely 100% safe. And finally, if just discussing the possibility of opening up a relationship makes LW "physically ill", that maybe suggests some less than healthy ideas about non-monogamy and by extension monogamy. You can know yourself and what you want without discussing what others want making you sick.

Maybe I'm totally misreading this, but the letter read to me like LW has some problematic unexamined assumptions about relationships, whether monogamous or not. Again, not saying self-reflection would make LW open to non-monogamy. But it might reveal some deeply ingrained ideas about what relationships are/should be like that will cause problems down the line. It could also help them be clearer about what they want and why, which can never hurt when moving on to another relationship.

Quoting from the letter: "We'd briefly talked about the concept of "monogamish" in the very beginning of dating, we both agreed it sounds great, so long as everyone is on the same page. But I know now I could only do it only in theory. It's not for me in practice."

I'm not sure why people are so ready to give him a pass based on this "brief talk". They talked about a concept. That would be like talking about the concept of skydiving. I think we can all agree that the concept sounds great! Right up until the point when you're actually standing at the cargo door of an airplane - 10,000 feet above the planet.

He knew what he needed to be happy and yet he kept it to himself. He probably brought up the monogamish convo just so he'd have some plausible deniability when reality hit. But you said it sounded great! Woe is me!

It seems that a lot of people are also cutting him slack because he was in the throes of new relationship energy and just didn't realize it would wear off? If he's been in any other relationships at all, he has to know about nre and the fallout when it ends. Perhaps she's the first monogamously-wired/minded person he's dated. She should definitely be the last, unless and until he can be honest from day one and not just keep his fingers crossed behind his back....

For now at least, monogamy is the de facto relationship model. Until that fact changes, it is the responsibility of the person not built for that model to disclose their expectations well before the first date.

I don’t think “briefly discussing being monogamish” at the start of the relationship is enough. The BF most certainly did do a bait and switch! He knew it wasn’t for him all along and should have clearly told her about his preferences before 9 months passed. We don’t know where these people live - and I know many commenters live out west where non-monogamous/alternative relationships are more common, but back East where I live it’s NOT common and most people assume monogamy and haven’t encountered too many other situations. I have had non-monogamy “sprung” onto me after several months with someone also, and it fucking sucks. I truly consider my ex-BF a total asshole for not telling me sooner and so is this guy. The person who is outside of the societal norm of any behavior should be the one to explicitly and clearly communicate that from the start. Maybe society “shouldn’t assume monogamy” but that’s not the society most of us live in, unfortunately. Open relationships and polyamory are a dealbreaker for the vast vast majority of people— for both men and women.

While not a war, I sense a division along genitalia lines with BDF being one of the few exceptions (at least the one I recognize, apologies for those I’ve missed.)
I still maintain that there is no good and bad here. I’m sorry for those of us who had bad experiences in this regard, yet I view both as equally trying and admitting failure. Best advice would be to move on.

He (as told by her)
“We talked recently and what I gather is that he was waiting for a "switch to flip" where he wouldn't want other women; when that didn't happen, he felt compelled to tell me.”

She (as told by herself)
“We'd briefly talked about the concept of "monogamish" in the very beginning of dating, we both agreed it sounds great, so long as everyone is on the same page. But I know now I could only do it only in theory. It's not for me in practice.”

@15. Fichu. It would not surprise me if (even among the young) the Savagistas were an advance guard, a church of arduous and self-determining exceptions. So it could be that monogamy is still a norm.

I'm in sympathy with the tone of everything you say. I can imagine how a 'we're-monogamous-but-I'd-prefer-monigamish' relationship could more equitably run: after the oxytocin-soaked period has worn off, and the one who wants to rove is ready to do so, the other partner would get a three months' grace to look for secondaries or FWBs themselves, to accustom themselves mentally to openness or to decide it's impossible for them. It could be choreographed more for this person's comfort, and a timetable from the start of the relationship could be more explicit.

