Probably the first fabcast novela of its kind. a mini series in our blogworld. this six-part couple fabcast featured a relationship in evolution. now on an open phase of sexual intimacy. truth be told, i know one of them since. and he might be reading this soon. :-) truth be told again, i was surprised to hear about the fabcast, actually the troikast, conducted in secrecy. lol. but moving on, i could only remark 'been there, done that'.
my own experimentation with openness happened during my relationship with coffee entrepreneur. cc-ce relationship started monogamous, exclusive. but cc, ever the wandering eye, was soon engaging in secret casual sex with others. after more than a year of this, snd instances when bf almost found out, cc decided to come out with his secret to his bf, a fit of religious guilt as motivator. ce was dumbfounded, quietly enraged. but instead of breaking up with cc, ce quietly requested to open the relationship. and cc, relieved that the penalty was not as harsh, even pleasurable! and thus started the open relationship.
cc recalls the first time they had a third party in their bedroom. they actively searched the town and found this attractive guy willing to be the third party. it wasnt as great or as hot as they imagined. the guy just 'allowed' them to 'ravage' him. it. was laila dee for sharing.
but instead of turning them off, cc-ce continued to look for the perfect third person. then third and fourth persons.. then a fifth somewhere. yeah you get the drift. but instead of bringing them closer, it drove them apart. something within cc, his religious guilt, his romantic ideals just kept on asserting. in the process. his respect for himself, his bf diminished. and that spelled doom for his relationship.
i know about several long-term couples, 10 years and beyond, going strong. All of them are in exclusive relationships with philanderings on the side, one partner more than the other. none of them open, truly open. ignorance is bliss seems to be the operative condition.
but i offer no guidelines, no directions. it can work, i suppose, on a conceptual level. but openness cannot work for me. i know that now.