What is your opinions on Open Relationship ?

I am sex freak but open relationship? not interesting.
 
A big NO for me. I'm the kind of person that want to be committed to one person only. There should be more to a relationship than just sex and physical contact.

What a sad world we live in.
 
its an interesting concept but as a couple its a no-win situation in the long run, so theres no real point in trying it.
 
Hubby and I are not into Open Relationship but we are thinking about Swinging....we're curious about it but we're not sure if we achually want to do it.
 
For many, the question (or issue) of open relationships is a question (or issue) of psycho-sexual maturity.
 
I honestly don't believe open relationship works, it will not work. It can cause lot of strain in the relationships and can destory the relationship as well. Open relationship is more like cheating so I don't approve of that because cheating and swinging is not cool. I know people that have open relationship, I think perhaps some people are more inclined to one or the other. But human beings are not monogamous by nature. So, I think it all boils down to choice. That and social conditioning, naturally. I think many more people would choose open relationships if polyamory was presented as a choice that is just as valid as monogamous, heterosexual marriage. Then that their choice, not mine. I would rather be with one person that it.
 
shel90 said:
Will Smith and his wife, Jada, have an open relationship. I know this couple who has been married for almost 25 years who have an open relationship too. They said they dont indulge in it all the time..like once in a while. Interesting. Anyways, I am too chicken to do that! LOL!
Click to expand...

Jada and Will does????????????????????????:eek3:
 
~*Kaelei*~ said:
Hubby and I are not into Open Relationship but we are thinking about Swinging....we're curious about it but we're not sure if we achually want to do it.
Click to expand...

One of my best girlfriends and her husband does that - they tell me all about it - you will need a very healthy self esteem to do that - it can cause jealousy and low self esteem.
 
For me, I am too selfish to share my man with another woman!!!!!!!!!!!:giggle:
 
Gemma said:
Jada and Will does????????????????????????:eek3:
Click to expand...

New steps to love's old tune : Mail & Guardian Online

New steps to love's old tune

Stuart Jeffries



23 February 2005 11:59


Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith have agreed to an open relationship. (AP)
"Coupledom is a performance art," wrote the psychoanalyst Adam Phillips. “But how does one learn what to do together? How to be, once again, two bodies in public, consistently together, guardians of each others’ shame, looking the part? Where do the steps come from?’’

Phillips was not writing about the unconventional marriage of Hollywood stars Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith when he wrote these words in his book Monogamy, but they are none the less prescient. For Will and Jada have reportedly essayed some new steps to love’s old tune: they have agreed a pact that they hope will prevent their relationship from being destroyed by their wandering libidos.

The pact means that either can have sex with a third party so long as the other gives permission.

“You don’t avoid what’s natural,’’ Smith reportedly said. “You’re going to be attracted to people. In our marriage vows, we didn’t say, ‘Forsaking all others’.’’

Will has apparently admitted to Jada that he has sexual feelings for other women, an admission that will surprise no one but the most dry-balled old monk. When he was working on the film Hitch, for example, he described his co-star Eva Mendes as “freaking gorgeous’’. If Jada has any sense, she will forgive him everything but the use of the word “freaking’’.

If all this is true, the couple, probably unwittingly, have recognised another of Phillips’s aperçus: “You can’t be monogamous and unfaithful at the same time.’’

Instead, they would appear to be trying for a third way between monogamy and infidelity — one that involves being faithful to one’s partner while allowing a kind of extramarital sexual licence that will not be allowed to destroy the relationship. Three words: good freaking luck.

Will argues that, should he feel impelled to consummate his hypothetical dalliance with some supposition of a hottie, he will say to Jada: “Look, I need to have sex with somebody. I’m not going to if you don’t approve of it — but please approve of it.’’

Again, Jada might well take particular exception to one word in that sentence: the unctuous “please’’. When a man pleads for sex it is never edifying; when he pleads to his wife for sex with a third woman, she would be justified in grabbing him by his sticky-out ears and nutting him into the middle of next week.

But do open marriages ever work?

The monogamous strictures underpinning marriage have long been derided as bourgeois by voguish lefties keen to get laid. Both Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre described their open relationship in philosophical terms. They claimed they had a lifelong “essential’’ relationship, but continued to see other people in “contingent’’ relationships. Perhaps this contingent-essential distinction is the one that Will should try on Jada if the need arises.

Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera had an open marriage premised on a socialist rejection of a bourgeois institution: that is why she had sex with Trotsky and other women without the Mexican muralist being able to complain. Though if he wasn’t white-hot with jealousy, surely something had died in their relationship.

