realtionship "allowances"

My wife gives me $60 a week for lunch.

i personly think cheeting is cheeting if its another guy/girl or anythign else,

girl kissing another girl, well i don't like it much either its still cheeting,

ive gotten into heated arguements with bi girls over this....and one ex. although that one led to a threesome. so its not all bad.

but as far as im concerned, another person is.....another person. to say that a girl is okay and a guy is not is (TO ME in bold to let you know its what i think and not what i think is right for everyone...its just my viewpoint) implies a kind of chauvinistic attitude. like girls dont count or something...i dunno. ive been told i dont understand because im not bisexual. maybe thats true, but its kind of impossible for me to see something through eyes ill never understand. either way, its not a situation im ever going to put myself in.

My bf's cool with me hooking up with girls on the condition he can watch or be involved

Meh...must turn him on or something

most of my boyfriends have been cool with me going with girls, they dont see it as cheating. but iv had two who would have left me if i so mnuch as kissed a girl because they see it as cheating.

You have a point there. i tend to lean more towards femeales, so i guess it would be cheating. although, im not sure how i would feel if my boyfriend at the time kissed a guy. i guess bisexuality just isnt taken as seriously as homosexuality and hetrosexuality.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! i love you.....

+1

A few years back I was in a really fucked up relationship, I was cheated on with both guys and girls. I don't think either is ok, one person is the same as another. When you are in direct competition with another man there is all this hardwired shit that happens, ergo the girl was much easier to deal with. Biology aside, it's easier to deal with somebody that doesn't share your anatomy, makes you less inclined to pick apart little differences.

It's always been a fantasy of mine to have him watch me with another girl, but he wouldn't be allowed to interfere (I'm mean). However, the fact that I've already admitted to him that I'm likely to swing the other way if/when our relationship ends adds a whole new element to the concept of my "just having fun" w/ another girl.

well - here's my two sense:
fooling around and a relationship can be different things. i have lesbian/gay friends and i don't consider their relationships anything less than ones i would have. in fact, my lesbian friends' relationship is the one relationship i look up to.
but thats not the point - the point is that i think for me - and others - is that its just a turn on. and if its a turn on, then it cant really be bad - can it? However, I'm the sort of person that can handle an open relationship (at least I think) in some manner. Like, she could fool around with girls all she wants, but I wouldn't expect her to bring the girl back to have a threesome. However, if she does, then I'd have no problem involving another guy at another point. So, ultimately - i think it all just boils down to what is a turn on and how much can you handle. I don't think it at all involved the idea of thinking a lesbian relationship is anything less than a heterosexual one. And on that note - if she wanted a girlfriend, I'd have no problem - as long as everything was copesetic all around and we all were able to co-exist.

I don't even consider my girlfriend's sleeping with other guys cheating. I trust her taste - the other boyfriend/roommate (we're all moving in soon) is wonderful and, from what I hear, so am I. So why would we feel "threatened" by a new arrival, male or female? I'd much rather feel blessed because she's found someone cool to spend time with.

I mean, supposedly love endures, right? So why wouldn't it endure when she's not around, or eating pizza with someone else while I'm at work or something?

I was going to write a comment to Morgan's question, but I guess now I don't have to.

Regarding questions of this kind, I recommend reading The Ethical Slut.

The "women-only" rule leaves open the possibility that when the guy's friends are checking out a hot chick he can say, "Yeah, my girlfriend totally banged her."

That's the real reason.

Personally, I'd feel more challenged by a woman than a man, because she'd have something I couldn't compete with. I probably wouldn't make up a "man-only" rule though, because I don't think gender-rules make any more sense in this context than age-rules or whatever. But, anyway, do I take a relationship between a man and woman less serious than one between two women? Hell, no!

What I'm trying to say is this: every couple who makes up such a rule will have their own personal reasons, and I can imagine that at some point the rule will be dropped when the male partner feels more secure.

I've had the women only rule a few times. It was when I was in relationships with girls who were interested in messing around with girls, but would (according to them) never fall in love with a girl. I once had a relationship with a girl who I knew had fallen in love with other girls and we did not have the women only rule for that reason.

There are some girls out there that just like fooling around with other girls. And because of that, I wasn't really threatened by them actually doing it. And, of course, I will not deny the "turning me on" factor in that decision making process.

(All of this said, I don't think I'd ever do another women-only rule again for reasons totally separate from any of this discussion.)

I agree.

I'm not going to tell people how to conduct themselves in their relationships--that's everyone's own business. But my personal opinion is that I don't think the decision in a relationship to be monogamous or not should depend on what the extra-relational participants have between their legs. Tadzi, you stated my thoughts perfectly: whenever I hear the "I'm allowed to hook up with other women, just not men," it feels like people don't think that sex between women actually counts--as though real sex needs a man there, and that's why "girl sex" is okay. Man-less sex doesn't count, and homosexual sex doesn't count--that's what these "girls are okay, boys are not" relationship "allowances" look like to me. That personally bothers me. A relationship is either open or it's not, and to distinguish along gender lines when deciding the terms of the openness of a relationship seems nonsensical to me in any other context except that of patriarchy and heterosexism. Kind of bullshit, that.


Edited to say: Um, I mean, what Morgan said. See above.

Edited to say also: I don't mean to say that I think the OP personally doesn't take female sexual relationships seriously or anything like that. I just think that the reasoning behind such a rule is worth examining.

There are some things I don't mind sharing. A girlfriend/wife, is not one of them.

Ride my bike? Sure thing. Ride my girl? Pass.



ps. Yes I'm totally asserting that men should own women as chattel...