lsuser Posted April 5, 2014 Posted April 5, 2014 My husband and I agreed on non-monogamy from the start; I definitely wouldn't have made a lifetime commitment without that understanding. But what I'm starting to realize is that he doesn't want to see other women, but rather wants threesomes, and he keeps trying to nudge me in that direction. We had threesomes before we were married, all FMF. I was young and having a great time, and we weren't serious back then, so it was all in fun. I was very clear and explicit that I'm not bi and I was just taking advantage of the opportunity to have some good stories to tell in my old age. When he started talking about marriage, I refused at first, and would not marry him until he assured me that he understood I'm not interested in having sex with women anymore, and I wouldn't be involved in any dating/flings he pursued. So now it's a few years into the marriage, and he has dated a few other women, but he keeps coming back around to how much "easier" it would be for us to find women together, and asking me to reconsider participating in FMF threesomes. Of course, every time the conversation heads that direction, I'm firm, and tell him I'm not interested and don't want that. I have even tried asking how interested he would be in participating in MFM threesomes, but of course he says that's different. Is there any way to end the conversation for once and for all, and really make someone accept that he isn't going to get what he's hoping for?
dichotomy Posted April 5, 2014 Posted April 5, 2014 You did open the door, but then I guess you were clear - marry me and that fun candy is not available anymore. Seriously though He should honor your clear and honest boundaries established as part of the marriage But can't threesomes involve not bi- sexual involvement? I mean in most cases the MMF isn't the rule "no crossing swords" and many FFM is a best a little touching? by the way I think this should be over in the sexuality section - although it IS mostly about marriage rules.
Leigh 87 Posted April 6, 2014 Posted April 6, 2014 I cannot comprehend being marriage to a husband who dates other women. However, he never agreed to be monogamous with you so you can't be mad at him for making suggestions pertaining to your sex life and other women he wishes to involve. You can however, say no thanks. He should still respect your feelings above others outside of the primary marriage. I have no idea how you cope. I like it when men only desire me and Iam the only women in their eyes. 2
Author lsuser Posted April 6, 2014 Author Posted April 6, 2014 You did open the door, but then I guess you were clear - marry me and that fun candy is not available anymore. Seriously though He should honor your clear and honest boundaries established as part of the marriage But can't threesomes involve not bi- sexual involvement? I mean in most cases the MMF isn't the rule "no crossing swords" and many FFM is a best a little touching? by the way I think this should be over in the sexuality section - although it IS mostly about marriage rules. I doubt that - I have never watched/been a part of a FMF threesome, in movies & tv or real life, that did not include active participation in all directions, and my husband's idea of a threesome definitely includes the women being as into each other as into him. Regardless, I'm not interested in another woman in my bed no matter how limited the activity - is there a way to definitively kill someone's hope and optimism for once and for all?
xxoo Posted April 6, 2014 Posted April 6, 2014 If you keep having the conversation, it may encourage him to keep the hope alive. Tell him it's not going to happen, period, and ask if that is a problem for him. If not, remind him when he brings it up that it is no longer an option, and you don't want to discuss it unless that's a problem for him. 2
oldshirt Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 This is actually one of those double-standard moments and in this instance men are the ones that come up on the short end. Open marriage is quite easy for women but is often quite difficult for men to achieve with any semblance of peace and tranguility. As a woman in an open marriage, men would be lined up down the street and around the corner to have sex with you. Guys will be glad to bang you whether your husband gives his blessing or not. women are completely different however. While many men would love to be a married woman's lover on the side, women on the other hand are very remiss to be a man's extra lover. The fact that you are blessing it and giving him permission actually makes it HARDER for him to secure a girlfriend. In that sense your husband is quite correct, it would be much easier to secure a girlfriend if you were part of the package and involved in encounters to at least some degree. This may seem counterintuitive but it is actually easier for a man to cheat on his wife and pick up women on the side without his wife's knowledge and consent than it is for a man to find a girlfriend on the side with his wife's blessing. Here are a couple options. - loosen up your stance a bit on the 3somes and be an active participant in at least the selection and seduction phases of the operation and participate to whatever level you are comfortable with the first time or two that there is any sexuality taking place. - consider some couple/couple swinging and allow him and the other to remain FWBs and you could perhaps maintain a FWB relationship with the other husband as well and primarily play separately. (this option will be the hardest and require the most work to achieve but it is possible and there are a number of people out there who do it) - This is of questionable ethics since it is a form of deception but it probably is also the option with the highest potential for him getting a GF but that is to give him permission to find someone but keep that permission strictly between you two. ......in other words, have him pretend to be cheating. I know, I know, that sounds counterintuitive but it is the truth. He will have a higher degree of success as a cheater than as man with a hall pass. It's just the way women are wired. Women will screw another woman's man if she thinks she can pull one over on the other woman but she won't give him the time of day if the wife has given her blessing and is ok with it. The risks of that are many and like I said, it does involve deception and dishonesty and there is a chance the OW will be very pissed and feel used and degraded and may be out for blood when she finds out that the wife of the man she was screwing is ok with it. I never said people made sense. 3
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Well I must say that I am a bit confused about this. My husband and I agreed on non-monogamy from the start; I definitely wouldn't have made a lifetime commitment without that understanding. Any marriage service I have been to, whether it is in a church, synagogue, temple or registry office/town hall etc makes it quite clear that the persons involved are committing to a married life of sexual exclusivity. So if one or both parties do not wish to be sexually exclusive, why go and get married?? It seems to me that you are re-writing the rules of marriage to suit yourselves and then getting all bent out of shape when things don't work out. Personally, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you self-created predicament.
