Leaderboard

Definitely agree. Also, if your partner doesn't care enough about your feelings to the point that they get resentful because they can't do something that makes you uncomfortable....your relationship isn't going to last very long. I think if you're going to get married both parties need to care about each others feelings and well beings as much as they do their own. I would never want to do anything that bothered my wife at all, even if it meant missing out on something I was interested in. There are plenty of other things we both want to do that we can focus on.

I gave Dave a hall pass when I was a sick a couple years back (without restriction). I knew it would be close to a year before we could swing again. He never used it. We found that sex without the other doesn't mean a whole helluva lot. I threw that out to him in case he wanted to have some fun on the side. I believe most men (a lot of men) would have jumped at the chance to have a no-holds barred sex romp with anyone he wanted. Dave didn't. I think he'd offer the same for me... and I know I wouldn't go for it. For us, that's the whole point of swinging. We have much more fun together and watching each other. Without the one person, it's just plain ole sex. I did that enough before we married. It wasn't that great. And I think this is a winning statement. If you do want to give out hall-passes, keep them to a minimum.

That's not my position at all. Open relationships, IMO, are ETHICALLY nonmonogamous relationships of any form. That means that any partner(s) must know and approve of that type of relationship structure. Swinging falls under ethical nonmonogamy, therefore falls under the umbrella term of open relationship. For me, swinging is a subcategory under the general heading of "open" that is a couple-centric activity. So, as I said earlier in the thread, I would consider a couple who "hotewifes" to be swingers if they play together at some point and/or do the "hotwifing" in a way that is still about their relationship, but just in a general open relationship (sexually) if it is just her going off and he's not really involved at all. In my experience, all varieties of open/nonmonogamous relationships are guided by general rules. That is most definitely not exclusive to swinging. Even cheaters (which I do NOT include in open relationship - cheating lacks the ETHICAL part) generally have "rules" - i.e. spouse can't know, limited contact, or whatever else eases their conscious/minimizes risk of being found out.

I think you know what it tells you. She simply is not the right partner to have for this lifelstyle. You gave it a shot and it didn't work out, It happens. Be monogamous for a while and work on strengthening your bond to eachother. But face the fact that if you attempt this again you'd be putting your marriage at a greater risk than most couples on this forum. I am rooting for a happy ending to this. Good luck to the both of you and please keep posting.

This all sounds good, in "we're all adults here" sort of way, but instead of nodding I found myself troubled. 1. If "practicing safe sex" and "check in and let me know you're alive" are okay, why isn't any other rule or restriction? Those are both about your and your partner's safety, and about your peace of mind, so allowing that and outlawing other things that are also about safety and peace of mind just seems like hairsplitting. 2. Sure, if you're inclined that way. If not, then restrictions and rules can be as playful and fun as a good pair of leather restraints. 3. Oh, but they are. Partners A1 and A2 agree on a set of rules. A2 conveys those rules to B1, who has the option to agree or disagree. That's eminently fair. That's leaving aside the issue that restrictions and rules aren't necessarily about control. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. 4. There I agree, at least in theory, but I can see a situation where one or the other takes a possibly irrational dislike of someone. I can live with that, possibly with a head-patting "sure, sure, of course I won't have sex with that awful man" nudge and wink, but it's not a particularly onerous restriction, because there are a nearly infinite number of people who won't push that button. I think every relationship has rules and restrictions and negotiated settlements, some implicit, some explicit. If it feels like control, that's either because it is - in which case a lot of talking and some therapy is probably a good idea - or because you don't understand that a relationship is an entity with its own requirements and those can supercede those of the individual. It's an issue of common good, I think. Your paraphrased quote is another place where I take issue. It doesn't really hold up. The thing is that most of us are somewhere between good and bad, mostly because we all walk around with our inner toddler still alive inside of us. It's fine to let it out to play, but it still has to have a bedtime and a routine.

It's all sex to us, including the cuddling afterwards. Sex is an intimate thing, so while i respect that others feel differently, balking at things like kissing or cuddling defies our sense of the logic of it all. I've also noticed that watching Mr. Doe cuddling frequently segues into watching Mr. Doe eliciting more orgasms from his partner. Plus, I get all gooey about how sweet he is, and that's never a bad thing. ;-)