I appreciate this is your take on things Parsy, and I certainly can't argue with your experiences/personal observations.

However I don't think the above two situations are always inevitable. I'm sure romance does fade for a lot of couples, but it depends how romantic the two people are in the r'ship: I think some people are romantic just to woo a prospective partner, whereas others are naturally romantic.

If you get a pair who are in latter category, I see no reason for the romance not to stay alive. My grandparent are still soppy romantics after 58 years of marriage: Grandad buys my gran flowers every other day, and my gran takes grandad out for a romantic meal once a week. So I'd say romance can stay fresh, if the couple want it to. I'm not saying couples should keep romance alive, it's whatever makes the couple happy.

As for sex... you may not be surprised to hear this, but I often have very frank discussions with friends (straight or gay) about their sex lives Again I think you're right to say sex for many couples tails off after a while; especially if a couple go on to have kids, or work long hours.

However I know couples who have been together for years, and still have a rampant and varied sex life. They say the key to have a prolonged sex life is to make time for sex (if they have long working hours) and to keep things fresh; different positions, massages, varying types of sex, different locations and using 'marital aids'-- all to avoid boredom.

So I'm of the opinion that how long romance and rampant sex lasts for in a r'ship depends on the tastes of the two people, and how effort or comprise they put in. As long as both parties communicate honestly with each other, and are happy, that's the main thing

On the other matter, I know women who have no qualms about putting it about and have FWBs or even just one-night stands: When I worked at a restuarant, most of my colleagues were female; most the singletons certainly wasted no time in preying on my straight male colleagues, without any qualms afterwards! I believe the ladette culture has awoken this mindset amongst women-- although I imagine it's always been there!

Not heard of the term "nymphomania" Parsy?

As a generalisation I do not believe that at all. Of course, it's true for some, but I'm sure there are plenty of men who always have a soft spot in their heart for a previous lover, just like there are women who are sexual predators and forget a partner as soon as he's out the door, let alone let him in her heart.

I agree Wouter I was gonna say the same thing. My bf has been married and known to have cheated on his wife (she knew) but he has never cheated on me as hes with me everynight unless hes at work. I have complete trust but I do know of a certain ex gf that he never cheated on either and he still has a spot for her but is no longer in love or loves her but remembers her in great detail. And I have had many ex bfs who still continue to talk or call me on the phone and want to help me or what not but being in a relationship I refuse to talk back because I dont think its right. (I know run on)

Cindy

Some of the posts in this thread make no sense to me whatsoever and got me pretty annoyed (a bit like Astron ) but I have no real need to comment further as Astron, AdrienAsche, Roger Mellie and Tiuri have already said what I wanted to say.

What about mine?
The "annoying" or the "right on man"?

Oh, I liked your comments too. Don't fret!

What about me have I annoyed you.
(if so Im blonde and a girl)
Cindy

Oh dear poor Cyan...never name names!

Don't bring us down Cindy!

You think I would have learnt that from the "which FMFer would you date" thread from ages ago. It was a love-in for certain members, while the rest of us had our hearts broken!

Completely my opinion so don't slate me on this, but I don't really understand Open Relationships.

I feel that if have you go outside of your relationship to feel satisfaction in life then the relationship your in isn't working.

I understand the attraction to other people while being in a relationship, that's natural. But if the person your with is the right person, the thought of hurting them automatically stops anything from happening.

To me personally, Open Relationships just seem a bit wrong. If I have chosen to be with someone then anything I do in my life I want to experience with them.

I can however understand that it might feel perfectly natural to others. It doesn't mean either of us are wrong.

Additional to Open Relationships...I'm not too sure how I'd feel about introducing new people into the bedroom. While as an idea, I can imagine it being fun, realistically I can only foresee it causing problems eventually...

Again though, that's my personal feelings and opinion. Not everyone is the same.

To sum up how I see stuff like this...think Marmite. Some do, Some Don't.

Am I on the bad side?


If so, it's because I'm young and naive.

:puppydogface

Oh dear. Dont worry be happy. LOL
Hell most of the people on this board know Im off my rooker and half of the time I dont even make sense to myself. I tend to get a free pass. Im loved well I think I am.


