What’s the point of open relationships
It just sounds like you’re allowing cheating
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
exexec · 70-79, C
Cheating was what my wife did when we were dating in college. She was free to date others, but not have sex. She had sex and lied about it. If she and I stay within the conditions we have agreed upon now, I don't consider it cheating. If one of us breaks those rules, it is cheating.
swirlie · 31-35
@exexec
You cannot dictate to someone to not have sex with others if you are only dating that person, regardless of your personal commitments to each other.
If you wanted to have that much control over your unmarried lover, you should have put a ring on her finger and made her stick to a set of wedding vows.
Sorry exec, but you can't have it both ways. That's not how life works in the real world.
You cannot dictate to someone to not have sex with others if you are only dating that person, regardless of your personal commitments to each other.
If you wanted to have that much control over your unmarried lover, you should have put a ring on her finger and made her stick to a set of wedding vows.
Sorry exec, but you can't have it both ways. That's not how life works in the real world.
Fishy · 36-40, F
@swirlie
I mean, isn't dating often a precursor to marriage tho?
Also, the ring doesn't change much...
(Eg open marriages)
But I mean, if early on in the relationship they discus it and they're fine with it,
Each to their own,
But I dont really think it's dictating if someone has deal breakers,
Or just points out that this isn't going to work out
Like, if they not interested in open relationships but the other person wants an open relationship, then they probably aren't the best match for each other from the start
You cannot dictate to someone to not have sex with others if you are only dating that person, regardless of your personal commitments to each other.
If you wanted to have that much control over your unmarried lover, you should have put a ring on her finger
If you wanted to have that much control over your unmarried lover, you should have put a ring on her finger
I mean, isn't dating often a precursor to marriage tho?
Also, the ring doesn't change much...
(Eg open marriages)
But I mean, if early on in the relationship they discus it and they're fine with it,
Each to their own,
But I dont really think it's dictating if someone has deal breakers,
Or just points out that this isn't going to work out
Like, if they not interested in open relationships but the other person wants an open relationship, then they probably aren't the best match for each other from the start
swirlie · 31-35
@Fishy
Only for those who's mother told them that dating leads to marriage, which is typically the case in most Third World country cultures. If you don't want to marry it, then don't date it in the first place... is their general rule.
A ring has nothing to do with it. It's the marriage vows people make to each other that is consummated by the representation of a ring that only matters here.
If those vows specifically state that an open-marriage is what they both anticipate from each other, then there's no problem.
Are you talking about early on in the relationship while they are still dating, or early on in the relationship after they've been married?
If you are not married to someone, you cannot dictate how that person behaves sexually with other partners. If you want that person all to yourself, then get married and make vows of strict monogamy to each other. Like I said to exec, he can't have it both ways.
That is correct. That is why two UN-married people cannot dictate to each other how the other wants them to conduct their lives.
I mean, isn't dating often a precursor to marriage tho?
Only for those who's mother told them that dating leads to marriage, which is typically the case in most Third World country cultures. If you don't want to marry it, then don't date it in the first place... is their general rule.
Also, the ring doesn't change much...
(Eg open marriages)
(Eg open marriages)
A ring has nothing to do with it. It's the marriage vows people make to each other that is consummated by the representation of a ring that only matters here.
If those vows specifically state that an open-marriage is what they both anticipate from each other, then there's no problem.
But I mean, if early on in the relationship they discus it and they're fine with it,
Each to their own,
Each to their own,
Are you talking about early on in the relationship while they are still dating, or early on in the relationship after they've been married?
But I dont really think it's dictating if someone has deal breakers,
Or just points out that this isn't going to work out
Or just points out that this isn't going to work out
If you are not married to someone, you cannot dictate how that person behaves sexually with other partners. If you want that person all to yourself, then get married and make vows of strict monogamy to each other. Like I said to exec, he can't have it both ways.
Like, if they not interested in open relationships but the other person wants an open relationship, then they probably aren't the best match for each other from the start
That is correct. That is why two UN-married people cannot dictate to each other how the other wants them to conduct their lives.
Fishy · 36-40, F
@swirlie
Yes, that's what I was implying,
A ring is a symbol of the marriage vows.
But the point is, that if someone can't be committed before marriage, then what's the point of making commitment vows if they can't keep those vows?
I dont think marriage vows are going to "keep them all to yourself"
Vows without actions are just words
Breaking up with them or moving on isn't dictating how that person behaves tho.
That person is still free to behave however they want, just as the other person is free to behave by not sticking around 🤷
A ring has nothing to do with it. It's the marriage vows people make to each other that is consummated by the representation of a ring that only matters here
Yes, that's what I was implying,
A ring is a symbol of the marriage vows.
But the point is, that if someone can't be committed before marriage, then what's the point of making commitment vows if they can't keep those vows?
I dont think marriage vows are going to "keep them all to yourself"
Vows without actions are just words
If you are not married to someone, you cannot dictate how that person behaves sexually with other partners. If you want that person all to yourself, then get married and make vows of strict monogamy to each other. Like I said to exec, he can't have it both ways.
Breaking up with them or moving on isn't dictating how that person behaves tho.
That person is still free to behave however they want, just as the other person is free to behave by not sticking around 🤷