Perhaps monogamy is, given the nature of sexual desire, hopeless. Deborah Anapol, a California-based psychologist and author of Polyamory: The New Love without Limits, believes so: “It seems clear that without some major renovations, marriage is doomed. If the new paradigm for love can save marriage from the scrap heap, so much the better.’’ When so many marriages end in divorce, she seems to have a point.

But is Anapolian promiscuity the answer? Like monogamy, one might think it is a perilous affair, but only multiplies the opportunities for jealousy, hurt and intra-relationship headbutting. Adam Phillips wrote: “Profoundly committed to the better life, the promiscuous, like the monogamous, are idealists. Both are deranged by hope, in awe of reassurance and impressed by their pleasures.’’

Perhaps the idealism, both of monogamy and its seeming opposite, promiscuity, is what needs to be ditched. Instead of idealism, realism.

This, surely, is what British broadcaster Joan Bakewell was talking about when she said that her marriage to Michael Bakewell had “mutually acknowledged infidelities’’.

Bakewell, the TV presenter whose seven-year affair with Harold Pinter inspired his play Betrayal, understood that those affairs eroded marital trust — a realisation that Will and Jada are yet to experience.

“Yes, of course one did mind about the infidelities in the end,’’ she has said. “Our marriage was as human and muddled and awkward and jealous and full of attempts to understand as human life itself.’’

This thought certainly seems more plausible than trying to hermetically and self-defeatingly seal oneself from the perils of desire — though it hardly guarantees a happy marriage. Instead of being deranged by hope, we need to rearrange our expectations.

Maybe these considerations are beside the point for Will and Jada. They have been married for seven years, and have a family to support. He has a new single to promote and a film to plug. What better way to do so than to give interviews that guarantee acres of prurient coverage and big pictures? For Hollywood stars, coupledom is probably even more of a performance art than we have hitherto recognised. — © Guardian Newspapers 2005
 
Well, I don't understand for one thing to love that person and not be satisfied sexually. Obviously, something is not right. Either you're with the wrong person or you are mistaking what a loving committed marriage really is. There are men or women you will love, but not be attracted sexually or fulfilled or whatever other than the feeling of love for that person, but that doesn't mean that person is for you in terms of marriage. You can love a person, but if you cannot fully committ or love them the way that they are, then you need to love them enough to break the relationship. I think they are confused with what a real marriage is and what they feel to that person. They could just be a friend that you can trust with and be honest with. I think someone made up the term "Open Marriage" to make up an excuse to committ adultery. Maybe they marry and have open marriage because they might be scared to have no one at the end of the day. Something's not right about open marriage.
 
^^There are worst things in life than what others do in their marriages. Life is too short to worry about what others do behind closed doors.
 
There are worst things in life than what others do in their marriages. Life is too short to worry about what others do behind closed doors.
Click to expand...

I wonder if we have a responsibility as a whole world to set the right example to our children. I think we're trying to understand where these people come from.

I wonder what's the point of Will Smith and Jada Pinkett giving each other permission? I mean, what if one says, "no." Do you stop having attraction to them? I don't get it. If they say "no" everytime, then they wouldn't do it. I don't get what the point is.
 
ClearSky said:
I wonder if we have a responsibility as a whole world to set the right example to our children. I think we're trying to understand where these people come from.

I wonder what's the point of Will Smith and Jada Pinkett giving each other permission? I mean, what if one says, "no." Do you stop having attraction to them? I don't get it. If they say "no" everytime, then they wouldn't do it. I don't get what the point is.
Click to expand...

We only have responsibilities to our children but what they decide as adults is beyond our control. As long as they are not doing anything illegal and is kept private, who are we to judge?

Really, is it important that we must know the point of what Will and jada do in their marriage? It is none of our concern...it is their lives and they chose to share that info with the public. Still doesnt change my views of Will as an actor cuz both issues are separate. He is not out committing crimes.

That's how I see it. People's sex lives are none of my concern as long as nobody is forced to do things they dont want to like rape or whatever.
 
shel90 said:
we Only Have Responsibilities To Our Children But What They Decide As Adults Is Beyond Our Control. As Long As They Are Not Doing Anything Illegal And Is Kept Private, Who Are We To Judge?

Really, Is It Important That We Must Know The Point Of What Will And Jada Do In Their Marriage? It Is None Of Our Concern...it Is Their Lives And They Chose To Share That Info With The Public. Still Doesnt Change My Views Of Will As An Actor Cuz Both Issues Are Separate. He Is Not Out Committing Crimes.

That's How I See It. People's Sex Lives Are None Of My Concern As Long As Nobody Is Forced To Do Things They Dont Want To Like Rape Or Whatever.
Click to expand...

Word
 
Back
Top