What are we?

G

GrowingTogether

New member
Hi everyone,

I'm here pretty unexpectedly. I started up this account following some recent conversations with my wife. I'm a 34 year old Canadian man, married and with children. My wife and I live a very conventional life, and we are probably what you would consider conventionally successful. We met when we were teenagers, started dating in our early twenties, and were married in our mid twenties. We hold down stable, steady, well-paying jobs that afford us a lot of comforts. We don't want for much in a material sense.

We have a sex life that has also been pretty conventional, even conservative - neither of us has had many sex partners and we have been completely exclusive to one another in that regard since marriage. I am a person who spends a lot of time delving into subjects that interest me, and I happen to find relationships (romantic, sexual and otherwise) fairly interesting. I've read a lot about how people relate, about what sort of behaviours encourage the types of relationships people desire, how to be a good sexual partner, about how to be the sort of man a woman wants, etc. I'd never say that I'm very good at applying the knowledge, but I do try, and I find the subject matter intriguing at very least. It's just what I do when I become interested in something - try to learn what I can about it.

I think partially as a result of that, and my attempts to put some of it into practice, my wife and I have become quite a bit more communicative about our sex life over the last couple of years. Raising little kids doesn't make it easy to put conversations into practice, but it does bring the subject to the fore, and sometimes when you keep a topic like sex and your collective sexuality on your minds it does some good on the practice side of things also.

Recently we've had some theoretical or conceptual conversations about monogamy and its counterparts. We're both philosophically on board with it. By that I mean that we both see monogamy as something fairly arbitrary, more rooted in convention and tradition than inherently being the "right way to live". While we've yet to talk about whether we SHOULD open up our relationship or take any practical steps toward it, we have discussed it in theory - would it work for us, could it work for us, how would it work, what are the barriers, what would be the benefits - that sort of thing.

I think one of the barriers we've identified (or I have, anyway) in our (my?) desire to learn more has to do with the terminology and the way people talk about polyamory, non-monogamy, swinging, and any of the other related topics. I've always been uncomfortable with doctrine that try to pigeon-hole people into categories. At the same time, I understand categorization to be a bit part of how people learn, and I think that's mainly why I'm here - to learn.

So I thought maybe I would describe the general ways my wife and I have discussed this new found topic of interest and how we could see it working for us, and see if there is any advice you might have in terms of helping us understand what you call what we're after and how we might explore it in a bit more informed way.

Why we are intrigued by the idea:

1) Fulfillment can't be achieved through a single individual. We both love each other, we're fully committed to each other, but we share a belief that relying on one single person to meet all of your needs is an impractical pipe dream.

2) We'd both like some novelty in our sex lives. We like having sex with each other just fine, but I realize my wife (5'4, blonde, tanned) is never going to be a tall freckled redhead. We also realize that my 5'11 is never going to be 6'4. And both of us want to experience "the other" in that way.

3) We'd both like to be "who we are". This one is a bit more complex. When you've known someone for over half your life, you have a concept of who they are that is pretty complex. It factors in a lot of their past - what you know of who they WERE as much as what you know of who they are. We both feel like it would be fun to have our current selves reflected off of new partners, who would only know us for who we are currently, without the biases that come with that long term familiarity.

4) We're not very jealous. I'm not naive enough to think we could go down this path without any jealousy. However, my wife and I have found that we are pretty good with jealousy - pretty good at seeing it for what it is, and channeling it positively (to be the best we can for each other, etc.). We are both intrigud, even turned on at the notion of our partner being pleasured by someone other than ourselves.

Intriguing theoretical arrangements:

1) Another couple. We've talked about how it would be nice to meet another couple (or couples) that are thinking along these same lines. Maybe they're more experienced, or maybe they're still at the theoretical stage like us. I don't think we're really after a group sex sort of arrangement (this makes me think we're not "swingers"), but more like one where we'd be able to have individual relationships with the members of the couple(s) which would allow us to have some of the benefits I identified above. There are a number of other practical safety / stability related benefits we see with respect to pursuing this with another couple, but maybe I'll save those details for another conversation.

