|
|
|
|
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:45:24 AM | zopz wrote
......if you ask me.
I did ask you and everyone else on the forums and I think all of you for your responses.
The story is very true and no, I am not involved personally with this couple. I just happen to know them.
I purposely did not argue with the people in this thread about their views because I know how strongly many people feel about marriage. The reason I posted this particular story is because it ended happily (so far anyway, it has been 4 years).
I know how people would have answered if I had asked this question a day after the couple had made this arrangement. I was very curious of how people would respond when told after the fact and when told how happy the couple is now.
Even after knowing about the happy ending and how happy this couple is now, many still think the couple are wrong and are making a mistake. I can understand people not wanting an open marriage but I do wonder how people can criticize this couples choice considering the "facts on the ground."
p.s. BigDaddyJinx wrote
But no one is "picking on" anything. We're just trying to comprehend how issue avoidance in a marriage is considered a "good" thing these days?
They did not avoid the issue. They just handled the issue in their own unique way.
This marriage situation is much more prevalent than many of you suspect. What makes this marriage situation uncommon is that they do it in the open, as in their friends and family know. Most arrangements are keep secret for obvious reasons. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 2:21:31 AM | If she were bi then yes, I'd see this as a reason for allowing her a safe way of satisfying needs that I simply can't because I'm a man. Otherwise, I can imagine allowing her to sleep with someone but we'd need to talk about the idea and agree.
I'd rather have an honest friendship than one in which she felt possibly trapped. I see it as a better alternative than the many ways that people end up cheating and reconciling or having separate vacations or other euphemistic ways of pretending not to see obvious infidelity.
If you're best friends then must you own and control your spouse's (or significant other's) sexuality so ultimately? I'd say focus on the friendship first and these kind of questions above don't seem so important by comparison. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 2:54:09 AM | If I'd been asked this question in my twenties, my answer would have been a quick "Hell no!" But now my answer isn't so certain. I think the most important thing is that a couple makes every ounce of effort to resolve the problems in their marriage so that both are content. However, some issues just can't be resolved. If 20 years passed and I found myself repulsed by sex (or vice versa) and no amount of counseling managed to change that, then it seems I'd have four options:
1) Give in to sex. even though it makes me unhappy.
2) Refrain from sex, making my husband unhappy.
3) Find a solution that satisfies both of our sexual needs (even if that means he goes out of the marriage once or multiple times).
4) Divorce the man who might otherwise satisfy all my needs, leaving me as a single woman approaching 60 with virtually no hope of meeting someone who offered what my husband did AND didn't want sex.
In that situation, I think the third choice would be an easy one to make. I certainly wouldn't choose #4 over an issue like sex. Obviously, I would hope the marriage would never come to any of those choices but if I had to choose between the relationship the OP described and one of the countless marriages in which one or both parties are miserable (or where one or both resort to cheating), I'd take the open marriage. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 6:46:33 AM | I understand what OP is claiming as far as this 'opening up of the marriage' making the parties happier. Something just isn't ringing clear in my mind about the whole situation, though. I think a big part of that for me, is the description of their activities as being 'needs'. IMO, what they seek outside of the relationship, are not needs, but 'wants'. A little cherry on top of their respective sundaes. She isn't frigid.....she has sex with an ex and he doesn't have ED.....he has sex with a dom. Therefore, it isn't like they "can't" have sex with each other.....they just 'want' more than only that. If they were relationship 'needs', it would have been known from the beginning.
Obviously we don't know their whole relationship dynamic and only OP's posts to go on, but the way it has been described, this is a long, enduring relationshiop ("tired old marriage"). Therefore, questions that come to mind are, 1) When did the husband learn of his fetish for BDSM? Has it always been there, or 'evolve'? If he always had it, was it communicated to the wife before they were married? If it 'evolved', why? 2) Was the husband told by the wife before the marriage, that she still carried a torch for an ex including desires to be with him sexually? If so, it was his decision to marry her anyway. If not, that's basically a lie by omission/deception on the part of the wife.
OP, I think some of these points and the hows and whys behind them, are issues that others have stated that have been 'avoided'. They may or may not have been discussed in the relationship. We don't have that information, but 'something' triggered the 'opening of the marriage', i.e. a fight/argument, infidelity, fantasy, etc. The question remains, is the decision they made, the correct answer to the root cause of their marital problems? Leaving morality, life choices, etc. out of the equation, how would this otherwise blissful marriage survive if the corrective action was removed? In other words, if the wife's ex BF got hit by a bus and killed tomorrow, how would that affect things? Will she be content staying home while her husband continues to go 'play'? Will she seek another playmate, even though her 'corrective action' was to be with her ex....not just any man? If she decides not to play anymore, will she demand her husband stops as well? Or, will she choose to 're-close the marriage'? How would the husband handle that? Resentful? Empathetic?
JMO.
