It’s easy to forget that same-sex marriage is actually the conservative manifestation of the Gay Rights Movement. It values commitment over freedom; conformity over revolution – it’s a far cry from the underclass of transvestites and bohemians that populated the first gayborhoods.
Perhaps half of all gay people wouldn’t even choose marriage if it were legal everywhere. That’s why the tired refrain of the Right is so ironic: the insistence is that same-sex marriages can somehow affect straight marriages; that social affirmation of monogamy and settlement in the gay community would cause it to spill over and wreak havoc on all values everywhere. Suddenly, gay marriages are pouring out of every city hall and church like floods of ants, and filling the streets with hand-holdy chaos.
“They shove their relationships down our throats!,” they’ll say.
Oh really? In my experience, gay people don’t flaunt their relationship status even to other gay people – not even their close friends – let alone to mainstream society. They don’t have sex in public, nor do they make out constantly, and they are capable of walking down the street two, even three feet apart, and sometimes farther.
Gay couples aren’t as jealous as straight ones; a gay man is far less likely to get offended if you mistakenly hit on his boyfriend. Gay couples still go out to bars both together and separately, they still flirt, and while they may not advertise it, a huge number of them still have sex outside the relationship.
For those couples, as far as friends and acquaintances are concerned, the only thing that changes when the relationship starts is that they’re no longer open to something serious – everything else is still fair game.
Statistics vary, but studies suggest that roughly half to an outright majority of long-term gay male relationships are open – and the longer the relationship lasts, the more likely that is.
Nobody wants to talk about it too publicly for fear it will give fodder to discrimination or stereotypes, but by keeping it hush-hush gay people are again choosing a conservative path: they’re saying that we should win acceptance by appealing to mainstream values rather than taking a more honest look at human behavior, with diversity as the core value of the movement.
Rights are rights regardless of what some or even most people who identify as gay do with their lives, and different people have different expectations in relationships. That’s the truth. No finding on common gay male behavior should have any bearing on the rights of other gay people.
Younger gay men and others may come up with cynical comments about the prevalence of open relationships: gay men are too horny, they’ll say, or too averse to commitment, but a better explanation is that when you have been with someone a long time and trust that they aren’t going anywhere, you stop being jealous.
Why not have your cake and eat it too, if it’s something that you can pull off?
It would be an overreach to think that two people in a relationship aren’t, in some sense, a single unit: get into one and your identity inevitably changes. We all know the urge to “shout it from the rooftops” when we’re first falling in love. In relationships, you make decisions together, and you might sleep in the same bed anywhere from a few nights a week to every night. You might live together, share finances, and in some cases, children.
American teen culture teaches you that your boyfriend or girlfriend defines your social status, and we often grow up with parents who don’t do social activities separate from each other. And if any of us remember falling in love, we all also recall the soul-crushing experience of the first time our hearts were broken: it’s like we have to re-invent ourselves as a single again, and it’s as hard as mourning a death, because the person we were with is officially gone.
But I think that a few times around that corner gets us thinking that maybe the key to a more successful relationship is space. With maturity, we’re less likely to yearn for a “soul mate” when we’re single, and when we’ve made a commitment we’re more likely to go out without our partners in tow. Our boyfriends don’t have to be exactly like us, either – gone are the days when we seek in a mate exactly what we seek in our ideal selves. We can find someone who isn’t the same age, race, profession, isn’t “in the same place in life,” and in some cases, isn’t even of the same generation, with five-, ten-, or twenty-year spans between partners.
We don’t put quite as much emphasis on sexual chemistry as the sole purpose of love. And I think that in many cases, it’s when gay couples get more mature, independent, and start seeing the world more existentially — who are we as beings, rather than as a social unit — that they begin to consider open relationships.
It first occurred to me that many long-term gay couples do relationships differently while I was reading responses to an article I’d written right here on Nightcharm a year and a half ago. The piece addressed a social generation gap that exists between younger and older gay men – but to many who spoke up, that gap had been bridged, not only by friendship, but by love and sex. A couple commenters briefly mentioned open relationships. I quickly started asking some of the older gay men I knew how they and their friends do exclusivity.
