Non-monogamy showed me what it really means to be with someone

Being in an open relationship flies in the face of everything we are brought up to believe about ‘loose’ women being undesirables

Non­-monogamy, polyamory, open relationships: whatever your preferred term, it can be a heavy word to drop at the dinner table.

It’s not even something with a stellar track record of media representation, either: when non-­monogamy is seen on our screens it’s usually in the context of a cult leader with a throng of brides, each of them clad in neck-high gingham and seeming to have more in common with the Manson family than any modern relationship.

For most of my life I was as monogamous as it was possible to be, almost to a fault. I found that jealousy would frequently rear its head if my partner or crush du jour was so much as spotted in the same room as someone who might chance at a flirt.

Only when I was in my mid­-20s did I meet a man who tipped that attitude on its head and told me that although he was as interested in me as I was in him, he was already in a successful open relationship and monogamy was not an option.

At no point did I feel neglected or envious; indeed, I found non-­monogamy worked for me better than any relationship formula I’d seen in the past. I got to know my partner’s partner, and we got along well, and while they shared romantic weekends away and dinner dates together I was free to date and hook­-up as much as I wanted.

Who am I to demand a partner never again indulge a crush, share a kiss at a party, or take someone to bed? And who are they to demand the same of me? Beyond the thought of getting a big diamond and an expensive dress, marriage had never really appealed to me, and I couldn’t imagine myself now wanting to make that choice.

Likewise, I never had much of a maternal instinct, and after 27 years of having a completely silent biological clock it seems only right that I should focus on having rich and fulfilling romantic relationships instead of aiming for a husband, three children, and a white picket fence.

It is entirely possible to be in a relationship where loyalty, trust, and honesty are valued while both partners sleep with and date other people: I would know. I have lived it more than once.

theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/04/non-monogamy-showed-me-what-it-really-means-to-be-with-someone

Attached: 3708.jpg (1920x1638, 187.8K)

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2018/08/20/us/politics/melania-trump-cyber-bullying.html
cato.org/blog/trump-should-warn-south-africa-land-expropriations
qz.com/africa/1344686/trumps-trade-wars-hit-kagames-rwanda-over-secondhand-clothes/amp/
amp.dw.com/en/president-trumps-global-gag-rule-endangers-lives-in-africa/a-45075281
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

What do we care about this propaganda?

You want to carry on with your vile, hideous, disgusting degeneracy?
Please refrain from passing on your genes.
Thanks

Also, gas yourself.

You are their partner.

can we not platform these people?

Sexual strategies for women differ from those of men, just as sexual strategies of older people are different from those whom are younger.

Men can be with more than one woman. Polygamy is easy enough for both men and women.
Women can only be with one man. Polyandry is NOT an easy relationship for either men or women.
The easiest relationship to be in, and the one which is closest and most rewarding, and thus the relationship through which we learn the most, is simply one man making a household with one woman.
This is what's natural, though it's not necessarily fair. (It's certainly not fair for the Lefties who are destroying families and marriages and sexual differences and everything else that doesn't support the myth of everyone being the same.)

Esp. when we are younger, we all do better in simpler relationships. When we get older, beyond child-bearing age, then we can more easily explore beyond the bounds of monogamous relationships. That said, what's palatable or interesting for older people is NOT what's good for the younger set.

These are just different stages of Life. It all balances out eventually.

Attached: Who's better off.jpg (900x1340, 257.42K)

Cucks get lead

Attached: ernie.jpg (700x535, 24.48K)

I agree with this crap. Thots shouldn't reproduce and they can organize an orgy with Chad for the rest of their lives, I don't give a shit.

The point of OP, speculating here, is to illustrate thr culture shift but also get us pissed off at the cumdumpster whore who penned said article. Sage for shit fucking thread. Something worthwhile died for this disgusting bloviation.

...

Fuck off jew.

Kill yourself you fucking faggot.

Attached: OP is faggot - the motion picture.jpg (425x301, 45.31K)

Shut the fuck up via killing yourself. As you get older your free time should be spent on mentoring your children and grandchildren. Not reverting to teenage impulsiveness. Please just kill yourself now and save us the trouble on DOTR.

Yea, mature sexual exploration isn't your fascination, nor is it mine, but for people who are don't have children and are beyond child-bearing/rearing age, if they want to have sex with strangers or tree-stumps, who gives a fuck? The uniqueness of Western Civ is our 'live and let live' attitude when it doesn't negatively impact society.

Our live and let live attitude is what got us into this mess, and if my parents became swingers I'd stop talking to them and I wouldn't want my kids anywhere near them.

Dead wrong. Monogamy is one of the first cornerstones necessary to have a functioning civilization you ignorant ape.

If your parents hadn't had children, or if your childless neighbors held orgies in confines of their backyard every Tuesday evening, then it wouldn't negatively impact society.

But your parents did have children, and thus such actions would negatively impact society by negatively impacting you and your siblings. Family matters. Rightfully that's the cornerstone of a functioning society.

Are open relationships more 'mature' than closed ones. I don't think so. But for some emotionally mature older people, they might be enjoyable enough. Again, as long as there's no negative impact upon society, they can do what they want. That's the law, and that's the way our society has developed it's hard-won freedoms.

Reminder to sage degenerate thread.

Give it 10 years and this sow might have a rude awakening


Let's translate that. She met an attractive high status man who just wanted to fuck her. But she's happy with just being in his company and deludes herself that this is an actual relationship.

What kind of logic is this? What "trust" is she referring to?

Obvious slide thread. Remember to sage, people.

Oops, sorry remember to sage.

Redpill, sage, and move on.

Attached: Nichola Torbett.png (2160x1215, 800.81K)

tits AND GTFO

The first thing you should see when you see a story like this is "Who wrote this?" and you shouldn't even bother making a post until you've prepped on that front.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1697x1432, 1.34M)

...

Not a spade, not a heart.

I am not a player.

Planting water in my car and assuming it means consent is criminal bullshit.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (2448x2448, 10.28M)

Skank report from 2015, interesting! Gas yourself. Sage and reported

Roasties preferring the chaddiest Chad in the vicinity regardless of how many other broads he's banging. News at 8.
Seriously, anybody over 18 who's still surprised by this should neck himself.

Attached: OP's_theme_song.webm (640x360, 7.88M)

nytimes.com/2018/08/20/us/politics/melania-trump-cyber-bullying.html

The NY Times left out what she's actually hoping to do in Africa.

cato.org/blog/trump-should-warn-south-africa-land-expropriations

Cato doesn't think the orange turnip has been completely rejected in Africa. Tbf, neither do I. People are a lot more flexible than they give each other credit for.

qz.com/africa/1344686/trumps-trade-wars-hit-kagames-rwanda-over-secondhand-clothes/amp/

Rwanda, a casualty! Oh no! Linked for the overwrought headline; I didn't read it.

amp.dw.com/en/president-trumps-global-gag-rule-endangers-lives-in-africa/a-45075281

General interest. Abortion policy globally swings as a result of foreign aid. Rich nations do buy interest in poor nations, and although the right bitches about that sometimes, Trump wasn't any shyer to do it than leftist leadership. Maybe it's even fair play.

F I L T E R E D

Take it to bant. No one cares about your whoring around.

Hypergamy