What About Love? Open Marriage Can Be About Sex And Love

People in open relationships often talk about rules -- what they should be, whether or not to have any, what to do if they're broken. That can be especially true for people just starting out or thinking about embarking on an open relationship. One of the most often contended topics on this front is love. And so I get questions nearly every day that go something like this.

Dear Jenny,

My husband and I are at the beginning of an open relationship. I understand the difference between love and sex and was wondering if you have ground rules with your husband as I have told mine: DON'T FALL IN LOVE. Is this a reality or am I kidding myself? I love my husband, and he loves me. I just find he is happier having the freedom to have a sexual relationship elsewhere.

Thanks,
Hopeful in the Heartland

The answer to Hopeful's question is yes -- and no. A couple can set out whatever rules it likes including the "Don't Fall in Love" rule, which plenty of open couples have and are able to follow. In order to make that work, they often also have the "Don't Sleep With the Same Person Twice," "Only See People Out of Town," and/or "No Correspondence Beyond Date Setting" rules.

Open relationships are about setting up the kinds of boundaries that 1) make you feel comfortable and 2) are workable. Because, what's the point if all you're doing is setting yourself up for failure? If a couple sets the rules, follows them, and is honest about whether or not those rules are working for them, they can have a reasonable expectation of success.

But there's another key to open relationships -- flexibility. And without that, you are much less likely to make any kind of relationship work, let alone an open one. In my open marriage, it's all about communication and renegotiation. We had an "Only Out of Town" rule and a "No Love" rule (after our first girlfriend) for the first few years. They worked splendidly -- until I met Jemma, my now girlfriend of a year and nine months.

To finish reading "What About Love?" visit my open relationship forum "Open Up" on the Tango Magazine website.

Comments

[StopCensoringMe]

Security is an illusion (and thus the "rules" designed to provide it are even more illusory). Its a construct of the mind in a feeble attempt to control that which cannot be controlled. Monogamy is the apex of this kind of insecurity blanket. Either get into an arrangement with someone equally insecure so that the two of you are content clinging desperately to one another (because you could never get anyone else) or face the reality that life is nothing but an ever-changing landscape where "love" (read: romance and other ego-based sensations) can change in the blink of an eye. True love is not something you receive and around which you build a protective wall. It is something you give...without conditions for who, where, or when. It flows, without prejudice, to all beings, at all times. Let's try to use the proper terms...this is about romance. Romance is not love. It's those sweet "nothings" that you don't want to see your partner giving to someone else that you believe belong to you.

[Jasel]

I don't really have that much of an issue with open relationships although I don't think I could be in one myself. But what is the point of getting married if you're just going to be sleeping around anyway?? You might as well just live with each other and do your own thing.

It seems like the more marriage progresses the more of a joke it becomes. Over 50% getting divorced. Spouses cheating left and right. These same people will talk about respecting each others privacy but will tell gays what they can and can't do when it comes to THEIR relationships. People making light and joking about infidelity.

And everyone throws a fit when I tell them I don't plan on getting married. I won't even give the reasons because I know it won't matter. Society will keep pushing people to get married, people will always be unprepared or not mature enough to deal with it, and the institution will continue to become more and more abysmal as time goes on.

No I'm not bitter and both of my parents have been happily married for 20 + years: P

[TheBlackCat]

Also, as to your question of why have an open marriage, why just not get married if you're going to sleep around, I will tell you what I was told by friends of mine who are in an open marriage. Aside from the financial benefits (both tax wise and from having two incomes) and convenience (it's just easier to take care of a home with two people than with one), the reason THEY got married is that they decided that they did love eachother and want to spend their lives together, they just didn't want to spend their lives together with ONLY eachother. It's the same reason MANY married people cheat, even if they love their spouses and have no intention of divorcing them, they just want some variety I suppose.

[TheBlackCat]

I wonder if indeed it is a dying institution. People in Europe are getting married less and less, though maintaining lifelong committed relationships. Over there many children are born "out of wedlock" but it's not like in America when typically an out of wedlock baby is unintended, problematic, and looked down upon by society. There, more and more people just do not believe in the concept of marriage anyore, they think it is an antiquated idea, symbolic of ownership of women and religious subjugation. When people in my sometimes home of the Netherlands find out that my husband and I (both 27 years old) got married at 25 after only a year and a half of courtship, they are shocked at how "old fashioned" we are, though in the US many of my friends my age are married and have children by now.

I am a happily married woman, but I too feel that it is silly and old fashioned to think anyone HAS to get married. I think the idea of it as a "sacred institution" is a joke, I mean up until extremely modern times how many women, or even men, got to choose who they married? It was arranged by their parents, or a relative, or a religious official, or a nobleman.