@46 see, I took those comments in the exact opposite way. It sounds to me from the rest of her letter that she's already done a ton of reflecting on the idea and come to a conclusion. She's monogamous by nature and appears to have done the work to know that.

I don't blame the BF for realizing he needed to be in an open relationship to be happy. They both sound young, and it's normal to try things on (like monogamy) before realizing it's not for you.

If the BF were the one writing in, I would encourage him to explore relationship anarchy at first. And spend some time to figure out what type of open relationship would work before getting in deep with someone else. I had a boyfriend who realized he was poly a few months into the relationship, and I agreed to try it with him. This lead to him being a really shitty partner - bouncing from one new relationship to another, lying to me about who he was seeing, and making me feel neglected regularly. Then when I finally (after 6 months of this) found someone I was interested in seeing, he became a jealous mess.

I'm sharing this because it's easy to get excited about the possibility of always being able to find new partners, but the practice its dating on hard mode. Make sure you're being considerate to all parties involved.

Yes Fan @41, I did miss that polymory was an orientation discussion and I dispute that it is.
Thru out human existence and one assumes in most if not all human cultural groups, there have and will be homosexuals.
Yet each cultural group, except ours, tend to follow a set structure around monogamy etc. which the whole group follows. If any social/ sexual structure was ‘an orientation’, like being gay or straight is, then whole cultural groups wouldn’t be able to follow their tribe’s expectations of how their basic sexual units operate.
It is a malleable part of humans, how we construct our cultures, changing across cultures, yet strict within most. And as we see in our culture, where ethical poly not evident publicly in my youth, sexual/ social constructs evolve as science has aided in pregnancy prevention.

was not evident publicly

Apology, left out bi as an orientation.

@49 @CMDwannabe Chiming in to say I'm with you, @BiDanFan and @46 @JohnBlitz. I agree with @BiDanFan that many people do indeed expect to stop wanting to have sex with others if they meet "The One" even if they expect to still find others attractive. These are different issues. And I also think some people need to see a pattern emerge before they recognize their preferred relationship type deviates from the norm. I would not consider it a bait and switch but rather a combination of wishful thinking, internalization of societal norms and just not quite enough relationship experience on his part. If he was honest at the outset about liking the idea of a monogamish relationship, it seems he was already mulling over his preferences and discussing them openly. I see no reason to believe he was holding back. And I give him immense credit for raising the possibility of non-monogamy when he realized monogamy was not going to work for him. Lots of people just cheat and that point instead of attempting honest renegotiation.

I agree with the multiple suggestions that he could benefit from pursuing non-monogamous women to see if that is indeed a better fit for him. And finally I agree that her value judgments about "not being enough" speak to a mindset about monogamous relationships that could be unhealthy.

@46. johnbltz. Of course. But she's a journaller--she thinks she's doing the self-reflecting. Is this the best time for her to take hard truths on board? The process will have to be gradual.

@43. Donny. At the start of the relationship--after they've had the discussion about monogamishness--he expresses no desire for anyone else and she thinks she's 'enough for him'. Then he does and she's not enough for him. This is regrettable. It's a soul-sapping and hurtful experience for her to have to go through. Merely this happening suggests to me he didn't walk her through the stages of his wanting nonmonogamy right.

We don’t know what their sex life was like other than he has a high sex drive. Did they have sex twice a week whereas he wanted sex twice a day. Would he have been satisfied with the LW if they had sex as much as he wanted?

We don’t know if he was open to her having other partners, or would he be jealous?

I think the last few lines in Dans response were what caught my attention. When I was a teen I tried to be friends with benefits with two of my female friends at once and found that, in fact, they both thought we were much more than that. It was the 90s and, for straight midwestern teens, poly or open relationships were most certainly not an option. As a result, even though I always wanted to fuck many women, all the time, that this was something I just was not going to get. And, I thought, everyone felt the same way.

I am glad young people get the opportunity to openly have different arrangements now. But when I hear that someone is agonizing over wanting to fuck more than one person all I think is "No shit Sherlock."