2) Individual friends with benefits. If the couple idea isn't feasible, then we also see some merit in simply allowing each other to pursue sexual relationships with other people.

In neither case are we really all that interested in being present for each others liasons. I don't know that it's totally undesirable, but it's definitely not what we see as a major benefit.

The two major hang-ups we both share are:

1) How would we deal with the privacy / anonymity question? We live in a small city. A lot of people know each other. We wouldn't be excited about the idea of this becoming common knowledge.

2) The natural tendency to want to compare ourselves to our partner's playmates. This is something we've mostly identified as being a challenge rather than a deal-breaker. We've both noted that this is sort of the downside of wanting the variety that I mentioned above - if you want to have sexual experiences with people who are different from your partner, than you're going to have to accept that those people have different characteristics than you do.


If any of you are still reading, my apologies for the brain dump. I'd really be curious to hear any insights you may have had while reading through that treatise. Can you help us understand what we should call ourselves, or point us toward any relevant resources or sub-communities?

Thanks.
 
Hi,

Welcome to the forums.

You and your partner sound like you're well adjusted, patient, and have taken the time to really weigh in heavily on the pros and cons of polyamory. I'm quite new to the forum myself and find myself learning new things all the time.

My impression on the annonymity question is that it will be less of an issue than you think. Given that your wife does not have to hide her lover from you, the three of you can just be casual in social circles and anyone seeing the two of them together will think it's just friendship. You may have to hold back on public displays of affection and be prepared to not act guiltily. I could be wrong. How small is your small town and are you part of a religious group that would frown morally on this sort of setup?

Others will probably come on shortly with tips on your second question on how not to compare. Alternatively, you can post in the poly relationships corner section to get a tonne of responses really quick.

Finally, my impression after a few short months searching here is that many originally monogamous couples don't survive the transition to polyamory. Many later go on to say that the original relationship was flawed and that they feel better off now, with polyamory, without their original partner. Based on absolutely no experience whatsoever, my gut feeling is that you have many factors going for you that will help a healthy transition - you're taking the time to research it, you're both on board with the idea, there is no 3rd person yet, your hangups or questions strike me as fairly advanced and this shows a maturity about the issues you still envisage struggling with. The factors that I feel count negatively would include the length of your current monogamous relationship, lack of other sexual partners and a transition from monogamy to polyamory without an in-between step like swinging, kink or BDSM. Other factors that might play a role that you may not have considered potentially include childhood traumas, past relationship abandonment traumas and love attachment styles. I am undecided if children keep the original couple together in a healthy or unhealthy manner.

Good luck on your journey. If you and your wife do this, I think you're off to a good start.

Kind regards,
Shaya.
 
Hi GrowingTogether, welcome.

You might want to ask a mod to put this in the Poly Relationships section. You will get more responses. Click on the red triangle in the upper right of your first post to report this thread and make your request.

One thing I will suggest as you open your relationship: read the books More Than Two, and Opening Up. Read them together with your wife, if you want. It helps you decide what kind of poly you want to do, and how to overcome common pitfalls.

One thing that stands out in your OP is the idea of searching and finding another COUPLE to play with and perhaps fall in love with. All tidy. She gets a bf, you get his wife as a gf, everyone is on the same page.

This works out-- hardly ever! It is very very uncommon for the MF of one couple to both fall in love with the FM of the other couple all equally and tidily. Much more likely one new pairing will hit it off, and the other 2 will be "meh" about each other.

So, consider dating separately, or being OK if you wife and the new married guy get along like gangbusters, while his wife and you are friends at best.

Most poly people, even coupled ones, date independently, and experienced ones know that often, they might have a partner or partners while their spouse doesn't, or vice versa. You have to learn to be OK with this.

Read up on "couple privilege" or "couple-centric" poly, here, by doing a search, or elsewhere on the net or in those books. Try to think of you and your wife as 2 independent beings, not necessarily on the same exact path to new love.