[bibirebozo]

I find it really amazing that people can find polyamorous, or open relationships hip, but when people choose to live in a polygamous one based on religious beliefs, the same people become uncontrollably angry.
I happen to be a libertarian who could care less about peoples lifestyles, but the hypocrisy is so overwhelming it needs to be addressed.

[TheBlackCat]

The thing is, with religious polygamy, and in the US that means fundamental Mormonism, consent is not a factor in the vast majority of cases. Teenaged girls are married to men decades older than them, often related to them. They are threatened with banishment, beatings, and above all eternity in hell if they refuse. In these communities, younger boys are systematically kicked out with no ability to support themselves and no knowledge whatsoever of the outside world, so that the older men can have all the women (look up "Mormon Lost Boys" on google to get a glimpse at how big a problem this is). FDLS polygamy means this: young girls being raped by their RELATIEVS, and then being blamed as "sinful" when they have multiple miscarriages, stillbirths or "defective" children due to generations of inbreeding; and their young male counterparts homeless and wandering the streets with a first grade education.

You try and make it seem like open relationships between consenting, unrelated adults is the same thing as a 13 year old marrying her 75 year old great uncle because she's told she'll burn in hell if she doesn't, is the same thing, and its not. People aren't enraged at the concept of polygamy in GENERAL, they are opposed to the appalling way it is implemented in fundamentalist mormon communities today. The issue in these situations IS NOT POLYGAMY itself, it's CHILD ABUSE.

[recless]

Nonsense. No one is all that wound up about polygyny. Except maybe the right-wingers and some feminists. However, people do get wound up with polygyny when it includes sex with underage girls. Don't care how many wives you want to punish yourself with, you nail an underage girl you get caged like the animal you are. It wouldn't be so bad if the FLDS in Texas hadn't agreed to no longer allow underage marriage (thereby admitting that they had been doing so).

[fzriely]

You passed over the most significant statement by Hopeful in the Heartland:

She said, "I just find he is happier having the freedom to have a sexual relationship elsewhere."

This hardly seems like an arrangement that takes into consideration the needs of both parties.

Is the point of this blog simply to promote alternative lifestyles, or to help people with specific issues? Because Hopeful has some issues...

[ouroborous]

Interesting that opinions on open relationships still seem to be almost overwhelmingly negative.

I understand the risks -- you'd have to be a fool not to see them. But, aren't we all adults? Shouldn't we get to choose what risks to take, especially on the sexual front?

This isn't about cheating (how can you "cheat" when your partner condones it), it's about a "nontraditional relationship" -- exactly the same kind of relationship that gays used to have (in terms of what we called it), and fought successfully to normalize.

I might tend to agree that "open marriage" isn't a great idea since marriage implies some views on monogamy (the traditional marriage vow is to "forsake all others," after all). But what about relationships in general?

[dgscol]

some people can dance on hot coals, but some are less fortunate.

[mouselion]

I haven't met a woman yet that I was truly attracted to who ultimately didn't want more than just sex in a relationship. I doubt it is any different for two women who are lovers -- maybe even more so, come to feel -- er -- think about it.

~ Mouse E. Lion

[Donkslayer]

Haha, your last sentence effectively made the rest of your advice null.

I have a craaaaazzzy idea: if you can't stay emotionally and sexually faithful to someone, don't get married or stay married.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Bingo.

Might as well have said, "Just kidding."

[Bystander]

Yet another attack on the institution of marriage.

[Hmmm624]

Feelings are real, but they do not reflect truth. Fears of abandonment are a prison (especially for females, since we are conditioned and programmed to rely on males for emotional fulfilment). Those fears must be transcended before we even consider loving another human being. Polyamoary and open marriages are "black-belt levels" of relationships, we shouldn't judge simply because we do not comprehend. Consenting adults are the key words.

[Hmmm624]

I am 27 and bisexual. I'm glad this topic is becoming more visible. Freedom should extend beyond what religion to choose and which tabloids to read.

[Robert59]

If you're going to have an open marriage you're a fool if you think you can control your partner's emotions. Love or some form of attachment is going to be part of the equation. My advice is you better have a strong marriage going into an open marriage and a thick skin because one partner is going to find more bliss than the other.

And when I hear people say they can balance the two relationships I have to ask do they love their children equally, their siblings equally, their parents, even their friends? Of course they don't. Some people matter more than others; there's an affinity we feel.

Your girlfriend or your husband. I bet there are plenty of times he's on the backburner because your relationship with him is old (with her it's new) and newness means intensity.

[Summer71]

I guess they figure since everyone is supposedly cheating on each other you might as well be up front about it?

[soonerdru]

I think this is stupid. In my opinion, in case you didn't notice, human beings are beings with feelings, which inevitably get hurt. I'm very liberal and am not saying that an open relationship couldn't work for someone on the planet but the likelihood of it working is very small. Lately it seems as though the media has been pushing this topic on the public. What is the end game? Please experts, tell me how having an open relationship will not affect the relationship to begin with?