Seek Help Approaching Relationship With Couple

Difference of semantics, it sounds like. Appears some people here use terms based exclusively on sexual intimacy, and that's fine. I don't share that perspective. In my view, intimacy can be mental, emotional, spiritual, physical (platonic) or physical (sexual), and there is certainly more to a relationship than sex. There are many dimensions. Based on my view, I still define what I seek as an acknowledged and legitimate 'triad'.

Didn’t take it personally. Just called out the few inappropriate remarks for what they were.
 
Okay, it's obvious that definitions vary wildly among users here, and this is creating a barrier to understanding one another. Unless anybody has something constructive to add, based on facts—not perceptions, opinions, assumptions, etc., just let it go.
 
It doesn't sound like great odds to me to where I would go to the trouble. But I am not you. You are you. So if you want to go there? Go there. Be up front about it and sort it out.

Again... could start slow and ask her in a private setting that is quiet. Not in a loud restaurant to bar or similar that offers no privacy. Ask her straight up:


"I hear from your spouse that you guys have an Open relationship with a DADT policy. Is that true?"​

See what her answer is.

If not true? Back off. Do not feel her out on anything else.

  • If he's been lying to you about about being Open? That is not kind to you.
  • If he's been coming on to other people while leaving her in the dark? That cheating is not kind to her.
  • You don't need to get in their drama.

If true? Make an appointment to talk to BOTH of them together.

Then when the appointment time comes around? Be straight up about what you seek when you talk to both of them together.
  • Explain you want to date the husband and get closer to her.
  • You want to share X intimacies with her and Y intimacies with him.
  • Could they be interested in polyamory with you? Yes willing? Not willing?
  • Do things match up here or just not compatible? Able to be together well? Not able?

Sort it out.

Galagirl
 
Last edited:
Okay, it's obvious that definitions vary wildly among users here, and this is creating a barrier to understanding one another.

The definition of a triad is where everyone in the triad are sexually and emotionally involved each other. Yes there are variations of this but I believe this is the consensus of what people think what a triad is. So that could be where misunderstandings are coming from. *shrug* who knows.

TRIAD: 1. A polyamorous relationship composed of three people. 2. A union or group of three. Usage: In the sense of Def. 1, generally, the word triad is most often applied to a relationship in which each of the three people is sexually and emotionally involved with all the other members of the triad, as may be the case in a triad consisting of one man and two bisexual women or one woman and two bisexual men; however, it is sometimes also applied to vee relationships.

source: https://www.morethantwo.com/polyglossary.html

But I would suggest what Galagirl stated. Speak with Wife alone without any possible interruptions and somewhere not for everyone to see or hear. Ask if the open relationship is even true in the first place and go from there. Be straight forward and honest with her. I wish you luck in your endeavors.
 
Difference of semantics, it sounds like. Appears some people here use terms based exclusively on sexual intimacy, and that's fine. I don't share that perspective. In my view, intimacy can be mental, emotional, spiritual, physical (platonic) or physical (sexual), and there is certainly more to a relationship than sex. There are many dimensions. Based on my view, I still define what I seek as an acknowledged and legitimate 'triad'.

Didn’t take it personally. Just called out the few inappropriate remarks for what they were.

Well. in a community it helps if everyone shares the same vocabulary. I do think poly people tend to define their relationships based on whether they are physical or not. We are aware that there can be intimacy on many levels. In the mono world having an intimate non-sexual relationship with someone other than your spouse can be viewed as cheating. Poly people are usually more secure than that. There are reasons to differentiate in this way. It is not as shallow as you imply.

I think you are being a little passive-aggressive when you say definitions vary wildly here. They don't. It is you who is trying to change the accepted definition of the word. You can view it as a triad if you wish, just don't expect others to.
 
Soulseeker, I interpreted your posts to mean that you want a "marriage" type of relationship with both people in this couple, but that it would not be physical with the wife, only emotionally/intellectually intimate. And you would like it to be physical/sexual with her husband. I didn't see any indication that you need this "marriage" to be legal, thereby forcing him to divorce his wife. I only see that you want a partnership of 3, in which the various needs of each person are considered. I misunderstood you and thought you want to move in and help co-parent the kids, but I see now that you don't want to live with them.

Do I have it pretty much right?
 
TRIAD: 1. A polyamorous relationship composed of three people. 2. A union or group of three. Usage: In the sense of Def. 1, generally, the word triad is most often applied to a relationship in which each of the three people is sexually and emotionally involved with all the other members of the triad, as may be the case in a triad consisting of one man and two bisexual women or one woman and two bisexual men; however, it is sometimes also applied to vee relationships.

source: https://www.morethantwo.com/polyglossary.html

Some of us here have used the phrase "sexual Vee, emotional Triad" when it comes to describing a situation where the "arms" of the Vee are not sexually involved (such as in my case, where my two boys are heterosexual but emotionally close - "brother-husbands" if you will) but we choose to present ourselves as "chosen family" and choose to live together as such.
 
