Are there Reasonable Moral Grounds to Oppose Open Relationships and Marriages?

[Barcode]

Falvlun said:

The difference is that your partner knows that you are having sexual relationships with other people; it is something you have dicussed and agreed upon. You really don't see how that is different from sneaking around, going behind someone's back?

Cheating is wrong. It is always a negative, hurtful thing. However, if you and your partner have agreed to having sex with other people, it is not cheating when you go have sex with other people.

So apparently you define cheating by active deception such as the failure to disclose one's own sexual escapades?

So if I am actively engaged in sexual activity with multiple partners and my wife (or significant other) consents to me engaged in these acts its ok so long as she knows the names of the people? Or is it ok so long as she knows that I'm doing it? Consent requires more than a yes or know.


Falvlun said:

Obviously, you and your wife wouldn't be good candidates for an open relationship. How does that translate to "no one could make an open relationship work?

I also don't understand what exactly you think someone in an open relationship would be sneaky about.

I am not saying people in an open relationship cannot work, I am merely pointing out gray areas in this type of union. As I stated in the above what is my wife consenting to? What am I consenting to?

What if I meet a woman I am attracted to at work, and although my wife and I agree and consent to each other being engaged in sexual activity is it ok for me to have sex with this co-worker or is it cheating since I didn't tell my wife?

Falvlun said:

Huh? How can you say that? That would be like me saying "All monogomous relationships have lukewarm emotional attachments because everyone is only thinking about all the sex they could be having with other people, therefore they lack substance." Such blanket statements are ridiculous.

Because nobody has explained real benefit at least morally on open relationships. What are the benefits of me sharing myself with other women if I am in a so-called committed relationship? Free love? What is the benefit? Only benefit I see is to endulge in my own sexual desires. Some married couples "get off" by seeing their spouse having sex with another. I see only sexual desire being benefited but what are the benefits?

Falvlun said:

How can I value my dog when I pet other dogs at the dog park?

Answer: I love and appreciate my dog more. We have a deep understanding; I train him, I feed him, I hike with him, and at the end of the day, he is the dog snuggling with me on my couch. Those other dogs at the park, they are cute and I like to pat them; I like dogs in general. But I like my dog the best.

Shorter answer: There are gradations of value. It is not all or nothing.

Sorry I don't do animal comparisons which greatly differs from human value.

Yes there are degrees of value, but the question still remains on how do I show value to my wife if I am actively engaging in group sex? How does my wife show value to me if she is actively engaged in group sex?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am not saying people in an open relationship cannot work, I am merely pointing out gray areas in this type of union. As I stated in the above what is my wife consenting to? What am I consenting to?

What if I meet a woman I am attracted to at work, and although my wife and I agree and consent to each other being engaged in sexual activity is it ok for me to have sex with this co-worker or is it cheating since I didn't tell my wife?

That depends; what arrangement have you worked out with your wife in this hypothetical scenario?

 

[blackout]

Edit: Value doesn't necessarily equate to happiness.

At least in a monogamous relationship if I transgress it is known I don't value her, but what about open relationships? How am I valuing her?

her freedom?
her happiness?
who she is?

As well,
If she doesn't know you value her
in regards to you everyday daily life
(putting aside all things sexual)
there is already something VERY wrong.

When we embrace the whole truth about who we are,
and then embrace that in each other,
that is no small thing.

 

[Barcode]

Really? I guess I'm nobody. :sad:

Well you didn't really give a good explanation. No offense.

Genital Herpes is serious business. Although there are different types of herpies people need to be clear that it can be contacted from skin-to-skin. Just because someone doesn't have an active outbreak doesn't mean your risk is less, it just means the virus is dormant. True, a condom can help reduce the risk but it doesn't prevent any risk. I love using swinger parties as a good examplebecause people engaged in these groups aren't responsible for each other. Sure it can be assumed that there ought to be other responsible adults that take precautionary measures, but again those adults that are responsible cannot be responsible for other adults and so on and so forth.

 

[Barcode]

her freedom?
her happiness?
who she is?

As well,
If she doesn't know you value her
in regards to you everyday daily life
(putting aside all things sexual)
there is already something VERY wrong.

When we embrace the whole truth about who we are,
and then embrace that in each other,
that is no small thing.

That didn't answer my statement but nice poetry

 

[Barcode]

interesting how you are unable to distinguish between "differently" and "equally".

Of course, with your whole argument being based upon your own inability to distinguish between the two....

 

[Me Myself]

Edit: Value doesn't necessarily equate to happiness.

At least in a monogamous relationship if I transgress it is known I don't value her, but what about open relationships? How am I valuing her?

That depends on how you do it. Value can lead to happiness indeed.


To value somebody in this case refers to something emotional. It doesn´t depend on quantity of sex. You wil value more somebody with which you have had more frecuent and intense positive exposures to. Idealy, sex is not the only positive expoosure you get with a wife, so just having sex with other woman wouldn´t mean they suddenly become more valuable to you than your wife.