Harriet@56~ “...after they've had the discussion about monogamishness--he expresses no desire for anyone else...”

That’s not what the letter said. She did say, “We'd briefly talked about the concept of "monogamish" in the very beginning of dating, we both agreed it sounds great, so long as everyone is on the same page...” I repeat my assertion that both parties went in with good intentions, but soon realized that THINGS CHANGE as a relationship in its infancy goes on and YES, they did the sensible thing by breaking up after what was really, a brief try at making it work.

@59. Donny. Yes, they are better apart. The LW's question to Dan is whether she did the right thing in splitting up; the answer is 'yes'.

Donny @42: Exactly, which is why I continue to advocate a 90-day money-back-guarantee approach to relationships. In those first three months, you don't know the person well enough to commit yet, and you haven't shown them the potential dealbreaking sides of yourself. You are right by month four, the cracks are beginning to show. He probably felt the strain of monogamy a month or two before he admitted it to himself and worked up the courage to talk to her.

Tim @43: I'm not trying to "sell" anything but understanding, and I don't think that thinking of polyamorous as akin to a sexual orientation requires giving anyone a stripe on the Pride flag. If straight poly folks want to support the LGBT community they should do so as allies -- allies who can better relate to queer folks.

John @46: Yes, that jumped out at me; much of her language struck me as a bit melodramatic, but as a recently heartbroken person, I decided to give her a pass.

JibeHo @47: Hell no, skydiving as a concept sounds fucking terrifying. No thank you! Not even in theory!

Lava @52: As a monogamous person, your views on polyamory are noted.

Amos @57: Wanting more sex with one's partner, or more sex generally, is a different thing from wanting different partners. See today's column for a man who seems perfectly satisfied with just one partner and does not want the "variety" this LW's ex craved. So my answer is no, even if they had as much sex as he wanted, he would not have been satisfied.

Ms Fan - Polyamoury as an "equivalent" to a sexual orientation sounds on the right track. Perhaps a "parallel"? As for the long-past-time-for-an-amicable-divorce acronym "community" per your reply to Mr Browne, that ship has already sailed. At the moment, my working suggestion is for a split into two groups - one full-on GRSM and the other SS.

BiDanFan @61 - And polyamory, or enm sounds equally terrifying to large segments of the population! Your point?

@John 46, I totally agree, she should re-examine her assumptions— and it has nothing to do with monogamy or ENM. She’s interpreting his feelings as reflecting her value. It’s a common cognitive distortion, discussed in Feeling Good and other books on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. I think sexist attitudes can make this particular distortion even worse for women. Society teaches us to seek out male approval, and to view our selves through the male gaze.

That approach causes women a lot of pain. We can’t control anyone else’s feelings. And men’s feelings are as fickle and irrational as everyone else’s. I hope she can learn to see herself as “enough” — regardless of what anyone else thinks.

Jibe @63, my point is: "I think we can all agree that the concept sounds great!" No, we wouldn't all agree when that concept is skydiving, and we wouldn't all agree when that concept is monogamishamy. Some of us find each of those things terrifying in both theory and practice, not just practice, which you seem to have stated yourself @63, so maybe your comment @46 just came out wrong?

@45 pythag3 I vote BiDanFan changes her name to "BiForDan." That's just a great typo.

Yes she was right to break it off. They are not compatible and now they can both find partners with whom they will be more compatible.

If I'm reading the letter correctly, the relationship only lasted 9 months. Six months into it, the dude brought up nonmonogamy. After some talk- during which time both were honest with each other but also sound a little honestly confused- they came to this conclusion, that they are incompatible. Sounds like an all around healthy way to handle it- unfortunate and a bit of heart break, but a learning experience for both.

Finally I disagree she needs to reflect on her feelings about monogamy. She feels disgusted by thinking about an open relationship. If we accept that people can have fetishes or preferences without the need to reflect, then likewise we should accept that they are disgusted by certain practices without needing to reflect on them. If she wants to examine them, it might be more insight into herself and her sexuality and that could be a good thing, but what really matters the most is that at this point in her life, she is only interested in a monogamous relationship.