~ds~ | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 6:55:34 AM | there is absolutely no way first of all IT WILL EVENTUALLY RUIN THE MARRIAGE!! secondly have these people ever heard of aids herpies ect...!
not to mention the big man above!! marriage is sacred and bringing in a third party is only askin for resentment, hurt ,anger and DIVORCE!!! it may be fun now but i'm willing to bet eventually someone is gonna start wondering which one they REALLY want to be with!! I personally am not sharing! | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:04:30 AM | | It sounds like they found a solution that works for them, and that's all that really matters. Most of us wouldn't accept their solution, but we're not them! Besides, he has a fetish that few women would be comfortable satisfying, so how would breaking up further either of their goals? They might both find that they can't find a decent partner who meets their needs - and in most other ways their relationship may be great. We don't know. We DO know that they must have more trust and communication than your average couple to make this work for them. So, while it may not work for me, I have to admire their creative solution. Whether it works longer-term (4 years so far sounds successful to me) or not, they are doing better than many couples already. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:07:17 AM | I say good for them.
I'd have to agree, no matter what my personal attitude would be.
Would you open your marriage (with strict rules and conditions) in order to save it?
No. But I tend to figure out pretty quick that if his "kink" isn't my kink, we're going to have issues. I'd probably be open-minded to his "kinks" long before I'd be open-minded to him having a Domme who isn't me. And, I would never be married if I were still thinking about/missing an ex of any nature. That screams, "I really shouldn't be married because I love/miss/wish I were with someone else."
Imagine you really love your marriage partner but for whatever reason the marriage was not working.
They are settling. Not a bad thing necessarily. Some people would rather just keep things status quo rather than taking the plunge, moving on and being completely fulfilled. Hey, if it works for those particular people ~ wonderful. I wouldn't be happy in their shoes. If I'm not the "one" ~ OK. Worse things could happen, I could be married to someone and be sexually/emotionally/mentally wanting someone else. Ewww ~ no thanks. JMO  | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:18:52 AM |
This marriage situation is much more prevalent than many of you suspect. What makes this marriage situation uncommon is that they do it in the open, as in their friends and family know. Most arrangements are keep secret for obvious reasons.
OK, I'll bite. If "most arrangements are kept secret for obvious reasons" then just how do you know that "this marriage situation is much more prevalent than many of you suspect"??? | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:25:40 AM | Yes I would have an open marriage and allow the man I love to be dominated by some sex starved man hating woman.....When hell freezes over and pig's fly!
Dominatrix? Ex boyfriend? What's this marriage based on? Sex? It sure as hell is not based on love.
Why are they still together? Is it for financial reasons or maybe the kids?
Who in their right mind would want to save a marriage in such disarray? | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:29:27 AM | I would not open my marriage, because if I did, I'd feel that I no longer had a marriage. To me, an "open" marriage is not a marriage at all. What's the point of being married if you are going to disregard that whole "forsaking all others" thing?
Why get married at all? Why not just stay single so you can do whatever you want without risk? You risk losing nothing if you want to sleep around, as long as you aren't committed to anyone.
Going "elsewhere" for sex means (to me) that you aren't committed to your spouse, and it opens a whole new can of worms. What if one of them wants to change the rules, or just bend them "just this once?" What if one of them wants to change it to once a week? Or twice a week? What then?
I think that your friends are rare that this is working for them...because usually when someone does this "to save their marriage," it's with one partner going along with something like this when it's not what they want...they just feel like they have no choice if they want to keep their spouse, and this leads to bigger problems.
I guess if they are both getting something out of it, good for them...for however long it lasts, anyway. I just think they should deal with whatever their issues are with their marriage, rather than use them as an excuse to screw around on each other, and pretend like that fixes everything. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:31:59 AM | | Wow, BigDaddyJinx, I am glad I'm not the only one who thinks they should work on fixing their marriage rather than putting a "band-aid" on it and thinking that will fix everything. When you have problems, bringing a third party into it will only complicate things. Maybe not now, in the short term, but in the long term, there will be trust issues over this, you can bet the ranch. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:34:00 AM | OP, 4 years isn't that long of a time, in the big picture. They haven't had a "happy ending" yet, because they still have a long way to go.
| |
|
| |
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 7:47:33 AM | Why would you want to "save" a marriage if it has gone array? Why live with a person if your feelings for that person are not paramount in your life?
Here's the reality of those open relationships. If you invite a third party into your relationship, eventually YOU can become the third party.
So, if some other couples want to swing, or exchange that is fine with me. But for my money, for what I value in a relationship, which is an evolution of trust between two people, no, something like this would not fly, and it would be completely unacceptable. End of story. If I or the other person is not willing to make that emotional investment into the other, it's not worth my time. I'd rather be casually dating until I find another partner willing to go the long haul. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 9:01:22 AM | To answer this question, I would need to ask myself another question:
Which is worth more to *me* - compromise for the sake of staying with someone OR refusing to compromise on a core issue.
At this point in my life, I would say the latter.
In the aforementioned case:
1) I wouldn't even begin a relationship with one person until I was over the other. That's called "rebound."
2) I *would* be willing to learn to be a dominatrix.  I am always willing to try something new and I LOVE learning new things.