A year and a half ago I still lived in my college town; I’ve since moved to a bigger city, which is considerably more diverse in many ways. I’ve found that a much higher percentage of guys are in open relationships here – and those who aren’t would not be taken aback by someone asking “are you and your boyfriend exclusive?” So while many gay people would be surprised to hear about the prevalence of open relationships, those who know a wider range of gay people would not be.
If you’re hoping that I’m heading toward some final decision or moral judgment in favor of open relationships, you’ll be let down. I don’t purport that anyone else’s sphere of comfort is any of my business. Guys can be lifelong virgins, and that’s just fine with me; alternately, I avoid using words like “slut,” which have shifty definitions, because I don’t think it’s the number of partners you have that determines whether your sexual behavior is ethical or not.
As far as open relationships go, I’m agnostic as to whether they’re an ideal endpoint of a relationship, rather than a transitional phase or occasional option. But one thing that’s clear is that gay people are re-defining marriage and relationships: from something based on status and restraint to something based on flexible realities and fulfilling lives.
And that, without a doubt, is good.
© 2010, Matt P.. All rights reserved. Nightcharm.com
I agree with this article. I’m not idealistic enough though to think that this truth won’t affect the fight for our rights, let alone that this will actually change the whole concept of marriage and straight people will just be okay with it.
I don’t know. I have grown, too, from the guy I was in high school/college, and I realize that those soul-mate ideas about relationships aren’t very realistic. I’m thrown around the idea of a triad or an open dyad, but so far I have had enough trouble just holding on to one partner, so we’ll see.
It would be nice if the straight majority would accept that those of us who wish to marry deserve to, with all the legal protections and benefits they get, regardless of all this. But it’s too much like right, as my mother always says. facts like these give our detractors an excuse to deny us. It’s not logical or fair, but it’s an opening, nonetheless. We can’t just make them do right by us because it’s the right thing to do. We don’t have he power.
I’m not saying we have to play/live by their rules, but I just wonder where all this is actually going. I doubt it’s to some postmodern freespirited utopia.
Interestingly, the two gay couples I know in open relationships are extremely libertarian in their politics. One couple got married (the “I got mine” attitude), the other believed marriage should be abolished because it ultimately confers special rights (and penalties) on some for their relationship status. Meanwhile, the only gay conservatives I know are either completely or professionally closeted, and only maintain sexual relationships with other men. My fellow liberal acquaintances tend to profess commitment to monogamy, but there’s a whole lot of infidelity going on.
It’s a pretty small sample – I don’t have that many friends, let alone gay friends, but it’s an interesting if admittedly stereotypical cross-section of the interplay of politics on the personal and vice versa.
Myself, I couldn’t imagine wanting more than one partner at a time. I don’t find my sexual interest in other men rises to the level where I need to act on it. Intellectually and emotionally, I find one human being enough of a wonder to try and figure out. I don’t expect the same reasons to come from my partner, but I make it very clear from the beginning of the relationship that monogamy is non-negotiable.
Does that mean it’s actually non-negotiable in the long run. No. I’m not that naive. As the gray starts to accumulate but the sex drive remains, I may feel differently. And maybe it happens to my partner. I hope I would be sensible enough to at least consider it before jettisoning him. But maybe my own inclination towards monogamy stays as strong as ever. I don’t know. I’ll find out when I get there. But it’s my natural starting point, and it’s unfair to any potential partner to pretend otherwise.
[...] Some thoughts on open relationships—Warning: Imagery NSFW Posted by: Sean Carnage · in · NEWS – Tags: Today's music [...]
Excellent article.
My husband and I have been married for almost 8 years. Other couples are sometimes shocked to find our almost total lack of jealousy. I find it hot when a guy hits on my husband…it reminds me that he’s a hot guy and it makes me even more attracted to him.
Its unrealistic to think you can live the rest of your life and have every sexual need and desire fulfilled by the same person. We are both 38…but sometimes I get a craving for a muscle daddy…so that’s what I go get. My husband can never be my older muscle daddy, just like I cant be the little italian muscle bottom he sometimes craves.
Not sure if a full-blown “Boogie Nights” open relationship, with everyone on Manhunt every night, would be the healthiest thing. But I dont want to end up living in “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof” either. I think its a good idea to learn what your partner likes, and make sure he gets it…even if it isnt always YOU giving it to him.