I've been with my anchor partner for 8.5 years. We met and were poly from the start. Over the years, I have have had many more bfs than her, some serious, some more casual "fun" things. But lately, she has had one solid bf for 3+ years. I don't have anyone serious now, my last serious bf and I broke up last July. I've had a few flings since then, but nothing worked out long term yet. Sometimes I am envious of my gf's other relationship, but mostly I am just enjoying her, my memories of wonderful experiences with past lovers, and trying to be patient that my next lover will come along eventually. I am really happy my gf has her bf, he brings her a lot of joy. She is a wonderful person and I am glad someone else sees that.
 
Since you mention that you are materially comfortable, I have a thought...

Would it be practical to travel to a nearby bigger city environment to meet people? Like attend events or conventions somewhere in a regional hub, maybe make some friends, see where the friendship goes...?

I get the feeling that you are not looking to add more people to your FAMILY, to your longterm household arrangement. So having a long distance friend with benefits might be kind of cool, they become part of little vacation travels that one or both of you can go do sometimes, with electronic communication in between, perhaps. I have known several people who had distant lovers like that, and it worked well. It also kept things from getting too "escalate-ey" where the mono programming kicks in because you feel emotional bonding happening, and you start thinking there has to be some kind of progress, some sort of "what's next?" with the relationship.

If that person is part of vacation, I think it frames it a bit differently maybe.

And of course "visiting friend" is easier to manage on the "small town everyone knows everyone" radar. A family friend, even who comes to visit you, need not raise flags.

I would warn against trying too hard to build boxes out of expectations. A nice, fluid, "friend with sex sometimes" is easier to manage than "you are allowed to get sexual variety but make sure you don't develop feelings." Thing is...humans are not exchangeable. No two of my friends or sex partners can be swapped out, because they really are as unique as snowflakes once you're looking at them that closely. Comparing is silly, because apples and oranges.

The only comparison I've found meaningful, has been higher or lower levels of "fit" for my needs and desires. But that doesn't mean that someone who is a lower fit isn't valuable in my life...just maybe not as a romantic partner, but perhaps as something else. I borrow a page from relationship anarchy in preferring to define a relationship with someone based on what feels natural between us. If being romantic partners feels forced or difficult, but being deep friends or "chosen family" or concert buddies or fuckbuddies or friends with benefits or WHATEVER is what feels right, that's what I want to go with. There are very few rules in place, in my primary relationship.

And it sounds like you are thinking about a need for sexual variety, and I would be interested if your wife is TRULY needing sexual variety. For me, as a woman, I'm not all that excited about "blonde today, redhead tomorrow." Whether a man is 5'10" or 6'4" doesn't really light up my imagination. My needs for variety are more of an emotional and social nature. I like the way that one person always knows what I'm thinking and gets all of my inside references. I like how another one makes me feel worthy and beautiful and lovable. I like how another one riffs magnificently with my sense of humor. I've had a lot of sexual novelty in my life, and the very vast majority of men, despite having a wide variety of physical characteristics, do essentially the same behaviors in bed, to the point that with only a few exceptions...they aren't that remarkable in that way. Although, it can be thrilling to have the "new partner experience" for a moment. I don't want to keep racking up partner count, just to chase that little mental tickle.

That of course is just how I see it and your mileage may vary.

But I would, instead of looking for a nice label to define what you are, call yourselves adventurers...embrace the fact that you don't know what's over the next horizon, and go find out with an open mind. I think you'll have more fun that way. :)
 
Agreed on the plan of finding another couple to be a "quad" with being... tricky. I've been in several, now, and while in some ways I *adore* them the potential for conflict is actually WAY higher than you think, even if you DO manage to find two people that both of you are compatible with and end up in love with.
 
Greetings GrowingTogether,
Welcome to our forum. Please feel free to lurk, browse, etc.

Technical note: Whenever you login, check the box that says "Remember Me?" This way you won't get timed out in the middle of composing a post. Not sure if that's the problem you ran into, and maybe you're already checking that box, but I thought I'd mention it just in case.

There's not a particular word for what you are and what you're doing, you're a monogamous-until-now couple looking to open up your marriage. I second the recommendation for reading the book, "Opening Up." It will give you a wide range of knowledge about various kinds of nonmonogamy and possible details.

Sincerely,
Kevin T., "official greeter" :)

Notes:

There's a *lot* of good info in Golden Nuggets. Have a look!

