Promiscuous relationships - good idea?

Kermit.de.frog

If you make a pact with your partner that she can have one night stands with as many men (or women) as she likes and you can do the same with as many women as you like but you will stay together would this actually make a relationship better in your view?

Or is it total no, no?

Cos I can see the side of the argument that this strategy might be preferable to maintaining a relationship than "accidents" further down the road. It's more based on honesty and trust starting out like this. No?

Youngblood.III

Miss Piggy is a slut

Maximus Alexander

Wouldn't be my cup of tea but if that's what you're both into, go for it. Sure it's nobody else's business.

ancapailldorcha

Depends on the parties involved. I'd say no for most people though. There's a huge risk of STDs for one thing.

knird evol

Darling, there's something I've been meaning to discuss with you.
Now just hear me out....

Saipanne

I've known people who are into this. They tend to be mildly sociopathic, imo.

I once dated a woman who was into the idea. I gave it a go, but I couldn't just switch my feelings off like that.

So, it's more for sociopaths. Imo.

Kermit.de.frog

knird evol wrote: »

Darling, there's something I've been meaning to discuss with you.
Now just hear me out....

Yeah - who brings it up?:D


P.S yes, Miss Piggy is a slut. Kermit is available.

boobar

For me it's not something I'd want.

But each to their own, I suppose.

One thing I'd ask is that if you want this much "choice" or "freedom" then why bother with the relationship at all?

The_Valeyard

If both sides are happy, let them at it. Although I've near heard any stories of this working long term. Wouldnt be overly concerned about STI IF properprecautions are taken.

LordSutch

Have you seen the film Vanilla Sky?

suicide_circus

Just cause she dances go-go, don't make her a hoe, no

kowloon

At least half of the couple will soon realise it's effort to find new people and the extra time is good for catching up on GTA V and rewatching things on Netflix.

frostyjacks

No. This is how diseases spread.

newacc2015

There is nothing wrong with open relationships. You get all the emotional support from your SO and still the thrill of sex from sleeping with other people. You cant expect to have the same adventurous sex from the same person for 30 years. It will feel repetitive and like a chore after a while. Some couples just need to mix it up

The risk of STIs is minimised with condoms. So that really shouldnt be a concern. You are statistically more likely as a gay man to get HIV from an "exclusive relationship", than having a ton of one night stands. A cheating partner is most likely to give you HIV, having sex with strangers using condoms. Open relationship should have rules to cover the likes of this

The Backwards Man

I think it's better than people give it credit for as a standalone, judge it on its own merits, not the franchise.

hytrogen

Happened all the time in ye olde days, too prunish society now though what with Tinder, Grinder PoF sterilizing the natural ways of mating after meeting in a public house in the real world. Now it's an accountants wet dream of how many accolades you have in common on facetube..

Kermit.de.frog

I'd also say cheating is becoming more common rather than less common. If you don't have an open relationship is this just a case your partner never finds out and even if they don't is that better?

I wonder what proportion of couples actually end up with cheating as the core reason for a break up.

OldGoat

Saipanne wrote: »

So, it's more for sociopaths. Imo.

Or it's for people with a different code of morals, libertines who are strong enough in their relationships that sex is not the defining characteristic of their relationship. People who don't want to live by the imposed church decree of what is right and what is wrong.
Biological impediment for men is to impregnate as many different women as possible. Studies have shown that a monogamous relationship can be detrimental to a mans libido. (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/200805/inconvenient-truth-sexual-monogamy-kills-male-libido). The 'one man, one woman' doctrine is dated and outmoded.

Sociopath indeed.

Lux23

It works for some couples especially when they are together for a few years and they want to mix things up a bit. But I think it has to be mutually agreed, I can imagine in some relationships that are uneven, one suggests it and the other agrees in order to keep the relationship together. That would be disastrous in my opinion.

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If you make a pact with your partner that she can have one night stands with as many men (or women) as she likes and you can do the same with as many women as you like but you will stay together would this actually make a relationship better in your view?

Is that not like posting a recipe and then asking "Would a spoonful of chilli improve this recipe"? Clearly the people who do not like chilli are going to say no for a start.