Thanks for the article, it’s very wise. I think that there are some couples who open up their relationships in order to revive flagging partnerships, and sooner or later, they unfortunately discover how that works as badly as any other misapplied attempt at a solution. But I think you’re right that for many men, open relationships work due to their own maturing self-understanding and emotional security.
It’s interesting, too, how many gay men also feel able to explore non-monogamy precisely because we have been/still are excluded from conventional marriage and the expectations that come with it.
It’s also unfortunate that open relationships are regularly associated by the bigots with truly odious behaviours such as washroom sex. I chatted with a fellow who completely supported civil unions, but was completely against marriage equality, because he thought that gays were intrinsically different and couldn’t help but have sex everywhere and with anyone.
I’m in an open relationship. Been about 2 years that we’ve been dating. We started early – I told him, from the beginning, that I never get jealous, but he does. Then he cheated on me, so we started an open relationship by default.
It’s not that I don’t trust him: I forgave him for cheating on me, it’s not like he didn’t love me, he was just drunk. It’s that, I said, “shit man, this proves that you can love one person and still be turned on by somebody else. Right?” And then he got it, and he said he’d feel bad if I didn’t get the same privileges, and before we knew it we were both having our cake and eating it.
We still have rules, though. No fucking other guys is the first one – blow jobs only. Also, no swallowing! And no “dates.” He can crash over somewhere and spend the night, though, I don’t give a shit about that. Just nothing romantic.
As far as I can tell, it works really well for us and we’re both very happy.
I know a lot of couples in an open relationship. They seem to love them and agree it’s best for them. The funny thing is I know a lot of people out of an open relationship. They agree they would never do it again.
Not sure if that’s standard unhappiness talking or if specifically it was the fact that their relationship was open that was the problem. Like someone above mentioned, a lot of open relationships I run into were opened to solve a problem. That’s probably the wrong way to go about it.
Personally I prefer monogamy. This way I can do anything I want with my partner without wondering “why does it burn when I pee?” the next morning.
But I understand men like to look and touch. I also understand commitment is harder and harder to come by. The funny thing is, as the generations change, I know more older and happy couples and far FAR more younger and unhappy couples. Expectations of a relationship have changed. And for one reason or another, it seems to cause more displeasure than pleasure.
Speaking as someone who has been in an open relationship for the last 15 years (and was “butt buddies” with my partner for 5 years prior to our becoming partners) I can attest to the fact that they are wonderful things….when they work. They don’t always work….but when they do, it’s quite amazing. Deeper levels of trust are there. Sometimes, when other parties are involved, there’s even deeper levels of thrust.
Darling you only need a veneer of monogomy ,the real wood is too hard to polish…
love the article thuoght provoking & top quality as always.
Darling you only need a veneer of monogomy ,the real wood is too hard to polish…
love the article thought provoking & top quality as always.
Assimilation is NOT integration! I’m not against gay marriage but I really need to critique how the mainstream queer movement is so caught up in it. Gay marriage isn’t the last big struggle for civil rights. Even if gay marriage where allowed, it would only be available to certain people that want that sanctity from the Govt. or the church or both & it leaves out other amazing relationships that aren’t talked much about like what this article is talking about. As far as the benefits go, I think that everyone should be entitled to good healthcare, not too taxing taxes, & other marriage benefits that presently are taken for granted by heteronormative society regardless of a piece of paper or engagement rings. Also, the idea of marriage has been traditionally used as a way to consolidate power, allocated funds, etc. It’s like a business deal! So I urge y’all to just tune out the rabble rousin for a sec & really expand your initial thoughts. Equality for all! Just saying.
I meant “Assimilation is not Liberation! lol!
Hi Zach. Washroom sex is “truly odious behavior”?
Long live the Tearoom!! Talk about a gay institution!
“Hi Zach. Washroom sex is “truly odious behaviorâ€?
Long live the Tearoom!! Talk about a gay institution!”
God, that’s sad, disgusting, and immature.
Up to fifteen years ago, it was a necessary evil, particularly outside of large cities. But if men want to have sex at a drop of a hat, they can log onto any number of sites, they don’t have use washrooms or public parks to get off. It’s 2010. Grow the hell up.
“As far as the benefits go, I think that everyone should be entitled to good healthcare, not too taxing taxes, & other marriage benefits that presently are taken for granted by heteronormative society regardless of a piece of paper or engagement rings. ”
In other words, you want to live in a utopia.