It bothers me that she seems to be asking if there is something wrong with her. Like, if she just fixed herself, they could still be together. She's fine. Monogamy is fine. If she wants to learn more about or explore monogamy or her own sexuality, that is fine too. But she's fine the way she is- she just needs to find a more compatible partner.

@49 CMDwannabe You did miss me @21. And since @49 there have been several other women who have essentially said this is a no-fault (or low-fault, anyway) breakup: BabyRae @51, futurecatlady @55, and EmmaLiz @67. I also see several others who show sympathy for the LW without accusing the boyfriend of anything. I think your theory may need revising.

Sincere apologies if I misgendered anyone. I tried to list people I'm fairly certain have said they identify as female, but I'm not 100% sure.

Ms Mooz,
My sincere apologies. About to add another rock to the pile I intend to throw into Lake Washington on the next yom kippur.

Ms Muse @66 - I've been using "BiForTulsi" to describe those people desperately trying to One Good Gay themselves into lefty acceptance even to the point of not just going OS but embracing someone who's only partly reformed.

@70 CMDwannabe Actually, Tashlich is usually on the first day of Rosh Hashanah. And ideally it's a body of running water, though a large lake will do fine. (Also, my synagogue has always used pieces of bread, not stones. The idea is for the running water to carry your sins away. Though they usually just wind up getting eaten by birds.)

I agree with EmmaLiz (67): there's nothing for her to fix. At the end of the day the two weren't a fit. He ultimately needs to find someone who wants an open relationship. As others posted, he probably needs to start saying that up front. She can't understand his quest for variety (thinking that variety means different types of sex when he seems to want different partners). And she does understand that monogamy is what she needs. So, look for a partner who wants the same thing.

Calliope @66: I did like that typo but alas, I'm the wrong gender to be bi for Dan. He would have to become bi for me, which I doubt is going to happen! He's also not my type, but to a far lesser extent than I'm not his. :)

Welcome back, EmmaLiz @67. Great analysis as usual.

Cocky @71, ditto.

Calliope @73, did you just Jewsplain to someone who was born in Israel? :-O

"Ditto" as in, this has been my experience when falling in love too.

@65 BiDanFan The contortions you go through to avoid admitting you're wrong are stultefying

@75 I didn't know they were born in Israel! Oy. My bad. Getting a lot of that today.

I mean saying a lot of that.

@47: "He knew what he needed to be happy and yet he kept it to himself."

This is way too Snidely Whiplash for my taste. "Haha, she doesn't know what I REALLY want, but I'll spring it on her some months down the road once she's attached and trapped! Hahaha, my evil plan is fulfilled!"

Who the hell knows what they "really" want? Every relationship is a process of learning the difference between what we want/need, and what we THINK we want/need. You don't really know what's a dealbreaker, and what's simply a case of "it would be nice if this were different, but...", until you find out for yourself by dating out of your comfort zone.

Someone can yearn for a particular sex act, finally find someone who's willing to do it routinely, and realize that -- once they've had all they could possibly want of it -- they've scratched that itch, and can and should prioritize other things.

Someone can meet a person who won't do a sex act they enjoy, and still get involved, hoping the connection between them is so strong in other ways that it won't matter. And sometimes that works out 100%.

All relationships are compromises. If we damned everyone who got into a relationship knowing there was something they really wanted from the other person but weren't likely to get, just about everyone would be damned.

The LW sounds like a particularly wonderful partner -- intelligent, compassionate, sexually engaged -- and the connection between her and the ex sounds uncommonly strong. I can easily understand how he thought that might be enough for him to set aside his non-monogamous desires. As it turns out, it wasn't, but if someone's exceptional (and the LW sounds like she is), it's reasonable to give it under a year to try.

(Now, if he turns around and does this AGAIN, he'd be a jerk, because he knows that even an exceptional partner won't be enough to change things.)