Hey, I refuse to compromise on a core issue, but I didn't say I wasn't flexible within those boundaries.
 | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 9:27:20 AM | They are living in denial. There is a big difference between a true marriage between two people and a business arrangement. The marriage has ended and they basically have a contract that says they can share their assets and liabilities. Any business partnership would be the same as their relationship. All marriages are at different levels of happiness...when you have to have sex with others...the part of fidelity and monogamy are out the window...it becomes a business relationship at that point.
I would get a divorce and find true happiness with one person rather than date several people...and that is what they are doing...dating...since none of the relationships will continue...except possibly the one regarding their estate. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 10:53:13 AM | Sounds like they are comfortable with "the known" and more uncomfortable with "the Unknown"....there is usually a fear of the unknown in many situations...may have just been easier to stay together and work around the issues instead of face them head on....putting a band aide on instead of root out the entire wound...and then allow healing to take place.
And in answer to the poster's question...
No, I definitely would not have an open marriage....the "intertwining" of a man and a woman is just two-vined as far as I am concerned. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 11:15:17 AM | I had wanted to re-post on this subject earlier, but then had my grandson for several hours.
I see that in the meantime, davidsauvignon totally nailed what I was going to say:
I understand what OP is claiming as far as this 'opening up of the marriage' making the parties happier. Something just isn't ringing clear in my mind about the whole situation, though. I think a big part of that for me, is the description of their activities as being 'needs'. IMO, what they seek outside of the relationship, are not needs, but 'wants'. A little cherry on top of their respective sundaes. She isn't frigid.....she has sex with an ex and he doesn't have ED.....he has sex with a dom. Therefore, it isn't like they "can't" have sex with each other.....they just 'want' more than only that. If they were relationship 'needs', it would have been known from the beginning. Far from me to judge them, as it's simply not my place to do so, but give me someone with traditional beliefs and values any day.
HnH  | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 11:21:35 AM | That isn't a marriage.
Two people committed to each other and building their lives together ....that is marriage.
Sex with other people is going to interfere with that commitment. There are too many emotions involved in sex to have it be any other way.
Not just my opinion..read about this from professionals. This will tear a marriage apart not save it. | |
|
| |
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 12:08:56 PM | | I couldn't live with it, I just couldn't imagine having sex with another man instead of my partner, and I couldn't live with the idea of him wanting to have sex with someone else either. I guess it's each to their own though. | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 12:50:13 PM |
Wow, BigDaddyJinx, I am glad I'm not the only one who thinks they should work on fixing their marriage rather than putting a "band-aid" on it and thinking that will fix everything. When you have problems, bringing a third party into it will only complicate things. Maybe not now, in the short term, but in the long term, there will be trust issues over this, you can bet the ranch.
Well, admittedly there was a time that I too thought band-aids were the way to go when problems arose, but thankfully I grew outta that stage. To me, if something is actually legitimately broken in my relationship, I wanna know what it is, how it happened, and if it can be made right. Applying band-aids is not a viable solution to me now, and never will be again. If it requires the introduction of a 3rd party, that party will have some kinda of medical background (see: psychologist/therapist). If we still can't make it right after that, then realistically, there's nothing for me there anymore. Whatever's broken can't be fixed by looking outside ourselves at that point, and we're just kidding ourselves to think otherwise. If the "solution" is elsewhere, then why am I staying where I am too? Doesn't make an ounce of sense to me.
This whole thing mimics a similar situation I know of with a friend of the family. He is now an older gentleman, who is also "married" and has been "married" for decades. The problem is though, that the actual "marriage" ended years ago. They still live together, with him downstairs and her upstairs. They have kids (all adult). The reason he's still there is because of divorce. He was told that if they do actually get divorced, she'll rape him for half his worth on the spot. So, rather than bite the bullet and take the hit, he begrudgingly decided to stay on in a completely and utterly failed "marriage". Now, much like the OP, their's is merely a business relationship based off greed, and couldn't legitimately be called a "marriage" of any sort. They don't, however, have an agreement to involve 3rd parties into the mix. This was just about saving the bank account.
I can't say I hardly blame him really, but as hard as it would be for me to be confronted with a similar situation, I would find it easier and much more fulfilling to just take the hit, fight it as best I could, and move on. If I'm lucky, I could still find someone to spend my waning years with, and still be able to call it a real marriage. Or just make sure I have a really good prenup in place beforehand (though 99% ain't worth the paper they're printed on).
Well Bigdaddy saved me from doing much typing, as I have to agree with every one of his responses.
LOL. Glad I could be of assistance   | |
|
| Would you open you marriage to save it?
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:15:56 PM | For me, spicing up  scene doesn't need a third party to be found, let's be involved.
Hey, I love balance in life and balancing up, so 1 : 1 is plenty enough for me to juggle.
As for my past marriage - I saved myself rather than compromise health, principles and values I lived and live by. Hmmm ... different courses for different horses  | |
|
| |
| |
|
| Page 3 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