ThatMan Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 oldshirt, you're doing it wrong. Why can't you be like most men I know in open relationships? The trick is to persuade various women into believing that if they don't accept an open relationship on his own terms then they'll be utterly alone and nobody will ever love them again. Seems to work every time when low self-esteem is involved. Making these arrangements are about power and control over somebody else. I actually know a very similar couple who are sexually incomparable. But the man sticks around anyways because rather be a cuckhold than alone. Sometimes open relationships involve only one spouse who actively pursues extra flings on the side.
oldshirt Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Well I must say that I am a bit confused about this. Any marriage service I have been to, whether it is in a church, synagogue, temple or registry office/town hall etc makes it quite clear that the persons involved are committing to a married life of sexual exclusivity. So if one or both parties do not wish to be sexually exclusive, why go and get married?? It seems to me that you are re-writing the rules of marriage to suit yourselves and then getting all bent out of shape when things don't work out. Personally, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you self-created predicament. Since they both agreed to nonmogamy prior to the marriage it is valid. A vow of nonmonogamy is every bit as much a vow as a vow of monogamy. Both monogamy and nonmonogamy have their own hurdles and challenges. all things considered, neither is any harder or easier to maintain or live with comfortably over a long haul. To maintain a nonmonogamous marriage takes as much communication, compromise, respect, compassion and the ability to work together to problem solve as does a monogamous one. Perhaps even more. A monogamous couple only has one rule when it comes to sex outside the marriage - "don't!" A nonmonogamous couple may have multiple dozens of rules and parameters etc to make it work. Maintaining a long term monogamous relationship is hard and requires sacrifice and commitment. Maintaining a long term nonmonogamous relationship requires the same hard work, commitment and sacrifice as well. The OP and her husband are simply encountering a challenge and hurdle just like a monogamous couple would. It ain't easy being monogamous and it ain't easy being nonmonogamous either. 3
oldshirt Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 oldshirt, you're doing it wrong. Why can't you be like most men I know in open relationships? The trick is to persuade various women into believing that if they don't accept an open relationship on his own terms then they'll be utterly alone and nobody will ever love them again. Seems to work every time when low self-esteem is involved. Making these arrangements are about power and control over somebody else. I actually know a very similar couple who are sexually incomparable. But the man sticks around anyways because rather be a cuckhold than alone. Sometimes open relationships involve only one spouse who actively pursues extra flings on the side. There is a big difference between an actual open relationship and an abusive and exploitive one.
oldshirt Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Well I must say that I am a bit confused about this. Any marriage service I have been to, whether it is in a church, synagogue, temple or registry office/town hall etc makes it quite clear that the persons involved are committing to a married life of sexual exclusivity. That's simply how the standard scripts are written and what the vast majority of people use due to simple tradition. There is nothing saying that a couple can't enter into a marriage with the understanding of nonmonogamy just as much as a traditional couple entering with an understand of monogamy. So if one or both parties do not wish to be sexually exclusive, why go and get married?? sexual exclusivity is not the only reason people get married. People may wish to marry for many of the other social and legal reasons but just not have sexual exclusivity on their lists of reasons. It seems to me that you are re-writing the rules of marriage to suit yourselves and then getting all bent out of shape when things don't work out. I don't see it that way. She may have participated in some 3somes prior to it becoming a serious relationship but she stated before marriage that she was not bisexual and did not want to be participating in 3somes after the marriage. I don't see this as her bending the rules (excluding the possibility she is lying to us about that of course) but rather her husband wanting to change the rules after he realized he wasn't going to be getting as many chicks as he thought he was going to. I see him as the one trying to change things up. And frankly he has the right to ask. However he has asked and she has said no. This is more on him than on her IMHO. Personally, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you self-created predicament. She wasn't asking for sympathy, but rather suggestions on how to deal with this. Regardless I don't see this as a self-created predicament any more than a traditional monogamous couple who are having challenges dealing with some of the complications of monogamy. If someone were to write in here talking about missing being with other people after being married for years, would you say you don't have sympathy for them and that they self-created their predicament by choosing to be monogamous?? . responses above.