And Lacey I like you too.
(though are you pregnant? if not I have one up on you sister) with the free pass


I love everybody except that bitch I let stay in my house who stole all my cash, my flat screen tv and my cell phone. I swear if I see her again Im gonna get the neighbor chick whos quite chubby and insists on wearing tight clothes and short shorts and show her chubby thighs to kick her ass. The fuckin bitch. I am not a coward but cant fight Im pregnant.

Cindy

Oh I never saw that one...I remember one about "which FMF's do you really like?" or something similar. That was quickly closed.

No you're on your side and what you choose for yourself is your business. Personally I wouldn't want it for me but if other people do it it's of no concern to me.

Some people on here are so needy. It's all - am I a nice person? Did I say something wrong? Do you love me? WHY WON'T YOU LOVE ME?!?!?!?

Am I a nice person? Why don't you love me Rocky?

It's not about "good" or "bad" it's about being able to spot a post by a person who doesn't care really and just said it for a laugh.
That's what is important young man.

Now get BACK on topic!

I don't like open relationships.
Especially when the couple say they're all lovey-dovey and that they care for each other oh so much. The person I know that does that is shameful, he just says he's in a relationship so he can say he has a girlfriend but he doesn't care he just wants so much pussy because he's a greedy bastard.
Urgh, hate him and to think I have blood relation with him sickens me.
Crap I rambled, but it was on topic, kinda.



Happy?

Perfect!

Cameron, I wouldn't be me if I didn't get you annoyed every now and then. Would I?

That's about the smartest thing that's been said in this thread so far.

With respect for everyone who has responded and shared their feelings and values I have to say that I place greater weight on the comments of those who are or have been in a long-term gay male relationship and have been faced with real temptation at a time when the relationship was "treading water". By a LTR I mean one that has passed the 5-7 year mark.

It is right for those who have yet to be in a real relationship to hold ideals and perhaps they will have the chance to live those ideals. If so then they should be applauded. But if your ideals are based on Hollywood cinema then you may be in for a rude awakening. At the moment I can't flip back to the original post and link, but as I recall it reported that something like 75% of all gay male relationships in San Francisco are open relationships (I'll go back and check). So take note. Most likely it will not be the rose garden that you imagine. With that said I still hold that a commited loving relationship is supreme (note that I did not say monogamous).

And to set the record straight, I actually tend toward monogamy myself. But I'm realistic about what I see around me (confirmed by the study in San Francisco).

EDIT:
Now I'm confused. Is it 50% or 75%? Either way.
Unless there are more details not in the article I would say that the study has a flaw. There is no indication that the length of the relationship was taken into consideration. There is a big difference between a (gay male) relationship where they have been together for 10 years and one where they have been together for 2. I think that such a study should be restricted to couples who have been together for 7 years or more. (You'll probably find that it's more than 75% that are "open".)

Yes, I admit I have not had a LTR-- but it doesn't stop me talking with or observing couples (straight or gay) who have. Certainly my friends are not the pretentious, proud or reticent types: Very much tell-it-how-it-is types (they wouldn't be my friends otherwise!)-- so they wouldn't bullshit me In fact being outside of the trees, means I can see the woods

Thus I am realistic about what I see around me too-- I certainly don't base my ideals around Hollywood movie cliches-- I'm too down-to-earth and Notts for that. Nor do I have any expectations of what a r'ship will turn out to be: I have enough nouse to realise every r'ship one has is different; facing different challenges and baggage, which need to be discussed. I realise enough to know that is where r'ships tend to falter, when open/honest communication breaks down-- which I wouldn't get involved with somebody who can't be candid. As for resisting temptation... well I've resisted it so far As I maintain, sex doesn't happen accidentally... I'm sure if I can keep it in my pants, other men can (although window-shopping is fine by me)

Can we really draw synologies from a small sample of gay men in San Fransico? If I did a survey about attitudes towards lesbianism in a small town in Saudi Arabi, and then repeated that study in Hebden Bridge, I imagine I would get wildly different results! My point is here, if you want to do a survey like that, you really ought to do it globally and with a much larger sample-- after all a few swallows don't make a summer (or a gay man )

As it happens my own social circle disproves the survey-- it's more a case of 75% of gay LTR are closed-- they a lot more dedicated and stable than many straight couples I know. As with most surveys, it's a case of "they didn't ask me" syndrome.

Yes Parsy, I may have not had the life experience or the miles on the clock you have-- so you can 'patronise' (for want of a better word) me to a certain extent However what I do have, is a lot of common sense (I'm always told I have!)

i'm in an LTR, 5 years and my personal best and to be honest the temptation is there after so many years of the same winky lol...but i do try to resist.

