91
By donotbelieveinsecondchances - / Monday 2 March 2015 14:04 / Netherlands - Capelle Aan Den Ijssel
Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments
Comments
Reply
  GamerPerson  |  19

I put people I dated a long time ago in one of two categories: Exes or former boyfriends. Exes are the ones that were assholes and not worth my time; while former boyfriends were people that, while we had differences, we ended things on a good note and we still talk every once in a while.

By  khorstmye  |  15

Comment moderated or buried due to negative votes. Show the comment

Reply
  ToxicTyrael  |  26

A friend of mine is in an open relationship and says that he only truly loves his gf and they tell everything to each other and share secrets etc but casually fuck sbd else. So they see the whole sex thing like a sport. And you can play tennis with anyone without considering it cheating. Thats how they see it.

Reply
  Vestin  |  18

#62: Most people don't seem to get this, but I find such relationships even purer than regular ones. They're not held together by sexual exclusivity but by some meaningful emotional and intellectual connection. It's heartwarming :).

Reply

But why should sex be held in such a sacred place in EVERY case? Maybe they DO see sex as a sport and don't necessarily need that intimacy to be in a relationship. As long as they're happy, who even cares?

Reply
  Vestin  |  18

#82: It's mostly an epistemic matter. If they're together and aren't sexually exclusive, there's something different holding them together and I find that lovely. If they ARE sexually exclusive, you can no longer tell. It very well may be that there are external reasons, but there very well may not. It's like Kantian ethics - if you suffer to fulfill your duty, it's more obvious that you were acting out of duty than if your action was both ethically right and personally beneficial to you. That doesn't mean that you can't act OUT OF DUTY and reap some benefits, but to an outside observer this isn't really clear. Hell - it may not be clear to YOU either. I hope I've made myself a bit more clear...

Reply
  kiwifruitred  |  18

#85 I think I understand your point, but I disagree. To me, sexual exclusivity is not an indicator for the quality of a relationship at all. I respect the people who can pull off open relationships, but it's more a matter of what sex means to you than of fulfilling your duty.

Reply
  kiwifruitred  |  18

#85 (...) If one can seperate sex from love, then one can succesfully lead an open relationship. If however sex is deeply linked to strong emotions, an open relationship is not an option. It has nothing to do with insecurities or being 'handcuffed' but with personal preferences.

Reply
  Vestin  |  18

#86 I think you do NOT understand my point. I like it when relationships are built on more than mere animalistic attraction. When there is no sexual exclusivity AND YET THERE IS a relationship, it's obvious that there's something more keeping these people together. If there is sexual exclusivity THERE CAN STILL BE MORE KEEPING THESE PEOPLE TOGETHER. You just CAN'T BE SURE. Imagine something being held up by a handful of pillars. "If we remove THIS pillar, will everything fall apart?", you may ask. It may be the case that the others would fail to support the structure, but they may as well turn out to be enough on their own. A clever engineer might figure this out via proper calculations, but for the purpose of the example - you can't tell as long as THAT pillar stands. If it wasn't there in the first place, however, the structure would either continue to be supported or not. Hell - the example is imperfect, since we should rather ask whether the other pillars are helping at all, or whether they are merely fancy decorations that serve little in terms of practical purpose. I hope things are a little clearer NOW. Again - I've just said that when people aren't exclusive sexually but continue to have strong feelings towards each other, I take that as heartwarming evidence that there's more to their relationship than sex. Hell - imagine an asexual couple and you get pretty much the same deal and won't have to fixate on exclusivity.

Reply
  kiwifruitred  |  18

#90 I did actually get that, no need to flip your shit. I was just pointing out that you can't judge a relationship based on one factor alone. Maybe two people are in an open relationship but are actually bored of each other and just stick together because it's comfortable and easy?

Reply
  Vestin  |  18

#91: Yeah, maybe. At least they see more value in staying together than in splitting up and seeking novelty. As for your first point - of course I can judge a relationship based on a single factor! Who's there to stop me ;P? The gist of what I've been saying so far is that I find expressions of what I reasonably suspect to be non-purely sexual attachment to be cute and heartwarming. I've then proceeded to explain why. That's basically it.

Reply
  greeneyedx  |  23

I tried being in an open relationship once. Eventually, my ex girlfriend got jealous of my boyfriend. She saw that he was the more important one out of them and that she couldn't take me out like he could, so she broke up with me (didn't say why until months later). You can have a very committed and loving relationship that's all inclusive. Personally, I believe a relationship that stays inclusive is the most pure, because to me it means those people are fully dedicated to their s/o. Physically and emotionally.

Reply
  cjb87  |  23

I get what you're saying, #8, but with an open relationship, where the partners involved are the "main" relationship and both can seek sexy fun elsewhere, and with polyamory, where people can have and seek multiple different relationships (sexual or otherwise), the main factor in success is being honest and respectful to all involved. It also only tends to work if the partners start the relationship this way with this being a mutual agreement from the get-go. Not if an ex wants a formerly monogamous partner back with new open terms. And especially not if that person isn't upfront about those intentions/terms and doesn't care to make sure the other partner agrees to them to begin with. This guy is not being respectful or upfront and clearly does not care what OP wants, just what he does.

Reply
  Flyndaran  |  10

Not everything must be 50/50 business equal. I'm in a sem-open relationship for personal reasons. She gets to play around, while I don't. Because I can't physically and don't want to. I had to convince her that I really was fine with it and not testing or desperate to keep her. But I'm weird for having zero jealous bones in my body.

Reply
  cjb87  |  23

Yes, the point isn't necessarily that the freedoms have to be equal. But the key is that you defined your relationship boundaries together, and she gave you the opportunity to agree to the terms or not and to clarify your own wants and needs. She also made extra-sure that you were ok with those terms, that you didn't just agree because you felt you had to, and that you didn't secretly want a fully monogamous relationship. Respect!

Reply
  JustinJK  |  21

@46 I'm long time FBs with a guy who's older than me who has been in a relationship with a guy for 10 years. The guy rarely-to-never steps outside of the relationships and isn't very sexual (seemingly almost a - sexual from my limited exposure to him). but they're very much in love and are going to get married. The guy I see steps outside of the relationship for sexual needs (he has a lot lol). They have rules, like I can't interfere with their time or really mingle in their social circles - although I'm a rebellious whore lol. Relationships are often not as black and white. I know that.

Loading data…