When I was near the end of the long-term relationship with Sylvia, Sally was one of several sexual relationships I was having – some regular, some irregular, some one-offs. Sally became a regular and my mental attachment to her grew. This did not affect my other friendships, whether physical or not. Sally did not mind me having my own life, she loved me ‘as I was’, unconditionally. Sally was married before to someone who was unfaithful but lied about it (and he was also dishonest in other ways).

Sally and I were able to talk about any subject – I felt she was completely non-judgemental and was very accepting about my situation, always positive and helpful and interested. She is very mature, wise, understanding and non-judgemental. As someone who doesn’t suffer from jealousy, she didn’t (doesn’t) get jealous of my friends or non-Sally activities. She does however really enjoy the times we spend together, and we have lots of good times together. She loves my ‘whole person’, which includes that saucy glint in my eye.

At the same time as I was getting to know Sally I was also getting to know Diane. She was, like Sally, more than ten years older than me, and she was a wheelchair user with quite severe physical disabilities. She was delighted with my interest in her and we had a few rather difficult to organise sexual experiences. Sally seemed happy for me to do this with Diane, and knew I was providing her with sexual release and companionship and love, which Sally believes is a human right.

When Sally and I discussed my flings with other women, we agreed some ground rules – I don’t play away at home, and am not to discuss lurid details with her (the less I say about it the better). The best thing to say is (if the time is right) “seeing X makes me realise how much I love you” and varieties of that. But only if that’s what I’m feeling!

Other rules were that I did not have those experiences in our house, that the behaviour didn’t get in the way of my being a good dad, and that I answered any questions she asked honestly. Also she would expect me to use a condom and be as safe as possible, partly to protect her.

Although in theory Sally is free to have other lovers, she tells me that I satisfy all her needs, give her more attention and love than she thought possible, and is very happy thank you very much. I think she thinks it’s fairer to share me out a bit.

I am honest with the women I’d like to ‘get to know better’ and I always wear my wedding ring. I’m sure this puts a lot of women off me, but it reduces the chances of misleading someone. Most women I chat up or pay a compliment to do not understand that I can be happily married but enjoy having sex outside of this AND have the ‘permission’ of my wife to do so. I know therefore how lucky I am to have Sally and how well suited we are for a lifetime together.

She is very satisfied sexually (we make love approximately seven times per week) and can see that I’ve got a very high sex drive/level of energy and stamina so is able to ignore the things which if she concentrated on would make her unhappy. She thanks me every day for making her into a mum.

The most difficult thing for Sally to cope with was that on occasions, Diane and I would have a ‘difference of opinion’ which would leave me feeling unhappy or preoccupied or thoughtful.

When we were considering getting married we discussed my sexual habits and agreed that we couldn’t vow fidelity, so we spent ages working out our own vows. My general recollection of these discussions is that I was amazed that I’d met someone who didn’t mind me doing this ‘naughty’ behaviour – making it not-naughty. This also made it less desirable for me, as my rebellious nature is attracted to those ‘forbidden’ things.

The wedding vows were:

By giving you this ring, I promise to continue the friendship, trust, respect and honesty that we have already established.

I promise to build on the solid foundation of our love, our shared sense of fun, joy in our children and appreciation of all that we have together.

I promise to keep listening to you, communicating my needs and practising tolerance of those inevitable little difficulties.

By giving you this ring, I am honoured to call you my husband/wife.

Building an open relationship

Russell’s description of his relationship with Sally illustrates many of the ways in which couples can make an open relationship work well. When they met, there were both keen to avoid dishonesty. It must also have helped that Sally already knew that Russell had multiple partners. He describes her non-judgemental, accepting, positive and mature, all characteristics that can help strengthen any relationship but that are especially important for an open one. In their wedding vows, there are many words that signal a good relationship, above all communication and listening.

Sally is lucky not to suffer from jealousy, and although there are some ‘things which if she concentrated on would make her unhappy’, the advantages of this relationship clearly outweigh the disadvantages for her. She prefers not to hear all the lurid details of Russell’s other lovers but trusts him to keep his wedding ring on. I have spoken with her briefly and she confirms that she is very happy in her marriage.

Russell and Sally’s story also shows how Open Fidelity can be part of a legal marriage. I find their vows moving to read – how realistic they are, how much more evocative of actual married life than the traditional vows!

In the mean time, I have in fact been busy writing for Bella magazine, who invited me to contribute to their ‘points of view’ page. The question being asked was ‘Can open relationships ever work?’ (in response, once again, to Tilda Swinton’s revelation of having two partners) and I was asked to write something for the ‘Yes’ side of the argument. The article is now out (on UK newsstands, not online). Here’s an excerpt from my bit:

An open relationship isn’t an easy option and not everyone can do it. You have to remember that you don’t own the person you love. You must listen, negotiate, keep your promises and be completely honest with your partner.

For some people, monogamy works well. But if you find monogamy difficult, an open relationship is more honest than having a secret affair.

The ‘No’ side was given by Bibi Lynch, ‘sex columnist and presenter’. She says:

Of course they don’t work!… Sure, some people (and I mean philandering men, here) will bang on about how monogamy is unnatural… But I think the technical expression for that argument is ‘trying to justify our inability to keep our pants on’.

I might be biased, but her piece seemed to have been put together without much thought and certainly without much research. I appreciate that she was asked to write something specifically denying that open relationships can work, but I would have thought that with her apparent years of experience writing on sex and relationships, Bibi Lynch might have come across a few positive examples. But no, she spouts the same stuff we have all heard again and again, about ‘commitment’ making a relationship special and staying faithful to one person being what relationships are all about.