Please read through the guidelines if you haven't already.

Note: You needn't read every reply to your posts, especially if someone posts in a disagreeable way. Given the size and scope of the site it's hard not to run into the occasional disagreeable person. Please contact the mods if you do (or if you see any spam), and you can block the person if you want.

If you have any questions about the board itself, please private-message a mod and they'll do their best to help.

Welcome aboard!
 
I tried responding already, but somehow lost my message in transmission, so here goes again.


All of these responses have been incredibly helpful. I think my lack of handle on the terminology is coming through a bit again, so Spork's suggestion that we avoid bothering with the fancy labels is probably the right advice.

But because I started down the labeling road, there are also a few things your responses highlighted for me, mostly in the sense that they underscore the need for further discussion.

First, I think it's important to point out that discussions between my wife and I have very much centred around sex (variety, novelty, diversity) as opposed to love. I don't think we're anywhere close to wanting to bring another couple (or individual) into our family. And maybe that means "poly" is too "big" a term for what we're after. Our discussions around non-monogamy have focused on that desire for sexual diversity.

However, I think Spork raises another valid point - and one I should explore - in whether or not my wife is truly after purely sexual diversity, or if there is something else there also. I think I was probably a bit flippant in the example I used in my OP (relating to physical characteristics). I think you would be correct, Spork, in that my wife probably isn't JUST interested in a taller, physically different version of me, but rather has some other experiential dynamics she is after also. That said, I don't think she is after another person to "love" or who "loves" her in the traditional sense. But this is something that I certainly should explore with her.

I think she probably does see sex and emotion slightly more intertwined than I do. If I had to put thoughts in her head, I would speculate that she sees sex as something you can do with someone you love or someone with whom you have a good friendship and high level of comfort.

So I think, long story short, we're after experiential variety in our sex lives that probably goes beyond physical variety but stops short of love. Again - that's mostly my take right now given that our conversations haven't really clarified that.

The above might have clarified this already, but I think it's fair to say that we're not (at least at this point) interested in a family / quad type of arrangement. In an ideal world I think we would have friends that, while good friends, are friends in a relatively conventional sense with whom we just happen to have sex. This might be one couple, it might be more couples, or it might even be individuals.

Thanks very much for all your thoughtful responses to this point. I'd be really interested if anything I clarified above has stirred any additional reaction.

Thanks!
 
Hi,

If it's sexual variety you're after and not necessarily emotion, I agree with previous posters that the book "opening up" by Tristan Taornimo may be useful. I myself have never gotten around to the book, but I found this essay useful in switching my mindset from monogamy to non monogamy. Given how long you've been researching this yourself, the suggested resource might be too basic for you.

The same author has some non monogamy tips for men (essay 1, essay 2), as well as an essay on jealousy that I summarised here. Yeah, he's my favourite author and I'm a fanboy. What can I say? ;)

Finally, even if you and your wife plan to go into this primarily for sex, emotions may develop. One question you might want to at least ponder before you start is, "What if one of us falls (head over heels) in love?" I think the book more than two asked this in one of its middle chapters and gave an example which I found really thought provoking at the time. This question has led to me wondering why managing jealousy is such a big topic in polyamory but managing NRE (new relationship energy) is so quiet in comparison.

Best of luck,
Shaya.
 
But wait! There's more!

You also conflate "love" and "emotion" with "Big Relationship Thing" and "escalation."

(Escalation is our fun term for that whole, "when you love someone, you have to have these milestones like moving in, meeting the relatives, marriage, kids, etc)

What I find super cool sauce about poly, is that you can have the pieces that work for you, without necessarily dealing with the ones that don't.

But I personally believe that actions are so much easier to control, than thoughts or feelings. So for me...it is easy to love someone, but never have sex with them. But to have sex with them, but control that I won't love them? Impossible. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. I can love a one night stand guy that I never see again. Love strikes me like lightening.

But love does not equal pursuit of a goal filled relationship path. It's not a trap! And in fact, I can love someone and never need them to love me back. I could literally have said, "I love you" to partners before and had them say, "thank you" and that would have been satisfactory.

