134
‘It’s risky business emotionally’: the social shift towards open relationships
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
134 points (93.5% liked)
News
33025 readers
3050 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not going to judge people who try open relationships, but I've literally never seen them work. It's also nothing new. Swingers were a thing decades ago. I've seen marriages implode, people end up needing therapy, and the like. I have a friend who is poly and has multiple people in her relationship group. She tried to tell me "how great it is" and then the next day I hear about the latest group drama. I'm like "yeah fuck that noise".
It's kind of like communism. I love the idea of communism. Equality for everybody and everybody has an equal say in the means of production. However, it only takes one prick not pulling their weight on purpose to abuse the system and it all comes crumbling down, which is why so many communist countries have a dictator forcing everyone to "be equal".
The same is true of open relationships. It only takes one possessive or damaged person to blow up the whole group. The weakest link in most things is the fact that some people fucking suck.
It seems you're ~~correlating~~ conflating "polyamory" (non-monogamous relationships) with "polycules" (relationships with more than two people). Not all polyamory is a polycule and not all polycules are necessarily permanent; nor have their members exclusive with each other.
Sometimes polyamory looks like a marriage where both members have okayed having sex with other people. Sometimes it's groups of "swinger" marriages where they "swap" members. Sometimes it's just a person who regularly casually hooks up with others. I'd argue that what people consider monogamous relationships have a bit of wiggle room. Life is complicated; people are complicated.
I think you mean "conflating", not correlating. I'm not comparing two disparate data points.
Both of the things you described are the same sides of a coin, but with the commitment slider moved around a bit. Much of what I said applies to both.
Polycules, in your description, might be more "successful", but that's only because there isn't any real commitment. If the relationship falls apart, oh well move on. That's barely a tick on the slider from a fuck buddy and two ticks away from one night stands.
Again, everybody should be allowed to do whatever they want. Freedom in sexuality is important. I just don't think these relationships are successful in the majority of cases and I prefer a stable relationship with someone I know will be there throughout my whole life. I have no doubt that I'll die before I ever considered leaving my SO because I'm in it for the long haul.
yes - did mean "conflating". mb.
I mean, I've seen a lot of monogamous relationships fail too.
Not denying that. Monogamy between incompatible partners who don't communicate happens all the time.