Soulseeker, I interpreted your posts to mean that you want a "marriage" type of relationship with both people in this couple, but that it would not be physical with the wife, only emotionally/intellectually intimate. And you would like it to be physical/sexual with her husband. I didn't see any indication that you need this "marriage" to be legal, thereby forcing him to divorce his wife. I only see that you want a partnership of 3, in which the various needs of each person are considered. I misunderstood you and thought you want to move in and help co-parent the kids, but I see now that you don't want to live with them.

Do I have it pretty much right?

Pretty much, though I'm open to consideration of co-habitation if all parties deem it practical. While the kids are young, I agree that it would not be practical.
 
Soulseeker, just one more appropriate word to throw in - when you say you want a sexually closed relationship of three, many people would call this agreement polyfidelity, or a polyfidelitous relationship. That's where you confused Magdlyn so badly.

Have you considered the possibility, that if they open with you, they may want to be open to other people as well? (Especially the wife, if she is not very sexual with the husband?)

But this may be a premature question - I agree with Nycindie and Galagirl; you should first find out where things stand. Have a honest conversation - and then step back for at least a few weeks to let them sort things out.
 
Have you considered the possibility, that if they open with you, they may want to be open to other people as well? (Especially the wife, if she is not very sexual with the husband?)

I have. Knowing the couple as I do, I don't think it likely.

My understanding is the wife has no interest in sex and has not for many years. In addition, those who have observed the couple describe them (this was even many years ago, before the kids and problems manifested) as seeming to have "no passion", "no vibe", "no warmth" between them. To see them together in the same space, one wouldn't think them married. More like friends or roommates. The man has been described as coming across as "a bachelor", one who doesn't "seem married" or "shouldn't be married". In the decade and a half I've known him, I've never known him to wear a wedding ring, except for photos that will be seen by extended family.

This is just speculation, but I sincerely suspect that their reasons for being legally married differ from what many might consider to be the norm.

I do agree that a three-way conversation is best. At some time in the future, I will approach that.
 
I sincerely suspect that their reasons for being legally married differ from what many might consider to be the norm.
Empty conjecture isn't bolstered by weasel-words. :rolleyes:

Though not some end-all definitive, Wallerstein & Blakeslee's The Good Marriage: How and Why Love Lasts mentions four forms of marriage:
  • Traditional: "the husband is the breadwinner and the wife is the homebased homemaker."
  • Companionate: "based on the spouses having mutual interests in their careers and children.
  • Rescue: "central focus ... on being able to heal the damage of a dysfunctional childhood or earlier hurting and damaging relationships. It is often a marriage of the walking wounded."
  • Romantic: "the initial romantic spark is essential and exciting and for them, sensuality continues through decades together."
Each has it's benefits & pitfalls. You described a companionate, which evolved past Ben Lindsey's definition & was something of a social movement in the early 1930s.
UPSIDE: the authors call it "the most common form of marriage among younger couples ... it reflects the social changes of the last two decades. At its core is friendship, equality, and the value system of the women's movement, with its corollary that the male role, too, needs to change. A major factor ... is the attempt to balance the partners' serious emotional investment in the workplace with their emotional investment in the relationship and the children."
DOWNSIDE: "it may degenerate into a brother-and-sister relationship. Invested primarily in their respective careers, husband and wife see each other only fleetingly, sharing a bed with little or no sex or emotional intimacy."

If they're having problems, it's likely due to (per your description) NOT being very good at the prerequisites --
Both individuals in a companionate marriage need self-awareness and self-confidence in order for the marriage to be successful. Without trust, friendship, commitment, and shared values, a companionate marriage may be difficult to maintain.
It could also be typified as a marriage of convenience. Here's an interesting little op/ed from Psychology Today --
You probably know a marriage of convenience. Some of them are of the mildly depressed variety.... The partners don't appear to have much of a connection, and they've probably contemplated divorce, but decided to stay together, perhaps because of parental duty, or for the comforts of habit, or just because they can't sell their home or afford to divorce.
You continue to paint their marriage as both empty & unsalvageable, where one or both are living in minute-by-minute torment. If there's any fact in that, then why are you proposing to help prolong the agony?

What they both NEED is a whopping big dose of self-esteem, confidence, & communication skills. A friend would be actively working to help them gain those skills.
 
Last edited:
Hi soulseeker,

I would start off with something simple, e.g., "I was wondering if you guys would be interested in forming a triad." Then let the conversation progress from there; answer their questions and ask your questions.

I don't want to pass any judgments and I don't know whether a triad would work out well for you guys. But it's okay by me if you want to give it a try.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
Back
Top