The value is not only in not cheating. One can be horrible husband and not cheat on a wife, that doesn´t mean you value her. Maybe you just dislike being cruel in general, but don´t care for her specially.

Naturaly, open relationships are not for anybody, people too unsure of themselves would most be unable of having one because of the specific aspect of "mesurability" of value in the commitment of just one sex partner for life.

The argument is talking about if they can work though, not if it is for everyone.

 

[blackout]

Well you didn't really give a good explanation. No offense.

Genital Herpes is serious business. Although there are different types of herpies people need to be clear that it can be contacted from skin-to-skin. Just because someone doesn't have an active outbreak doesn't mean your risk is less. True, a condom can help reduce the risk but it doesn't prevent any risk. Again, and I love using swinger parties as a good example. People aren't responsible for each other. Sure it can be assumed that there ought to be other responsible adults that take precautionary measures, but again those adults that are responsible cannot be responsible for other adults and so on and so forth.

I personally agree with you about swinger parties.
It's a high risk extra.
Yet there are couples who live this lifestyle.
Aparantely it's what they want to do.

Sure you can point to the worst case scenarios,
and they are real,
but there are many other very low risk scenarios
as already pointed out in this thread.

Some people in life are high risk takers in general.
The way they drive,
The way they drink,
They things they say to others,
The things they put up on their public facebook account,
The activities they persue--
from extreme sports to random sex without condoms.

Anyway, just to say that there are couples who
while they are Open to extended intimacies in their primary relationship
are not at all Open to high risk behavior.

Strong Mature Primary Relationships that are based in Love,
will be those where ALL important decisions are made together
as decisions that compliment and fulfill both parties
as individuals and partners alike.
Your primary partner is the one you build your life with.
Secondary partners are those who add to and compliment your life
and your personhood, and hopefully also serve to strengthen
your primary relationship.
Or else, why bother? With either the secondaries, or perhaps, the primary.

 

[Me Myself]

That didn't answer my statement but nice poetry

It did actually, but let me spell it out for you (UV may correct me if I read wrong)

What she said is that she most know that you value her because of OTHER things aside sex.

IF you don´t even know what can you do so she knows you love and value her then as she said, there might be more than one problem with such relationship.. But I am sure you know.

 

[blackout]

That didn't answer my statement but nice poetry

It answered to your statement.

 

[Songbird]

Ok. Define open relationships if they don't involve sex?

Non sequitur? I don't follow.

 

[Songbird]

I highly doubt that. Nobody loves multiple things equally.

A father doean't love his daughter the same as his son because more likely he'll treat his daughter differently (with love of course) differently. Sure a parent can love their multiple children the same with intensity but as far as treatment love is done differently and uniquely.

First, that wasn't even the question. Second, yes people can love multiple things equally. Third, I don't see an issue with your example. Do you? Fourth, like Mestemia said, you seem to have confused equal with different.

 

[Mathematician]

Are there Reasonable Moral Grounds to Oppose Open Relationships and Marriages?

If all parties agreed to be in an open relationship, then no. That is not to say complications won't arise as a consequence of an open relationship. They may.

If one person is being coerced into an open relationship, that is an entirely different story. The reverse is true as well: someone being coerced into a closed relationship after it was agreed to keep open.

 

[Barcode]

Non sequitur? I don't follow.

No it's not a non-sequitor. I have mwntioned sex in these relationships this whole time.

In order for me to have a clear understanding of any moral implication of this type of union I need for it to be defined first since I may be misunderstanding something.

 

[Me Myself]

I highly doubt that. Nobody loves multiple things equally.

I hope that:

a) you do are able to love multiple "things" equally

or

b) you have less than two sons/daughters

 

[Songbird]

No it's not a non-sequitor. I have mwntioned sex in these relationships this whole time.

In order for me to have a clear understanding of any moral implication of this type of union I need for it to be defined first since I may be misunderstanding something.

Ah, okay, okay. I think for the sake of including a range of open relationships, it can be either with sex or without. There's a couple here on RF who have been together for years, and they are in an open relationship. But so far she's only danced with other men, and he's only kissed another woman. (At least, last I heard.) They're looking for the right people, I think. So "open" relationships is a broad term including a spectrum of things. It doesn't apply only to swinger parties, but also to the couple I mentioned, anything in between, and things I'm sure I haven't thought of.

 

[Falvlun]

Falvlun said:

The difference is that your partner knows that you are having sexual relationships with other people; it is something you have dicussed and agreed upon. You really don't see how that is different from sneaking around, going behind someone's back?

Cheating is wrong. It is always a negative, hurtful thing. However, if you and your partner have agreed to having sex with other people, it is not cheating when you go have sex with other people.

So apparently you define cheating by active deception such as the failure to disclose one's own sexual escapades?

Yes.

So if I am actively engaged in sexual activity with multiple partners and my wife (or significant other) consents to me engaged in these acts its ok so long as she knows the names of the people? Or is it ok so long as she knows that I'm doing it? Consent requires more than a yes or know.