Polygamy is being mean to parrots, isn't it?

Yeah, usually having an unconventional number of birds on your arm.

Why would people be mean to birds?
Birds are cute.

A "random" sample of 556 within a population is statistically significant. It's more than enough. (the operative term here is "random").
However, the survey only speaks about San Francisco. It doesn't even speak about New York.
Further, given the subject matter, San Francisco is a sample of "interest" while a small town in Saudi Arabia would not be.
You have to understand something about how scientific research works (much of it is b/s I admit). A survey is done about a certain population and the results published. Another survey may say the opposite. Both are valid for other researchers to pursue a similar study. And so it goes.

Because San Francisco with its large gay male population is a place of interest for such a study the results are of interest. One might speculate that other large gay male population centers might yield similar results. And a survey may be done there to see if the results are the same.

Britain certainly has a different culture than the US, but TBH I would be surprised to learn that more than 50% of gay male LTRs in London are totally monogamous (i.e. not "open" or do not include some level of "cheating"). Again, by LTR I mean a relationship where the two partners have been in a committed relationship for at least five years (seven would be better). For shorter relationships I would consider the results to be less reliable to speak about longevity.

You make a good point here. It was my mistake and I used to wrong word.
I meant to say that the "passion" in most romantic relationships lasts about 12 to 18 months. Not romance. Sorry about that.
Yes, romance takes many forms over a long term relationship. Romance is not about sex while passion, I would say, is.

I would venture to say that whether a "LONG"-term relationship stays monogamous or not depends on how important sex is to the partners. Obviously those boys in San Francisco hold sex to be an important part of their lives (while you have said that sex is not that important to you).

I'm sure the surveys per se are sound as far as quantitative analysis and methodology go, a "random" sample within the target audience.

However what of the results? San Fransico may be an "area of interest", but gay men don't just live gay-heavy places (such as SF, Brighton, Grand Canaria and so on). It could be argued that open r'ships are more likely in those places, because there is more scope for them to develop.

You talk of (gay) culture in Britain being different, but then mention trends in just London: You may be right about suspicion that over half gays in a LTR are in "open" r'ships (I couldn't comment, I don't live in the capital): However don't forget London only represents around 13% of the British populace {i}, and my gay friends who are in LTR (as you defined it) live outside London and mostly round my area.

I know that ~75% of my 'sample' are in commited r'ships and the idea of copping off with other men is an anathema... believe me, if any of them had copped off with another man, I'd know about it! Believe it or not, I'm frequently an 'agony aunt' for them

But again, I wouldn't say this representative of gay men as a whole, any more than the SF survey is; I'd guess is more to do with the sort of people I befriend, or perhaps the culture of my area. I think it shows you can do all the surveys all you want; the results of such quantitative analysis are all very well, but are nothing without context!



Again this may be the case in your experiences and social circle, but I can't see how one can make such a generalisation, even if we substitute the word romance with passion; as you say yourself, it depends how important sex is for the two people.

I'm sure it's true in some cases; as deeper/more intimate feelings develop between two people, sex is less 'necessary' to bond. However I know plenty of couples (both gay and straight) who still can't get enough of each other sexually, even after the seven-year itch... I often get to hear about their sex lives, to the point of TMI:lol (we don't do New York-style pretention in Notts )

I concede that if two people have differing sex drives, then an open r'ship is going to be likely considered; if it works for them, then great. However I don't think it's inevitible: I think a sensible and assertive couple can negotiate a comprise on the sex front: I know a LTR couple where she isn't that fussed by sex, whereas the bloke loves it-- so they agree on a 'diet' of twice a week-- works for them. From what observe, any healthy LTR is based on just that, comprised.

My main point here is that I firmly believe none us can make generalisations about all gay LTRs based on our experiences, anecdotal evidence, local culture or context-less surveys-- simply because each (gay) LTR is unique its dynamics and 'parameters'

{i} Plus London is far more multi-cultural than anywhere else in the UK, with foreign-born people from all over the world!

I mentioned London because I thought it would be the best British comparison with San Francisco (and New York). Or maybe Brighton?
Of course there are gays in Omaha, Nebraska! I suspect that the proportion of gay male open relationships in Omaha is less than in San Francisco or New York.


The study was done in San Francisco. Don't be shocked by the results.

