I want to thank all of your for your input. My wife and I discussed the issue of our "open" relationship. Here's where we are with it:
We embarked on this venture to improve our sex life. It worked wonderfully, and I think we both acknowledge that.
Now, we are on the right track. Sex has been so incredible and so different from the way it was, that I can't imagine going backwards.
So, we don't feel that we need to endanger our relationship by continuing to have others involved sexually with us. The one 3some we had was enough.
We passed the word on to our 3rd partner, and we hope and expect that our excitement for one another will stay.
I think we are damned lucky to have each other and to be able to enjoy our sensuality at our ages (61 and 50). And we are even more lucky to be so in love with each other.
divorced in 2003 Married in 12/2005 born 1948 wife born 1958 divorced in 2001
Then my two cents is you have made the deliberate decision to not be bi in order to maintain a monogamous relationships. Period. If the monogamous R is no problem, then why are you on a divorce busting board? There must be trouble in paradise somewhere. (No, I'm not attempting to call the kettle black or point fingers; however, it truly does take two to tango. There has to be some indecision in your sitch somewhere or had to have been and to be here would indicate to me you are working through some problems in your R in a positive or healthy manner.)
One thing I see over and over again are people who deliberately put themselves in a position where they remain in a "gray zone" in order to be able to have an "out" -- in order to remain less than fully committed in a relationship. Sorry, I don't buy your argument.
You may carry on education others as you believe; however, "bi" or "bi-curious" is often an excuse from what I've learned to maintain a swinger's lifestyle. It damages marriage, often times beyond repair because inevitably one partner is going along with an "arrangement" in order to keep the other P in a relationship. It may be me taking things tooo personally, but there is always the flip side on which I feel I do need to educate others on as well.
I do not know anything about your situation; you probably no nothing of mine. My 7+ year old posts here are long gone. However, I witnessed what I had. It was awful. Two people (my ex and his OW) were two of the hugest emotional and mental walking wrecks you'd want to imagine. The OW thought the same as you. She is now singing a much different tune from what I can tell. Let's see...a destroyed marriage, a totally destroyed R with my ex, a destroyed family, many emotional problems due to what was called "I could be with one or the other." I call that indecision. I do believe the OW maintained the "ability to be with one or the other" simply because it was exciting to my ex, it kept him around for a bit. When it got way to emotionally difficult for them both, it was a psychological nightmare. I think you have pointed that out clearly through your responses to Bob
You are looking at DanceQueen through the clouded lens of your own hurtful experience: and directing the anger and bitterness that your feel towards the OW in your own situation improperly at DQ. Before attacking her and making false assumptions about her, get to know her. Read her past threads here.
DQ is a woman on a mission: to aid others in -avoiding- the same fate that her own former marriage took. While some might take this as "Do as I say, not as I did", I see it as a woman who experienced a massive train-wreck, and then afterwards went on a mission to understand FULLY what happened, why it happened, and to never again let it happen to her. Along the way, she also became a zealot with the goal of helping others avoid the same type of train-wreck.
She does good work here, and is a valued part of our community. So back off a notch, and recognize that you're projecting onto her what you feel towards the OW in your situation.
-- B.
Me 50, W 45, M for 26 yrs S25, D23, S13, S10 20+ year SSM; recovery began Oct 2007
I don't believe I directed anything such at DQ. I simply stated my background. If you wanted to see anger, you would need to see the posts I made here many, many years ago. What I did proffer was a second-person perspective on that trainwreck.
I don't see where I attacked her simply by stating the fact I had a second-person experience and had somewhat (!) objectively witnessed the trappings of such an arrangement...and how it does destroy relationships. DQ's experience may be first-person whereas mine is second-person.
I do stand by my statement that she made a deliberate decision not to be bi...face it...in order to have a successful, monogamous, relationship that had to have been accomplished, no? We can "feel" or "believe" (the nouns, the things) we are anything we wish to be. But in order to do something, we must act-->that is to decide (the verb).
I have been around this board for many, many years, having my own mission. Also have read much around here. I have not attacked anyone, nor was that my intention. You most likely do not recognize me...I don't post all that often anywhere on this site any longer. People who do know me from this board (and I have met many, many in person) understand my intent is just the same as DQ's. I am not projecting anything onto DQ. Why is it when someone who clearly has been hurt but attempts to make an objective observation is often accused projecting? (Let's not get into a volley of responses here...but do ponder that rhetorical question.) I'm not certain of where I even took an accusatory stance of saying DQ was stating "do as I say, not as I do!"
I'm not sure but it does seem to occur to me that folks may be thinking I am taking a moral stance here. I am not...what someone does is their business until they begin to communicate about it. When it gets to that point, esp. on a internet chat board, well then they're looking for opinion in my book.
Still, I do encourage you to read up on ALL angles of this "lifestyle." Because it does seem interesting, exciting, and fun you may not quite be seeing all of the repercussions of it yet. Sort of like buying that brand new car--it looks shiny, new, and fast compared the the old clunker in the drive. Then you finance it and drive it off the lot and what happens? It immediately depreciates and sometime not too long afterwards...new repairs. Tires, tune ups, scratches, dings, and dents. So the excitement is only temporary.
Because my ex was dishonest with me does not preclude or promote the notion that swinging/open relationships are healthy lifestyles. By definition, it is excluded from marriage. (And BTW, I am NOT much of a religious person. I really have not practiced any formal religion since elementary school.)
What I do see in many people I have talked to or met during my experiences is that this is done out of a need to put "excitement" into life...and face it, we're a society pretty much addicted to excitement. We can't be happy with what is. We see what we can't have and we want it... it's part of what's brought us to this financial nightmare we're in LOL. We want newer, bigger, faster, whatever we DON'T have.(Face it...how many folks have lost homes due to non-conventional or shady financing in the past year or two...hmmm!)
Learning to truly love someone means acceptance of the humdrum and routine as well as finding ways to spicing it up. And to me, marriage is exclusively monogomous. If you don't want a monogomous R, then why even BE married?
Kezy...I'm really sorry for your past...but you really did insult me by stating that a bi-sexual person cannot be monogamous. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is only that - an opinion.
I won't take responsibility for how you interpreted my message. I simply stated my opinion as well as you had yours. If you read carefully what I'd written, you may get another intepretation: read the part about decisions. I think in part that is a high compliment on your part. Part of sexual orientation is how we decide to behave and act. It does seem to me you have taken the high road.
And yes, we are all entitled to our opinion. I am never insulted by opinion although I am not thin skinned and am only insulted whe someone directly slurs me.