She even says that open relationships are not really relationships at all. Well, that’s a strange definition of a relationship. What about when two (or more) people love each other deeply, share their daily lives with each other, have a special bond? Does making their relationship open negate all that? Of course not.

Open relationships can, for those who go about them without much thought, be an excuse to sleep around while having a regular partner to act as a date when you need it. (See this Yahoo Answers discussion for an example.) I agree: that kind of ‘open relationship’ isn’t ideal.

But a properly thought out open relationship means considering your partner’s wish to have other lovers, not just your own. So it cannot be about ‘our inability to keep our pants on’, it is about the other partner as well. It is about giving your partner opportunities, not about selfishly wanting opportunities just for yourself.

Bibi Lynch does admit near the end of her article:

Maybe I’m an insecure fool – I did walk out of a restaurant once because my date was paying the waitress too much attention – but the thought of my boyfriend even kissing another woman makes me feel physically sick.

OK, so she is the kind of person who gets easily jealous. An open relationship is probably not the right thing for her. That doesn’t mean they aren’t great for other people.

The bias of the editorial team shows in the photo accompanying the articles (posed by models): a man and a woman smile at each other across the picture, while a stony-faced woman looks at the smiling woman and has her arms crossed and one hand on her chin, as if to say ‘hmm, what am I meant to think about this, then?’. The caption says ‘Could you trust your man with another woman?’ – again, no suggestion that the woman might be the one to benefit from opening up a relationship.

So, not an entirely balanced view, but what can we expect from a mainstream women’s magazine? It is probably the first time they have covered nonmonogamy at all, except of course for thousands of stories about infidelity. It can only be a good thing that they have presented the subject in this format, with two sides to the argument. And good for Tilda Swinton for prompting mags like this to think about ethical nonmonogamy.

I’m hoping that the intelligent readers who happen upon this article will realise that the Yes argument is carefully researched and based on facts, whereas the No argument is pure opinion. If you’re one such intelligent reader, welcome to the Open Fidelity blog and I hope you find some useful information here.

Helen didn’t feel guilty about spending time with Julie – how could such bliss be wrong? She introduced Julie to Georgina, who guessed that this was more than a friendship and said she thought David was beginning to guess that something was going on, not least because Helen was obviously deliriously happy. So with Georgina’s encouragement she chose a moment when she and David were both relaxed at home and told him everything. She also reassured him of her deep and enduring love for him, and that she would never leave him.

To her surprise, his reaction was cautiously positive. David wasn’t surprised but was pleased that Helen had told him. He greed that she could go ahead and continue to see Julie and become more sexually intimate with her. He made no conditions, but Helen promised that she would be completely above board with him and that she wouldn’t tell anyone else without his agreement.

In fact, it was worth it for David. The affair actually improved their life together. Helen’s passion for Julie spilled over into their marriage and rejuvenated it. She was more relaxed, more tolerant of little habits of his that used to irritate her, because of her overwhelming gratitude to David for his understanding of her feelings. Because she couldn’t see Julie very often, David got the benefit of Helen ‘firing on all cylinders’. And Helen came to see that she could love both David and Julie at the same time.

Loving the one didn’t diminish my love for the other. They met different needs and were in separate compartments. The one was a deep and enduring love – the anchor of my existence. The other was a life-giving and all-demanding passion, riding the crest of a wave.

Options for David

What would you have done in David’s situation? Some men might not have been as accepting as he was. Someone in this situation could have been afraid that his wife might leave him, or doubted his wife’s love for him. These are all natural reactions, especially when our culture assumes that they are the only reasonable ones. But David’s experience shows that there are other ways to react, and that they can bring benefits.

In fact, David is someone who doesn’t get jealous easily. Yes, there are people like him! Others might have needed more reassurance that the relationship was strong and that they were loved and valued. Some might not have been able to cope with the situation at all and might have preferred to impose restrictions on their partner or end the marriage. But what a shame to take such drastic action, when accepting the situation might have brought such a rejuvenation to the relationship?

In this blog I aim to give alternatives and show that they can work. Helen and David are far being from the only couple who’ve experienced this rejuvenation after opening up their relationship. You’ll hear about others in future posts, and I’ll also tell you later what happened next for Helen, David, Julie and Miriam.

Yes – it’s called Open Fidelity.

I think it’s time for an overview of what I mean by Open Fidelity. The following statements sum it up.

• People can love more than one person at a time.
• There are people in honest, responsible relationships between three or more partners, and/or who have opened up their relationship to other lovers. It can be done.
• You don’t have to be monogamous to be faithful.
• Faithfulness means keeping your promises, whatever they were.
• Sometimes it is hard to keep your promises to your partner; it is better to renegotiate than break a promise.
• Being monogamous can be great if it works for you; better to choose it out of the range of responsible options than to assume it is the only ethical choice.
• Honesty is crucial in any relationship, especially if you have more than one partner or lover.
• Jealousy can often be overcome, or lived with, or used to add excitement to a relationship.

She says: “Threesomes (whether purely sexual or otherwise) can work, but the setting up of any new situation must be very carefully negotiated between all parties to avoid conflicts, jealousies, resentments and the many other problems that can arise.” I’d agree with all this.

Nice to see that there are newspaper agony aunts who are open to the idea that good relationships don’t have to be monogamous. Although she does slip up in assuming that a man with a male partner is gay…