Love and emotion, just means "I think you are really super great. I enjoy you a lot." To me. Now, to you, those things maybe are reserved for only your special wife person. But most polyamorists will tell you that love does not suffer or diminish for being shared. Love is infinite, while time, money and energy aren't.

So to me, casual love is a lot less scary than casual sex. Casual love never gave anyone AIDS.

It's hard to put a "rule" in place that says "no feelings allowed." You do have to be open to at least the possibility that your wife might wind up feeling something for a sex partner, even if you feel pretty sure you won't. And it can be very cruel to try and enforce, if she does happen to love someone...saying "that's it, you can't see that person anymore, you promised, NO FEELINGS!" That does not work out well.

What you should perhaps contemplate is whether you can be ok with it, if she does feel things for someone.

Now you can certainly still have agreements that you aren't looking for another family member, and there are real life logistical boundaries that have to exist for good reasons. I'm just saying that unexpected love does not have to be a threat.
 
Shaya,

Thanks very much for the resources. I've already begun the Taornimo book and I'm finding it very insightful. The essay with practical non-monogamy tips was also very helpful. It distills a lot of the fluff out of the literature on the subject and offers a pretty practical picture. I'll be sure to check out the rest of the materials as well.


Spork,

Thanks for challenging me. It's been very intriguing. I think you are correct about the conflating of love / emotion with escalation. I think it's a terminology thing again - I've been using terms in the way they're used in the common vernacular as opposed to the way they're used in circles that care more about precision. :)

So when I've said "love" to this point, what I've been referring to (and what I don't believe we're actively intersted in) is that active sort of mainstream love where we're out looking for someone to rely on and fulfill the vast majority of our relationship needs. We both completely agree that it's impossible for a single person (even each other, our current mates) to fulfill all of our needs, or even close all of them. We rely on friends to fulfill all sorts of different needs that we don't fulfill for each other, and I guess we're starting to come around to the notion that maybe sexual needs fit into that category as well. And I think I'm using a broad definition of "sexual" here - not just physical, but the emotional and other experiential sorts of needs that come with sex.

Having written that, I think I've come to realise that what we're NOT looking for is a replacement (or replacements) for the needs and desires that we already meet for one another. I can see us both developing - or maybe I WANT us both to develop - very strong friendships with people who meet many emotional needs (like our current friends do) and with whom we explore (broadly defined) sexuality with also.

I think I'm also open and self-aware enough about this to accept the notion that what we think we want at the outset may evolve if we are to ever start exploring this type of life. So when I say above that we're not actively seeking any of those things, there are risks involved for sure. I don't think either of us wants to replace the other in any way, and I don't think either of us wants to be replaced. I know I don't. But I'm in no way opposed to being augmented, just like I am currently augmented in many non-sexual ways by my wife's friends, and she is by mine.



I've been rather consumed by this whole notion of non-monogamy lately. I feel like I am probably more enthusiastic about it than is my wife. However, I don't want that to be interpreted as a suggestion that she is UN-enthusiastic. I'm just more of the type to try to consume all the content available on a subject in which I'm interested. I'm currently trying to figure out the best way to progress things, while heeding the advice to stay patient. I'm not in any rush to move us into this change in lifestyle, but I do want to keep the topic at the fore without seeming overly obsessed or sending the wrong message. We've been pretty good communicators recently, so I'm sure we'll find a way to keep the conversation moving.
 
GrowingTogether said:
Spork,

Thanks for challenging me. It's been very intriguing. I think you are correct about the conflating of love / emotion with escalation. I think it's a terminology thing again - I've been using terms in the way they're used in the common vernacular as opposed to the way they're used in circles that care more about precision. :)
Click to expand...

Spork's point about love isn't an attempt at precise terminology, it's actually the opposite: She offers a concept of love that is expansive and gets away from the usual "threat" model and concern over what is safe love and what is dangerous love. Her point is that sexual/romantic love need not carry conditions at all and can just be felt for the beautiful experience that it is. That is a concept that is beyond comprehension for many, for it defies precision, labels and all of the usual expectations of a sexual love relationship. Even "you don't have to love me back" is a brain bend for most people. Right now, you speak of replacing one another when you speak of love and Spork's point is that you need not go into this with the assumption that romantic/sexual love is a threat to what you and your wife are for each other.


