Open relationships can be treacherous waters for a loving couple, but can it be done successfully? This week Daniel sits down with comedian Chip Pope and discovers that territory that seems to be "no holds barred" actually has some pretty significant do's and don'ts.
Could you handle the rules of an open relationship? Find out after the break!
Submitted by
on Mon, 2009-10-26 13:59.
Now, let's talk about what's important
Daniel, I'm loving, loving, LOVING your longer hair. It's SO sexy!
I wish more gay men would let their hair grow out.
Melts into a Puddle of Mush
Daniel, I just want you to know, I am so sick of saying "Another Great Vlog". Its like telling Britney Spears on her 3242324th hit song, *with little enthusiasm* Yeah, on the radio, AGAIN!!!! Its getting tedious!!! Could you maybe try being mediocre once? Not being pinch your cheeks cute? Not being laugh out loud funny? Not being dump my boyfriend for one gorgeous/sexy/adorable Daniel?.....No?.....Well maybe one day the time will come, until then......(oh and I was put off by the long hair at first, but you seem to like it--assuming its long b/c you are growing it out and not just b/c you got lazy---e.g. see my hair---as a confident man liking the way he looks, its DAMN SEXY, no matter how you put it).
Now about Open Relationships: I have never/don't plan on ever/don't think I could ever survive being in an open relationship. "The partners have a higher than average tolerance for change, confusion, anxiety, jealosy, and other uncomfortable feelings." That rule leaves me out as well. I'm already insecure and awkward enough, I don't need another guy bringing that into my life....and I agree/laughed out loud b/c I don't know who has a high tolerance for confusion either?!
Kitty
My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard, and they're like it's better than yours. ~Kelis
Open relationships
Why are we still debating this subject?
I've known long term (10+ years) couples who have successful open relationships. I've known long term couples that have successful monogamous relationships. I've also known couples who have had a "don't ask, don't tell" kind of relationship - they'd play on the side but wouldn't tell each other. I've known "monogamous" couples who when the sex gets a bit tired, they split up for a few months, have all the sex they want with others and then reunite for their "monogamous" relationship. Who are we to judge which one is the "best" for gay couples?
If any monogamous gay couple feels threatened by a gay couple with an open relationship, to me that's the same as a straight married couple who feels threatened by the prospect of gay marriage.
Precisely. Couples (gay,
Precisely. Couples (gay, straight or otherwise) should absolutely do what works FOR THEM, not what makes someone else happy or results in someone else's approval.
I completely agree with your
Fidelity
Being "faithful" has nothing to do with how many sex partners you have (simultaneously or serially)
Being faithful means you are being true and honest with your partner and you aren't cheating or lying or betraying them.
If you are in an open relationship and you're both following the rules of your relationship (whatever those rules are) then you are being faithful.
The comparison the other comment made works for me because it's not really about sexual orientation.
It's about grown people having the right to love whomever they want and have sex with whomever they want as long as there are conscenting adults involved.
It's about not trying to judge other people's relationships from the outside or tell people what they should or shouldn't do in their private lives.
That's the analogy I think he's making.
I don't expect homophobes to like me or accept my way of living but as equal citizens under the law and adults I expect them to respect my autonomy as an individual and "Live and let live" when it comes to sex and love and relationships.
There are people (gay, straight and bi) who just assume on general priniciple that the only correct or real or substantial way to have a relationship is to have one that is long-term and monogomous (some folks even assume you must get married and want children because it's "natural")
These same people judge other people's relationships by what they think makes sense for them.
It's like the bar is set at "two men of similar age in a long term partnership where they only have sex with each other" and everything else falls beneath that.
It is a cultural assumption that crosses sexual orientation and cultural boundaries and it is reinforced by the media and pop culture and a lot of "morals" and "ethics" stuff is thrown in the mix where it shouldn't be.
It's really just about honesty. Open relationships (just like "closed" relationships) are really just about honesty and trust and communication.
Different meanings
Unfortunately, you've misinterpreted what I was trying to say because we've each invested the word "faithful" with a different meaning.
First, let me be totally clear. Personally, I make no judgments whatever about how other people want to handle their relationships, as long as both partners are equal in the relationship and agree on how to handle it. Open or monogamous, it's not something I consider any of my business. "Live and let live" is far more than just words to me.
