Am I selfish for wanting a one way open relationship?

[Anonymous]

Lately I've been doing some soul searching about what kind of partner I wanna be with, and the answer is definitely unorthodox.

See I have no problem getting a woman to like me and give me a chance, took me years but I look after my appearance and learned to talk and flirt and be bold and that helps me find companionship.

My problem is I have problems committing and when a relationship option is on the table I chicken out because I don't wanna lose access to all other bachelors and be off the market.

But I also want something meaningful, someone to share the adventures with, a partner who is more than a friends with benefits or a casual hookup.

I keep coming to the same conclusion that I wanna meet the girl who is willing to be only with me but ok with me seeing other girls and even down for threesomes with them, and I know it sounds very crazy but from an evolutionary standpoint it makes sense, Monogamy is a social invention not a natural evolution.

So is what I'm looking for even doable?

*All opinions are welcome but please try to be constructive about it*

[PositiveFlight]

Men are not monogamous. This is why if you desire to be with more than one woman, I advocate for doing it the only way which is honorable and respectful. Marry each woman (polygyny) but you can’t be selfish about it. You have to do it because you wish to make each wife feel special and be giving with each one. Anything less than this is pure selfishness and lacks commitment making it more of just a fling. As such, each relationship with each woman will not last but rather will end in disaster.

[Anonymous]

If you wanna live like that, you gotta be ok with her getting pounded out by other guys too.

My wife and i have the same arrangements. We are allowed to sleep with other people but not get friendly or close to them. And we can't hide anything and tell eachother everything

So basically its ok if guys use her for sex but not go hang out, sex only.

im allowed to do the same with other girls, but i have no desire to and rarely do, she definitely gets around fking a new guy every month or 2.

you could find a girl thats ok with it being 1 way. But. I dont think its likely.

[Asker]

I'm curious as to why you're ok with this if you're not exercising your own liberty. You used the term "her getting pounded out" which makes me wonder if you get off on that or just accepting it because you don't wanna lose her. No kink shame we're both chatting anonymously 🙂

[Opinion Owner]

Im just not intrested in it, What sex i do have with her is enough to get me off, And i just dont have the desire to sleep with other girls, Personally i dint care one way or another, it doesn't bother me, because its just sex, She doesn’t hang out with them, Date them, Talk to them, about anything. Just gets fked. And comes home. Sex only. So its not really a problem. she's never given me any reason ever not to trust her. And ben nothing but great ! So i dont have a issue with it for that reason. She has a way HIGHER sex drive than me. Like 2-3x more Shel get off work, go have sex with a guy she met on tinder or her coworkers Come home make dinner, and before she even showers, have sex with me after. 10x the sexdrive and energy I have

[Opinion Owner]

My Only thing is, They ither use protection, Or make sure the guy she's seeing is clean, If they wanna go condomless Its not so much about her getting pregnant I care more about her catching somthing. But so far no problems She does a pretty good job

[fembotnpc777]

The logical conclusion to "I want".
You're never going to have anything special with anyone, because you're only thinking about yourself. You can't form a connection with others.

[Asker]

That's actually a pretty wise take on it. But don't you think that even our most selfless acts are done for selfish reasons? Would you be with someone you don't wanna be with and have no obligation to be with? It all goes back to what you want in the end. And for me the ideal partner would be someone who wants this relationship as much as I do and not someone pressured or bribed into it.

[fembotnpc777]

Yes, I want something where I can be selfless and treat someone well without it stabbing me in the back. I want to be with someone I have no obligation to be with. You and I have a different outlook, because you view love as a contractual thing. It's not that love is always contractual, it's that love is always contractual for you, therefore, you see it through that lens. If love is a contract, I've always gotten the shitty end of the deal, because that's not how I view it. But if you view love as a contract, there's nothing that will cause your brain to shift into an unselfish way of thinking. You are wired this way. Yes, every man says they "want a girl who also likes__". Open relationships, painful or humiliating sex acts, you name it. But almost no woman actually likes that. They do that to keep the relationship going, they pretend to really like it, etc. At the end of the day, you prioritize your own needs over your care about the other person. What if you just selflessly loved someone because you loved them? This is just not how you reason, so you're never going to be able to see this perspective. You are missing that part of you: your soul, your brain, whatever.

[fembotnpc777]

It's not an accusation, it's just a fact. I've noticed that there are two types of brain. One type is altruistic and capable of love, the other just isn't. Yes, your dog gets fed by you, and that's a benefit of being with you. But your dog would die for you; not because he gets something out of it, but because he loves you. The reason he loves you is because his ancestors loved their masters, and the masters decided that they couldn't be parted with these animals. You are seeking the sensation of being worshipped by more than one woman. It has nothing to do with love or altruism. It's an experience that you seek. People generally like feeling powerful, liked, given to, etc. You continue acting this way after you meet someone you like, because there's no connection to be formed. You never reach the point where another person's needs become greater than your own, or altruism. You rationalize that your need for experiences is "just an unconventional kind of love", but it's just self-fulfillment. It's an entirely different lifepath.

[PositiveFlight]

@Asker Correct. You would have to find multiple women who are all willing to participate in and of their own free will and in whom they can all get together or live together with you and each set down boundaries of respect. This is why honorable marriage is the only way which would work in the scenario. And you have to look at it not about the benefits to you, but what would be the benefits to each wife. Hopefully there would be benefits of being best friends together and being able to help one another with children or what other endeavor you choose as a family. Not only does this take a husband who is completely 100% selfless, but it takes several very special women to think outside the box while still having self-respect enough. Each woman would have to be 100% selfless as well and learn boundaries. There could never be a factor of jealousy or competitive one-up against each other. Those types of women exist but they are very rare indeed.

[fembotnpc777]

You interpret others as doing what you do: you rationalize that your experiences are love, because the horrifying fact is that you are a loveless. You are abnormal. This causes a disconnect between your real self and your perceived self: you see yourself as a loving person, but you weren't born with this ability. Save yourself the grief: you're not wired the same way that human beings are generally wired. You did not inherit altruism. You will never experience love the way that others are capable of experiencing it.

[Anonymous]

Yes, if you're rich.
But honestly you need therapy. Get healing. Because not many woman will be okay with this unless you're a sugar dady

[LazerBean]

Yeah.

[rachel776]

a sugar baby would do it

[Asker]

Yeah probably but I'm not into materialistic people (not to mention I can't afford a sugar baby) It's fascinating to me how normalized sugar babies are these days

[WhitneySnow]

Yeah

[misogynistic_pig]

No, man is polygynous by nature.

[BarryLiverstone]

Yes.

[Twalli]

Yes, you are.

[Anonymous]

"Monogamy is a social invention not a natural evolution." This is the kind of BS that people say when they want to do something that's wrong and not feel guilty about it.