I think I agreed with Roger up to his last few words which somehow implies that sex may not be an importnt part of a monogamous relationship. Well, our relationship may have started after the peak of our sexual prime (we were both in our thirties) and, indeed, was not actually that "passionate" in the first few months. But after 10 years, our relationship is both far more sexual and intense than it was then and, for Roger's information, the sex is an essential and intrinsic part of the relationship. I somehow doubt we are exceptional.

BTW my personal sample above of a half dozen or so current gay relationships which are all monogamous was based on London (and incudes a couple of Roger's "foreign-born people"). Brighton and New York adds one apiece. I have been reminded about one friend (he came to dinner the other night) who is in a non-sexual relationship with another guy (live together/joint accounts and "together" for over 5 years) but it is a non-sexual non-romantic relationship and therefore sexually "open" for each of them but I don't think it really counts! Funnily enough he's an American!

^^^
I don't doubt any of that (and I'm sure that you're speaking for yourself when you say that the 30s was past your sexual prime ) and I find your story to be happy news.

However, the San Francisco study makes a statement and I have no doubt about its accurateness.
(As I said before, I tend to monogamy myself, but am realistic about what is around me.)

I think that this sums it up pretty well really :



It reminds me of this woman I know who had been married to a man for 30 odd years and that geezer had been cheating on her from day ONE and she never noticed a thing !

The irony was that the main reason she had married him in the first place, was that HE was a measly little thing with no sex-appeal to women and a very low sex-drive to boot. She had initially thought she would be SAFE with HIM!

And all he did was to spend his 30 years of married life on a fuckfest with billions of other women !

How does it?
That's cheating on a partner and an "open" relationship is when BOTH people are fully aware of the situation.
These are two completely different things.

Hey Sam ! Je suis tout à fait d'accord avec toi , mais c'est le deuxième degré[b] dans la citation de Corius qui m'a bien fait rigoler. Appearances are ( can be ?) deceptive.

So, are we to deduce from this thread that American guys are all a bunch of slags?

Yeah and Parsy knows most of them.

probably

And US, ( European) gayers are the most righteous people on earth ! (héhé !)

(sorry Parsifal )

Sam ne parle pas le francais.

Paha.

Ribzy is actually a 54 years old woman called Maureen Ainsworth.
Here's her photo.



*and for the last time Maureen...I'm really not interested.

I told you not to tell anyone!

I wanted to be a boy, but the plastic surgeons said I didn't need it.
It's not fair.

Well I wouldn't disagree with what you put above : I certainly don't doubt you are exceptional, and I don't doubt that your r'ship is more sexual now than was. I would believe for many (if not most) people in monogamous r'ships sex is important: I've found that in my experience (IE anecdotal evdience) this is the case; makes sense to me, since sex is important to those people as individuals as well-- as I'm sure it is for most people. Nothing wrong with any of that of course

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, concerning what I wrote in my last paragraph BB? Just to be clear I was not trying to imply anything; the key word was "may", which I was using advisedly as to not generalise (note the bold above in the quoted): That is to say that sex is important to some monogamous couples, but not to others. I had erroneously thought what I had written in the rest of my prose would've made that clear, so my apologies that final bit was ambiguous

"How" important sex is, doesn't simply you want sex or not, which is what you appear to inferring (not what I implied)-- but shades in between. I hope you're not appearing to falling into your old trap of thinking sex is the-be-all-end-all, and defining yourself by sexuality. I'm sure that there are many couples (especially older ones) who have been together for years, but don't now don't have sex, but remain in an closed r'ship; they still are intimate, but in different ways-- just hugs and kissing for instance (again anecdotal evidence ).

My salient point here, is that I don't believe sex isn't necessarily the be-all-and-end-all. This comment isn't aimed at you personally BB, but I find that there are (highly) sexed people out there who can't/don't get that there are people (or indeed couples) who are happy not to have sex. Sex important for those for whom it's important: Plus sex drives can fluctuate as they age; I would guess that's do with hormones, lifestyle, general mental/physical wellbeing and so on. I've never really sought it (although if Tomasz asked, I'd be easier than a two-piece jigsaw

Everybody is different, thus every couple is uniqe-- different horses for different courses. Thus (to retread what I said earlier) nobody can generalise objectively about such things via surveys, personal experience or anecdotal evidence. As long as couples are happy and communicate honestly about their feelings, I believe that's the main thing