You’re not going to have ‘good’ healthcare without a robust tax system to redistribute resources (also, you don’ automatically become entitled to good healthcare simply because you’re married – you might become entitled to health benefits which might or might not constitute good healtcare. Similarly, there are taxation tradeoffs in marriage).
It’s good to have an idea of what you want for society, but you’re a grown adult, and it should be obvious that it’s one thing to extend existing rights and privileges to minorities. It’s another to totally rework massive portions of the legal system.
[...] Open Relationships: The 800-Pound Gay [...]
Someone once said all is fair in love and war–if I find a guy attractive, and he is mutually in love with me, you better hope and pray you are not in an ‘open relationship’… cause’ that means I have every right to steal him if he is not completely sated.
Zach, then you totally agree we need to rework massive portions of the legal system?
As far as my take on marriage goes, I’m arguing that those in it are preferred by society & its reward distributions than those that aren’t.
“Up to fifteen years ago, it was a necessary evil, particularly outside of large cities. But if men want to have sex at a drop of a hat, they can log onto any number of sites, they don’t have use washrooms or public parks to get off. It’s 2010. Grow the hell up.”
Zach, you’re walking a FINE line and I’m not sure that I get it. You seem to think that gay hookup sites and open relationships are fine and good and should have no impact on how gay people are viewed, but if you go so far as to cruise a park or a truck stop, you’re just immature or ???old fashioned??? or whatever.
Society frowns on all of those things, they ALL make people look bad to observers who are bigots. Alternately, a person who has “grown up” and accepted an adult attitude towards sex drops the judgmental tone because all of those vices are equally VICTIMLESS. Perhaps public lewdness isn’t to be encouraged – but why the hell do I care if two blokes suck each other off behind the rhododendrons in City Park at 1am? Honestly now, why the hell do I care? It sounds to me like you’re approach is neither pragmatism nor purism; instead, you’re all for the vices you happen to engage in, and you’re all against the ones you happen to avoid.
Your arbitrary holier-than-thou attitude is obnoxious. Here’s how you actually come across: vodka drinkers – now there’s something I can appreciate! But whiskey drinkers… you raging alcoholics! You ought to be in jail!
Great article, Matt!
Zach is a moraliser and a hypocrite…but I repeat myself.
Interesting how ‘the gay community’ has eagerly accepted the confusions and prudishness of the straight world, in exchange for limited acceptance into it. And yes, that’s the definition of “selling out”.
The problem is internal strife. Marriage – as heterosexual people conceive it, and in fact is – is a sociologically necessary institution that dates from prehistoric times, and is explained by the functions it serves. As such, it is only natural it has bled into law, conferring “special” rights to married people. It is those rights that the gay community should have; it is those rights that come with marriage equality, NOT their definition of marriage as mentioned above. Because gay marriage do not carry the same meaning as heterosexual ones, it does not serve the same purpose: it shouldn’t.
Most gay people that oppose gay marriage argue it’d be bowing down to “heterosexual values”, that somehow it would mean a defeat for diversity. How? I’m sorry, but it’s more a blow to the puerile renegade status they want for themselves, and by association, for the community. I could use the same argument the gay community uses against conservative heterosexuals for those people: if you don’t want gay marriage, then don’t get one. But don’t you dare stand as an obstacle for those of us who actively seek for those rights. Your divergent opinion on the issue shouldn’t be the downfall of the collective that strives for this. So next time someone says “hey, let’s go march for equality”, don’t go for the petty “no: that’s just a straight crock” and think about those who do not share your views. All this talk about GAY relationships and no word about what lesbians think of marriage. What about them? They think of it differently than both heterosexuals AND gay men. Why should your reticence affect them, who are not included in your “profound” understanding of gay relationships?
Marriage for heterosexuals means the instrument – even obligation – to start a textbook family. We are not bound by that. Marriage, for gay people, is what you make of it. That’s the definition of diversity. Who can say it’d affect any of the relationship types this article mentions? “Selling out”? What? To whom?
We’ve been a non-monogamous couple for 22 years. The non-monogamy started before day 1 as my partner was hooked up with 2 other guys when I met him. I don’t think we would have lasted this long if monogamy was the rule.
As the postcard said: marriage means commitment, so does insanity.