However, I was using the word "faithful" in the more traditional sense, not in the manner in which you were using it. In that more common sense, to be faithful to a partner is indeed to not have sex with someone else. To be clear again, I was NOT stating that faithfulness on that level was something about which I would personally make judgments. Rather, I was pointing out that faithfulness on that level is something that the majority of people, both today and throughout history, have valued highly. I would guess, based on my experience and interactions, that most gay people would in general share that sentiment. Since we live within that wider world, and within that historical context, it just seems wise for those of us with a more open viewpoint to be aware of how the majority of our fellow citizens view the subject. (Another disclaimer: I feel no judgments of what others want to do, but for myself I'm on what you might want to refer to as the conservative side on this issue. I personally tend to think of sex in the context of love, and if I'm in love with someone I have no interest in going outside of that. But that's just me. Yes, I know, really old-fashioned. Sue me!)
I objected to the analogy Indyman made, not to make a philosophical point, but rather more as an intellectual clarification. I think the two situations are far too dissimilar to allow a valid analogy. But as I think about it, I think I would like to make a philosophical point after all. The analogy had two sides, of course: acceptance of gay marriage and tolerance/acceptance of open relationships. Here's why I think those two things aren't enough alike to be used in an analogy:
Gay marriage cuts to the core of basic human rights. It transcends morality, has nothing to do with personal moral judgments, and is based around essential human identity. Open relationships, on the other hand, are about how people choose to relate to each other. As such, others are free to make judgments about what works best, or even about what is more "moral". Everyone has a right to his own moral code, even if it results in them disapproving of how you conduct your relationships. What they don't have a right to do is to impose that moral viewpoint on others in any way.
I certainly see the argument that many would raise to the above paragraph: if people have the right their own moral code, then they have the right to decide that gay marriage is immoral. Of course they have the "right". But I'll answer that one with my own analogy. Compare the idea of holding and expressing the opinion that open relationships are unwise or unhealthy with the idea that black people shouldn't be allowed to marry each other.
I disagree
We also need to recognize that throughout history many men and women, gay and straight, in relationships that were supposed to be monogamous have cheated on one another. So to me it's obvious that for many people monogamy is not something they can attain.
I also don't believe open relationships are unique to the gay community. The straight community just doesn't talk about it as openly.
I don't understand why straight couples would feel threatened by gay marriage. I also don't understand why single gay men or gay male monogamous couples feel threatened by a gay male couple choosing to have an open relationship. So perhaps you feel it's a "flight of illogical fancy" to compare the two, but it's my illogical fancy and I feel they are comparable.
My partner and I have had friends with both open and monogamous relationships and we've never felt threatened by either type of relationship. If it works for them that is all that matters.
Bad day
I guess I'm having a bad day with my communication since everyone is misinterpreting me today!
I completely agree that open relationships are not unique to the gay community, though they are certainly a bit more common there if polls are to be believed.
I also completely agree that it makes no sense for straight couples to feel threatened by gay marriage.
And how could I possibly disagree with the contention that people throughout history have had difficulty in avoiding cheating? I wasn't making the case that they did a good job living up to their standards, simply that they intellectually HAD those standards. You were positing a standard where monogamy isn't important, and all I was saying is that such a standard contradicts the commonly accepted standards of the majority of people today and throughout history. That was an intellectual assertion on my part, not representative of my own judgments in any way.
Regarding the analogy, I re-read what you said, and I might have invested your comment with more meaning than you intended. If you're only referring to people being threatened, then I see why you used the analogy. When I first read it I interpreted it to be more expansive than that, and to refer to moral codes, judgments about what works best, etc. I still would stress the differences between the two situations, as I explained above in my reply to Crab Boy, er, Crawfish Po Boy. :)
Thanks Daniel Leary and Chip Pope
Wonderful episode.
I know there's a lot of comedy here but Daniel I want to thank you for always bring so much heart and honesty to these topics even amongst the joking around.
It's sweet and we appreciate you "going there" with us.
Cheers
Open Relationships
Final words
I think we all just need to do what works for us personally and not worry about whether someone elses relationship doesn't match our own criteria. Each relationship is unique and should be appreciated.