It's whatever you two have agreed on. Some couples in an open relationship might want to know who their partner is having sex with, some might not.

Falvlun said:

Obviously, you and your wife wouldn't be good candidates for an open relationship. How does that translate to "no one could make an open relationship work?

I also don't understand what exactly you think someone in an open relationship would be sneaky about.

I am not saying people in an open relationship cannot work, I am merely pointing out gray areas in this type of union. As I stated in the above what is my wife consenting to? What am I consenting to?

What if I meet a woman I am attracted to at work, and although my wife and I agree and consent to each other being engaged in sexual activity is it ok for me to have sex with this co-worker or is it cheating since I didn't tell my wife?

Again, you and your wife would need to have a discussion on how your personal open relationship will work. It probably varies from relationship to relationship.

Falvlun said:

Huh? How can you say that? That would be like me saying "All monogomous relationships have lukewarm emotional attachments because everyone is only thinking about all the sex they could be having with other people, therefore they lack substance." Such blanket statements are ridiculous.

Because nobody has explained real benefit at least morally on open relationships. What are the benefits of me sharing myself with other women if I am in a so-called committed relationship? Free love? What is the benefit? Only benefit I see is to endulge in my own sexual desires. Some married couples "get off" by seeing their spouse having sex with another. I see only sexual desire being benefited but what are the benefits?

I have given one possible benefit, ie, healthier outlooks about sex. You can take it or leave it.

Regardless, I don't think an open relationship would have to have a "moral benefit" to be justified. Different types of relationships work for different people. Some couples may have a happier, healthier realtionship by making theirs an open one.

Also, what's the matter with satisfying your sexual desires? Why isn't that a good enough reason? Afterall, we eat dessert just to satisfy our gluttonous sweet tooth; no one ever needed cheesecake.

Falvlun said:

How can I value my dog when I pet other dogs at the dog park?

Answer: I love and appreciate my dog more. We have a deep understanding; I train him, I feed him, I hike with him, and at the end of the day, he is the dog snuggling with me on my couch. Those other dogs at the park, they are cute and I like to pat them; I like dogs in general. But I like my dog the best.

Shorter answer: There are gradations of value. It is not all or nothing.

Sorry I don't do animal comparisons which greatly differs from human value.

Yes there are degrees of value, but the question still remains on how do I show value to my wife if I am actively engaging in group sex? How does my wife show value to me if she is actively engaged in group sex?

Apparently you got at least part of the point even though I used my dog as the example: there are degrees of value.

Is sex the only reason you value your wife? Because, that's how your position sounds, even though I'm sure you don't mean that.

Here's the part about the dog example you did not get: I do many more things with my dog-- that I do not do with any other dog I may interact with-- that increases the value I hold my dog in. Likewise, the sex we have is one reason I value my fiance. But that is not the only reason why I value him: It is with him I plan to raise a family, with him I plan to share a house, with him that I love going on adventures with, and yes, it is with him I enjoy long walks on the beach.

If I had sex with someone else, would that mean I no longer value the sex I have with my partner? Of course not. If I had sex with someone else, would that mean I no longer value the many other things about my partner I value? Of course not. If I had sex with someone else, would that mean that the person I have sex with suddenly has the same exact value as my fiance, the guy with whom I am building a life? Of course not.

Why would you assume that all that you have built with your wife would simply vanish if you or she had (agreed upon) sex with someone else? Why do you assume that you would value this other sexual partner as much as your wife, the person you have built so much with?

It is seriously mindboggling to me.

 

[Falvlun]

Well you didn't really give a good explanation. No offense.

Genital Herpes is serious business. Although there are different types of herpies people need to be clear that it can be contacted from skin-to-skin. Just because someone doesn't have an active outbreak doesn't mean your risk is less, it just means the virus is dormant. True, a condom can help reduce the risk but it doesn't prevent any risk. I love using swinger parties as a good examplebecause people engaged in these groups aren't responsible for each other. Sure it can be assumed that there ought to be other responsible adults that take precautionary measures, but again those adults that are responsible cannot be responsible for other adults and so on and so forth.

Well, then you can't complain that nobody addressed your issue. Not liking what I said (and you never responded to any of it, so how should I know how you felt about it?) is not the same as nobody responding.

See post 153. In short, my argument is how is the risk for an STD any different than that for sexually single people?

EDIT:
And you do realize that not everyone in an open relationship participates in swinger parties, right? That's actually probably a very small subset.

 

[Barcode]

I hope that:

a) you do are able to love multiple "things" equally

or

b) you have less than two sons/daughters

This is really silly.

 

[Barcode]

Well, then you can't complain that nobody addressed your issue. Not liking what I said (and you never responded to any of it, so how should I know how you felt about it?) is not the same as nobody responding.

See post 153. In short, my argument is how is the risk for an STD any different than that for sexually single people?

EDIT:
And you do realize that not everyone in an open relationship participates in swinger parties, right? That's actually probably a very small subset.

Sigh*

Because if your lifestyle involves multiple people the risk is greater