The vast majority of opening-up couples run into trouble specifically over this issue: They have expectations or agreements that their explorations will stop "just short of love" and are thrown into a tailspin when love blooms in full. It's important to know that sex often leads to intimacy and intimacy leads to love. It's natural, normal and certainly not anything that is easily controlled. Expect it. Love is not inherently a threat and there are many ways to think differently about it other than the typical. You don't have to change your concept of love in order to open up your marriage, but you'd be wise to consider thinking more about what love can be, for this is the very thing that does in many couples. Love often does blossom out of sex and in this modern world we have somehow convinced ourselves that we can keep that from happening. One thing previous eras have on us is that those people recognized that where there is sex, love often follows. Nobody was one bit surprised by that. We see many, many couples come here who are shocked and bewildered when love sprouts into full flower around a sexual relationship that was supposed to be limited. I don't know how we came to convince ourselves that we can stop love from happening when we get sexual with others, but that erroneous belief is rampant today.
 
Last edited:
Hi FallenAngeline,

Thanks for helping clarify Spork's point. I think I understood what she meant. My reference to terminology was more of a criticism of my own use of terminology in my previous post - how I had neglected to define what I meant by "love". I wanted to clarify that I probably didn't really mean "love" when I was previously describing what my wife and I are not seeking.

I agree with both of you when you describe love as something more expansive and multi-faceted, and I'm not opposed to my wife feeling that for someone else, especially given that she feels several different versions of that for different people in her life.

In re-examining what I meant, I arrived at the idea that what we are not looking for (I know for me and I think for her) is to replace each other as a source of fulfillment for the needs and desires we currently meet for one another. I don't know what that means in a practical sense yet, and I don't know that it requires setting any rules or expectations.

One of the ideas that has resonated most so far is the separation of feelings / emotions from action. I think that has been a very helpful distinction. It would not be reasonable for me to expect my wife to feel (or not feel) a certain way about another person, whereas the boundaries we set could be more appropriately directed at actions (i.e., even though I know you feel X, I'd be uncomfortable with you doing Y). I still don't even know what X and Y are, but it's a more effective way of thinking about potential scenarios I think.

I also know that this all would be fluid, organic and unpredictable. I don't think we could enter into it with a strictly defined idea of what the end outcome will be, and for that reason it's risky.

Thanks again for your thoughts. I appreciate your help.
 
FallenAngelina said:
I don't know how we came to convince ourselves that we can stop love from happening when we get sexual with others, but that erroneous belief is rampant today.
Click to expand...

I blame porn.

*ducking and hiding as I imagine forum-goers throw things at me*

:p:D:p
 
Not very experienced with such things, but sharing what occurs to me.

GrowingTogether said:
1) How would we deal with the privacy / anonymity question? We live in a small city. A lot of people know each other. We wouldn't be excited about the idea of this becoming common knowledge.
Click to expand...

Dating apps, online chats, plans that address the need for privacy. Maybe going somewhere on vacation as a group/couple (one of you with new partner)

2) The natural tendency to want to compare ourselves to our partner's playmates. This is something we've mostly identified as being a challenge rather than a deal-breaker. We've both noted that this is sort of the downside of wanting the variety that I mentioned above - if you want to have sexual experiences with people who are different from your partner, than you're going to have to accept that those people have different characteristics than you do.
Click to expand...

I have seen similar characteristics be a bigger problem than different (not just in romantic/sexual relationships, but everywhere - jobs, schools, friends...). Because they trigger taller/shorter slimmer/fatter older/younger prettier/uglier kind of comparisons rather than each happily ruling their own label/stereotype - "I'm the geek, she's the babe" is easier than "Does he find her more intellectual than me?".

That said, comparisons are natural. One of those kneejerk things. Many people say you "shouldn't" compare. Problem is you usually notice yourself after you are already comparing and have little advance warning. So I guess the next best idea would be to be aware that while an instinctive comparison is natural, to not give that assessment excessive credibility. People are unique and none of us have any accuracy at knowing what another sees in yet another person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top