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Oldshirt you said, Since they both agreed to nonmogamy prior to the marriage it is valid. A vow of nonmonogamy is every bit as much a vow as a vow of monogamy. This is the biggest load of effluent since Noah mucked out his ark. Who did they make the vow of non-monogamy to? All mariage ceremonies include a vow of fidelity. So if a couple get married and make such promises without the intention of following through they are essentially taking vows in vain. They made promises of monogamy in front of friends and relatives and an officer of the court/registrar. So there is an element of disrespect for the ceremony they are involved in. Ipso facto IMO the whole thing is a sham. Then these people come on LS and whinge that everything is going pear-shaped because boundaries have become blurred. They have no-one to blame but themselves.
Grumpybutfun Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Easy. Tell him in order to have equality he must fully participate in MFM with blow jobs and kissing and PIA every other time you participate in FMF. That will shut him right up...and yes, it is the same, might not be as universally accepted, but it is an equal trade. He doesn't get to dictate terms as he likes them if he won't even let you have the same courtesies. Good luck, G 1
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Oldshirt you said sexual exclusivity is not the only reason people get married. People may wish to marry for many of the other social and legal reasons but just not have sexual exclusivity on their lists of reasons. this could be true but it is part of every marriage ceremony I know of. If people choose to disregard this part of the ceremony, then what other parts are they not taking seriously? When people start rewriting the rules of marriage then that is when problems occur. If someone were to write in here talking about missing being with other people after being married for years, would you say you don't have sympathy for them and that they self-created their predicament by choosing to be monogamous?? It depends what you mean by missing being with other people after being married for years, If you are talking about sexual activity then yes, they chose to be monogamous. If they have a problem with that after time then they can always leave the marriage. It seems to me that too many people want to have their cake and eat it. Judging by all the postings on thses forums that is a source of many problems.
ThatMan Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Who did they make the vow of non-monogamy to? They made this vow to each other. Look, Sex isn't all that different than any other part of a relationship. Be open and respectful, posses the willingness to try new things, and remain able to say No when uncomfortable. These are the simplest terms that each person should dedicate if they value their own well-being. You've both made vows and commitments to each other. Maybe your husband had a dramatically different expectations of the relationship than you did. When you both agreed to be open; Isn't it reasonable to assume that he expected a willingness to participate in more FMF threesomes? Because that's exactly what you two pursued before the marriage. Now that you're married you don't want to have anymore threesomes but enjoy extra flings instead? Can you see how be might have expected the marriage would have been different? I'm obviously serious about what I've said. There's a lot in many open relationships that involves one person sitting down and shutting up. The only way your end this conversation forever is if you tell him to shut up about the threesomes because it isn't going to happen. Unless your actually willing to continue this conversation and have an honest but open moment of sincerity.
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Oldshirt, You said The OP and her husband are simply encountering a challenge and hurdle just like a monogamous couple would. It ain't easy being monogamous and it ain't easy being nonmonogamous either. Rubbish. The point is that they have chosen to get married. If you choose to be married then you are de facto monogamnous and you don't engage in any sexual activity with members of opposite sex. Full stop. period. End of. The line is drawn. Simple. If anyone feels that is too difficult then they don't get married. Again simple. If they get married and find that they can't stick to that promise of monogamy, then they leave. Again simple. The baseline here is honesty. Honesty with yourself and honesty with your partner. I don't care what arrangements people make with regard to their relationships and sexual preferences. I don't care what rules they make privately. I don't care how many times they want to re-negotiate the arrangements. But if they want to do that they don't get married. If people were more honest then half the postings on this forum wouldn't appear.
ThatMan Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 (edited) Arieswoman, It's understandable* if you do not value open-relationships the same way as other people. But what marriages are defined as depends entirely on the individuals involved. Marriage can be monogamous, or not. It can involve religion, or not. It can maintain or long duration, or not. It can even involve LGBT, or not. Those who are non-monogamous have every right to marriage as the rest of us. Edited April 8, 2014 by ThatMan phone
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 That man Originally Posted by Arieswoman Who did they make the vow of non-monogamy to? They made this vow to each other. OK. So they made that vow of non-monogamy to each other in private and then made a vow of monogamy in front of all thier friends/ relatives? So the second vow was a lie? They deceived all their friends/relatives about the nature of the relationship. So we have confusion before we start about what the "marriage" is all about. The two vows are non-compatible. Is it any wonder they are in pickle?
central Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Oldshirt you said, This is the biggest load of effluent since Noah mucked out his ark. Who did they make the vow of non-monogamy to? All mariage ceremonies include a vow of fidelity. This is absolutely wrong. If you don't get married in a religious ceremony, there is no such vow required. Many people do not have a religious ceremony - they have civil ceremonies for any of a number of reasons (non-religious, different religions, etc.). All they have to do is leave out that - or any other vow. Our ceremony had no such vow, for example. 1
ThatMan Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 They seem to be in a pickle because open relationships are all about having your needs met by different people. Let me rephrase: open relationships are about being involved with an individual who is incapable of meeting all your needs. This can often be an upwards battle filled with drama, resentment, and hostility if they're unable to deal with the relationship in a positive way. They're in a pickle because either the OP isn't being sincere and open with her views on FMF threesomes, because her husband is might be pushy or unwilling to respect her sense of comfort, or both, and maybe even because they both misunderstood each other and had separate expectations of the relationship itself. The only way to deal with it in respective order is to have an genuine conversation instead, everything Grumpybutfun said, or another genuine conversation. The two vows aren't incompatible. Their sexuality might be what's incompatible. It's up to us as individuals to define what marriage means to us. Their version of marriage isn't any greater or less than our own. Exactly as homosexuals making their own vows and being able to marry without being in conflict or incompatible another vow.
MissBee Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Well I must say that I am a bit confused about this. Any marriage service I have been to, whether it is in a church, synagogue, temple or registry office/town hall etc makes it quite clear that the persons involved are committing to a married life of sexual exclusivity. So if one or both parties do not wish to be sexually exclusive, why go and get married?? It seems to me that you are re-writing the rules of marriage to suit yourselves and then getting all bent out of shape when things don't work out. Personally, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you self-created predicament. I don't think these opinions have anything to do with her question. What you think marriage should be isn't really the point. Sexual exclusivity is one kind of marriage and other people can choose differently. The issue isn't about non-monogamy, which they have agreed is fine. She is fine with him dating other women, she just doesn't want to be involved in threesomes. That isn't really a problem of non-monogamy, as non-monogamy doesn't equate to threesomes. The issue is respecting a boundary your spouse has created and was firm about going into the marriage...whatever that boundary may be. The issue isn't about whether or not people should only have monogamous marriages, which seems to be what you think is the problem, which it actually isn't. The underlying issue is: before they married they agreed on something and now he keeps trying to push for this thing they agreed wouldn't happen. This issue is like any other issue. If you married on the premise that you never want kids, for example, then your spouse decides to now badger you about it all the time and try to coerce you into it, it's going against the original agreement and your wishes. To the OP: I would sit him down and tell him you feel like he isn't respecting you and your wishes by constantly asking for this when you had said you don't want it. You don't want to create animosity but this isn't something you have any desire for and want him to respect that. Is there a way to compromise on this? Someone else mentioned not sleeping with these women yourself but participating in some other way? If that isn't an option then having that conversation expressing your feelings and basically firmly requesting again that he respects it if he values you is the other option.
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 That man, but what marriages are defined as depends entirely on the individuals involved. that is incorrect. Marriage can be monogamous, or not. incorrect http://www.haringey.gov.uk/wedding_scripts.pdf I Promise To Be True To You | For Your Marriage Those who are non-monogamous have every right to marriage as the rest of us. no, that is an oxymoron.
Arieswoman Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Miss Bee, What you think marriage should be isn't really the point. No. It is what marriage actually is, that is the point.
MissBee Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Miss Bee, No. It is what marriage actually is, that is the point. Because marriage is the same across time and space in every culture in the world? Okay... Please expand your horizons. Showing us what marriage is in the UK or in your worldview in no way covers the multiplicities of what marriage can be and is in other places in the world and the vows and scripts you are showing are not things people in every country, state, town etc vow to...and to think otherwise is very narrow minded. Those links you provided are not anything authoritative to say what marriage is...one is a pastor's view on marriage coming from that person's tradition, not any universal law of the world and the other is specifically UK based. In any event the topic and thread isn't to argue about what marriage is or should be, so I'll leave this argument alone so as not to further derail the thread.
central Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 The only practical problem with consensual non-monogamy is IF one person has fewer opportunities than the other AND is bothered by the disparity of partners and frequency. I think the disparity is the issue in this case - she can easily find partners, and he cannot, and is soliciting help in doing so. I suspect that if the OP does not help - even if it does not lead to a FMF threesome (as FFM is contrary to what the OP now wants) - then her husband may not want to continue the marriage as is, or at all. We have an open marriage and it works for us as we first and foremost are each other's primary and favorite partner, and we balance any outside partners to avoid a significant disparity of opportunity that can create envy or conflict. Other people will have different arrangements, rules, or expectations, that may or may not work out in practice. If it's not working, then some negotiation may be in order if you value the relationship and want it to continue. 1
Recommended Posts