And of the people remaining there will be all kinds of nuances as to how chilli might impact the other ingredients.

While there will be some people who just think "chilli in anything is great - slap it into anything and I am happy".

Adding NSA extra curricular sex to a relationship will be much the same as this. It will not make a relationship better (or worse) per se - it will entirely depend on the people in the relationship - what they like - do not like - and the nuances and effects that they would identify and observe from it.

So there is no answer to your question really. It is entirely subjective.

boobar wrote: »

One thing I'd ask is that if you want this much "choice" or "freedom" then why bother with the relationship at all?

I guess many people do not identify their relationship - or what they want from a relationship - by sex. There are many reasons other than sex you might want to be in and maintain a relationship - without tying anything of it to sex.

If you rate the importance of relationships purely by sex and fidelity - then indeed there would be little reason to be in an open relationship. But mileage varies on this and for many what they want from their relationship is a list of things that does not include fidelity - but their relationships are not less valid due to this.

Tony EH

I can't imagine it's ever really a good, idea long term. It's bound to turn sour for one or both (or more) people at some stage.

Son Of A Vidic

Things might be grand for a few months or a few years. But it is one of those situations certain to never end well.

suicide_circus

Don't mind admitting I would be way too insecure for that. Also if I wanted to be riding loads of people, I wouldnt bother being in a committed relationship.

bajer101

Me and my ex had an open relationship. She was livid when she found out.

arayess

I'm not sure I'd be on for random ONS and not telling the partner but certainly organised events such as swinger clubs or meeting with other couples would be cool in my book.
What i'm getting at is sex you were both involved in would be grand but not coming home after a club cos you pulled probably less so.

Old Jakey

Let's be honest how an 'open' relationship is going to play out for most men.

It's six months into this exciting new phase of your relationship and you've gone on one coffee date. Meanwhile your wife/gf is getting railed by ten dudes a week she meets on Tinder.

valoren

suicide_circus wrote: »

Don't mind admitting I would be way too insecure for that. Also if I wanted to be riding loads of people, I wouldnt bother being in a committed relationship.

+1

So long as it was a mutual decision to sleep around then there's no problem.

I wouldn't be wired for that myself though.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

You'd each need to be a particular kind of person with a particular attitude to romantic relationships, and you'd need excellent trust and communication in your relationship with each other, but if it's something you're both fully on board with and enthusiastic about then sure it probably could make your relationship better.

I don't fully see where any employed person in a relationship would get the time, honestly. I have a boyfriend and work from home and I've been meaning to get to the glass recycling since Thursday

Old Jakey

Old Jakey wrote: »

Let's be honest how an 'open' relationship is going to play out for most men. It's six months into this exciting new phase of your relationship and you've gone on one coffee date. Meanwhile your wife/gf is getting railed by ten dudes a week she meets on Tinder.

Ah I am not so sure. Just because partners give open permission to each other to engage in this kind of thing - that does not mean they actually will.

I have known people in relationships that are technically "open" but none of them have actually put it into practice. In fact technically I am in that kind of relationship myself as we had a discussion about it at one point - established how and when we would be ok with some - extra curricular activity shall we say - but none of us have engaged in actually making it happen.

Even where people have engaged in it - just because they are open to the idea of it and engaging in it - that does not mean they are automatically going to do it to excess. No reason to expect it will be "ten dudes a week" over one guy a week - a month - a year - or even a decade.

Generally the point of people opening up the relationship in this fashion is not merely to go around getting as much sex as possible - but to be permitted to roll with it IF a scenario arises that they want to run with. And even for those in open relationships this often happens quite rarely - or not at all.

NachoBusiness

We all start off as swingers really.
My first girlfriend was a hoor for the kiss chasing.
As was I.

Exclamation Marc

Nah I wouldn't be bothered. I'd go down the FWB route if anything, but even that I wouldn't have any interest in.

Just an accident waiting to happen. With all the best intentions, she could get knocked up, or the guy could knock someone else up.