Ah right, I see where you're coming from now Parsy . It was the juxtaposition of what you said previously: "Britain certainly has a different culture than the US", then you talked about just London-- threw me a bit: Thence what I said in response was just a pointer that the culture of London is very different to that elsewhere in the UK (up here we speak to strangers on public transport, shop-keepers smile and everything!). However I see you were just trying to compare like to like



Oh not shocked by the results at all, I've visited SF. Plus I've seen Paul O'Grady interview Armistis Maupin (sp?). Interestingly Nottingham has the seventh highest gay population in the country, but most the gays in LTR (longer than five years) I know of round here are very much monogamous-- go figure [shrug]



Well Maennliche, I'm not sure you can compare one country with an entire continent... as we've discovered, regions within a country are tricky enough

I hear there's a monogamous gay male LTR in Indiana and another one in Nebraska. (I'm not sure if shagging livestock is considered cheating though.)


Oh that's ok männlichen. You impressed me with your French so you're forgiven (notwithstanding that you live in France ).


Ha! I have it on authority that my father was hot to trot well into his seventies (it helped that he had a wife 20 years younger). And the only thing that stopped him then was that he had prostate surgery after which he lost interest in sex. I know a few more "oldies" in this town who have trouble keeping it in their pants.

Forget about the couple in Nebraska. I just read this on a dating site from someone in Omaha:


To my knowledge the couple in Indiana is still good though.

I'm sure there are! Bear in mind, that I said "especially", not "all" (and again on anecdotal evidence). Anyway if they're still getting it, good luck to them I say I hope I have the energy that Ken Dodd has when I get to his age, I bet he's like sewing machine... oof, just given myself a rather distasteful image there, that didn't fill me full of plumptiousness To quote that other great comedian, Les Dawson:
"Marriage is an institution-- and that's where a lot of couples end up"

What you said above Parsy, has remind me of this clip-- about growing old (dis)gracefully

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmwQD1Y2k6g

This was posted in the Hitchhiking thread, but since that thread is back on topic (hitchhiking ) and I don't want to divert it I'll say a few things on the subject here.


There seems to be a few sanctimonious idealistic whiners on here.

And it is not for anyone to make critical judgments about other people's chosen lifestyles. It happens that thousands of gay male couples are in open relationships by choice and it works for them. To say that those people live with the morals of a sewer rat is biggoted, stupid and narrowminded.

I'll give you an example. I know several gay male LTRs here in New York that are open relationships. One of the couples whom I've known for many years are in their 60s and have been together for over 40 years. They are looking forward to celebrating their big FIVE-O several years hence. I know them very well and know that they have not been monogamous over the years. Yet it is one of the most solid gay male relationships that I have ever seen. I would also venture to say that if it weren't for their occasional trysts, threesomes and side boyfriends (and at least one girlfriend that I know of) then they probably would not be together today. (And no, I wasn't one of them.) Each of them is the beneficiary of the other's will.

The other LTRs that I know of that are "open" are also very solid and it is my annecdotal observation that in the longterm, among gay male relationships, the open ones are more solid and secure than the 100% monogamous ones (and one never really knows for sure - unless one lives in a place where there is no availability.).

Regardless of what others have said on the matter previously on here, I seriously doubt that the situation in the UK is significantly different than in the US (compare London and maybe Manchester with San Francisco and New York - no, Nottingham doesn't count).

If anyone on here should be ashamed it's not me.

As for the "offensive" remark, it was pertinent to the situation. However, one has to be careful about speaking the truth because many people don't want to hear it. Many (most?) would not have been offended by that remark. However, Ebenezer is very sensitive and I recognized that and felt that an apology was in order.

And in case you're wondering, I've been in several deeply commited relationships, all of them monogamous, none of them "open". As a matter of fact I ended one of those relationships precisely because the other guy wanted it to be open and I didn't. He wouldn't budge on the topic and I ended it. It was extremely painful for me because I loved him very much ( ). However, I'm accepting of open relationships and the choices that those people make and therefore defend them and respect them.

Again, I'm not the one on here who should be ashamed.

What? You're a homosexual? You shag other men? SINNER!!!
Stop living with the morals of a sewer rat and repent!

Loosen up a little bit.

You're in a hole. Stop digging.

If my boyfriend let anyone else fuck him I'd beat the shit out of him.

Sometimes it's best to say nothing.