I'd be way too insecure for it anyway. That night you want a bit, and she's out on the town too busy getting pole-axed by some lad from Tinder.... Yeek.

justchecked

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If you make a pact with your partner that she can have one night stands with as many men (or women) as she likes and you can do the same with as many women as you like but you will stay together would this actually make a relationship better in your view?

Or is it total no, no?

Cos I can see the side of the argument that this strategy might be preferable to maintaining a relationship than "accidents" further down the road. It's more based on honesty and trust starting out like this. No?

Not going to work.
If I saw no username I'd still be sure that it was a man who wrote this question.

Women work differently - sure they like to shag, and thats groovy baby, but they don't think in the way men do, which is shag shag shag, its got tits shag it.
The idea of being able to shag around is more attractive to a male who wishes to carelessly sew his seeds hither and thither and then have a beer job done.

smash

"So I boned this hot guy/girl last night and they had the best body..." Isn't going to go down too well with the majority of people.

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If you make a pact with your partner that she can have one night stands with as many men (or women) as she likes and you can do the same with as many women as you like but you will stay together would this actually make a relationship better in your view?

How come the female partner gets to sleep with men and women, but the male partner only gets to sleep with women?

Seems a little unfair that one gets twice as many potentials as the other.

kfallon

If I wanted to sleep with other people I wouldn't get into a relationship in the first place!

smash

Candie wrote: »

How come the female partner gets to sleep with men and women, but the male partner only gets to sleep with women?

Seems a little unfair that one gets twice as many potentials as the other.

Yea. She should only be allowed sleep with women too!


:pac:

harry Bailey esq

It depends OP.On a looks scale of 1-10,would you rate you self higher than your ladyfriend?Or would she be considered the more attractive half of the union?If she is,be a man,put your foot down,voice your disgust at her lacklustre morals and put the issue to bed,for want of a better term.If,however most people would consider you to be the more attractive of you both, go and fill your boots.Your wife sounds really nice.

justchecked

harry Bailey esq wrote: »

It depends OP.On a looks scale of 1-10,would you rate you self higher than your ladyfriend?Or would she be considered the more attractive half of the union?If she is,be a man,put your foot down,voice your disgust at her lacklustre morals and put the issue to bed,for want of a better term.If,however most people would consider you to be the more attractive of you both, go and fill your boots.Your wife sounds really nice.

she could be a wreck and he could be a model, she'd still hands down win in number of shags.

sex is a casual choice for women. theres never scarcity.

Kaiser Sosay

Destined to never end well and best avoided imo.

harry Bailey esq

justchecked wrote: »

she could be a wreck and he could be a model, she'd still hands down win in number of shags.

sex is a casual choice for women. theres never scarcity.

I agree with the first part,but the phenomenon of hoardes of young women hitting the town together of an evening with the sole intention of bringing someone home and getting their hole at the end of the night is not a new one. Ever been to Waterford? Unless the chap in question is extremely socially awkward his odds of getting the ride are on a par with most women,if he knows the nature his game(Which any gentleman toying around with the notion of an open relationship most definitely should)

Maximus Alexander

justchecked wrote: »

she could be a wreck and he could be a model, she'd still hands down win in number of shags.

sex is a casual choice for women. theres never scarcity.

Never understood this reasoning. At the end of a Friday night in Coppers, the number of straight women getting their hole is the same as the number of straight men.

wakka12

newacc2015 wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with open relationships. You get all the emotional support from your SO and still the thrill of sex from sleeping with other people. You cant expect to have the same adventurous sex from the same person for 30 years. It will feel repetitive and like a chore after a while. Some couples just need to mix it up

The risk of STIs is minimised with condoms. So that really shouldnt be a concern. You are statistically more likely as a gay man to get HIV from an "exclusive relationship", than having a ton of one night stands. A cheating partner is most likely to give you HIV, having sex with strangers using condoms. Open relationship should have rules to cover the likes of this

First Ive heard about that. Care to enlighten us as to why this might be?

anothernight

It actually works very well for some couples. Having permission to have sex with other people doesn't actually mean having sex with everyone. There's as many types of open relationship as types of 'regular' relationships.

Cold War Kid

Overall, women can get sex more easily than men (so much nuance when you drill down though) but to say any woman who is "wrecked" would get more sex than any male model is just nonsense.
If something is such a true phenomenon, it doesn't need ludicrous exaggerations to articulate it.

wakka12

I would hate to have an open relationship because Im too insecure and self conscious. Id be worried they'd find somebody more attractive than me and want to be in a relationship with them instead..so I'd rather just not go there.
Apart from the fact that I think sex is a very private thing and I don't enjoy having sex with anybody whom I don't have an emotional attachment with .

kowloon

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Never understood this reasoning. At the end of a Friday night in Coppers, the number of straight women getting their hole is the same as the number of straight men.

Yeah, but some men take home the majority of the women because they're total legends and the slags can't get enough of them.

Tombi!

justchecked wrote: »

she could be a wreck and he could be a model, she'd still hands down win in number of shags.

sex is a casual choice for women. theres never scarcity.

mod: less of the sexism if you'd like to continue posting in the thread

justchecked

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Overall, women can get sex more easily than men (so much nuance when you drill down though) but to say any woman who is "wrecked" would get more sex than any male model is just nonsense.
If something is such a true phenomenon, it doesn't need ludicrous exaggerations to articulate it.

No theres no real nuance about it, and I was correct in my initial post.
Its not a phenomenon its fact and the explanation need not be exaggerated to prove it.

Nor is it sexist. Its a general truth, sure you'll find the odd exception, but overall it stands as fact.

If you don't believe me go do some basic research on mating strategies and sexual economics.

Not that you should need to.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

justchecked wrote: »

No theres no real nuance about it, and I was correct in my initial post.
Its not a phenomenon its fact and the explanation need not be exaggerated to prove it.

Nor is it sexist. Its a general truth, sure you'll find the odd exception, but overall it stands as fact.

If you don't believe me go do some basic research on mating strategies and sexual economics.

Not that you should need to.

There is nuance to it. At a very basic level a Melissa Mc Carthy lookalike does not have easier access to sex than someone who looks like Zayn Malik. That's just nonsense. Those are extreme examples but you can't say that any woman will definitely have easier access to sex than any man without accounting for age, appearance, personality and location.

Even beyond that, evolutionary psychology is not the hard science that people are determined to present it as.

I'm ok looking, and I when I was single I used to go out on the pull and could be very forward about it. Struck out, frequently.

justchecked

Cohen Young Trigger wrote: »

There is nuance to it. At a very basic level a Melissa Mc Carthy lookalike does not have easier access to sex than someone who looks like Zayn Malik. That's just nonsense. Those are extreme examples but you can't say that any woman will definitely have easier access to sex than any man without accounting for age, appearance, personality and location.

Even beyond that, evolutionary psychology is not the hard science that people are determined to present it as.

I'm ok looking, and I when I was single I used to go out on the pull and could be very forward about it. Struck out, frequently.

Thats taking the nuance thing a bit far.

I mean technically we can say that a female model on an isolated island in the pacific proves that theres nuances which disproves my earlier post.

But if you take away extremes the general rule will be evident.
This rule exists because of physiological differences, and differences in reproductive capacity between the genders.

As for appearance and personality, again extreme cases excluded, neither are really required for a woman to obtain sex.


In my humble opinion, and this is not intended to be in any way a sexist remark and I apologize 1000 times if anyone should perceive it as such, we're all equal and deserve equal treatment ....

but if you have ever struck out as an adult female, and you live somewhere other than a remote deserted island and are in any way still fertile... then in my humble opinion which can be wrong .... it was through your own choice alone, granted there are exceptions, but as a general rule if you're female and legal age then sex is/was available to you on a 24/7 basis.

The above paragraph is not intended to offend and I apologize if it did. Everyone is 100% equal in all ways, no exceptions, even people from Sligo.

Cold War Kid

I don't think it's sexist and I do agree it's easier for women to "acquire" sex, but no way do I believe any woman who's not visually/sexually appealing to men will get sex more easily than a male model, which is what you said.