Can you really be in a committed relationship yet still sleep with other people?

[notanumber]

I am a regular and I haven't namechanged, so it would me nice if we could sidestep any troll accusations.

I've been pondering this since reading the interview with George Michael in last weekend's Guardian.

Michael seems like a slightly troubled but very likeable man. He has been with his boyfriend Kenny Goss for a very long time and as such they are one of Celebrity Royalty's fêted couples.

However, Michael -in this interview and previously - has made clear that he routinely has sex with other people (clearly this is with Goss' consent or at least knowledge).

Now if they're happy, that's fine, I don't have a problem with someone having multiple sexual partners if that's their thing. I just find it very hard to buy that a couple can have this kind of understanding and for their relationship to be really truly committed.

It is hard work being committed to someone, and being sexually faithful is a big part of what makes it hard. The pay-off though (in my opinion), is a truly deep, fulfilling committed relationship. Basically, can someone be 'the one' if you routinely shag other people?

Of course, it's none of my bloody business what George Michael (or anyone else for that matter) does with his willy for fun. I'm not judging casual sex.

I would also like to stress that this is nothing to do with homosexuality for me - I'd feel similarly about a heterosexual couple who portray themselves as deeply committed yet regularly sleep with other people. I would be asking the question, well are you really that bloody committed then?

It really really isn't me being icky about anal sex. I don't get why someone would want a fist up their fanjo either, but this would in no way make me question their commitment to their relationship if it was something they only ever did with their partner.

So what do you think?

LeQueen, am so speechless at that total set of generalisations and cliches about non-monogamy that I'd have to conclude that, yes, your music tastes aren't mine.

tbh anything that's 'promoted by most of the world's largest religions' doesn't appeal terribly, given that said religions have also promoted all sorts of lovely wars and quite frequently the death, 'medical' treatment or social exclusion of loony non-monogamous queers like me....

Let's be fair, an awful lot of art, literature and music celebrates, if not "soulless shagging" then endless variations on non-monogamous love. This doesn't mean monogamy isn't the dominant working model in Western society, though.

I'm trying to think of ANYTHING I like musically that actually unequivocally celebrates hetero monogamy- errrrrm....not quite there...

Something by The Carpenters? Muscrat Love?

don't most love songs just talk about 'us' or 'me and you' or 'you and I' or variations thereof, there's not much talk of gender in most of them is there (obv 'when a man loves a woman' is exempt from this example - lol) ?

hehehe....'We've Only Just Begun' by the Carpenters is the only one I can think of...well it does have a certain kitsch value....

hehehe....'We've Only Just Begun' by the Carpenters is the only one I can think of...well it does have a certain kitsch value....

'Together Forever' by Rick Astley?

ahhh lovely rick

very romantic

How about the many cultures were either the man or woman is allowed to have more than one wife? Does that mean no one in those cultures are commited to their spouses?

Just like to point out there is a difference between what a religion promotes and what so-called religious people promote. For example the Bible tells people to go and spread the word, "Christians" decided to go and kill people until they converted, not exactly "spreading the word".

'So, correct me if I'm wrong. But, being so in love and comitted to your DH, that you only have sex with him for the rest of your life is indicative of poor self-esteem, and narrow-mindedness, with conotations of slavery and is typically symptomatic of a bad relationsip???

Being 'in love and committed to your DH seems to me to be the ideal state-like LeQueen, I am amazed that it could possibly be indictative of poor self esteem and slavery!!! I think that it shows a high degree of emotional intelligence. DH and I made wedding vows to be faithful to each other. I always keep promises and I wouldn't have married him if I thought that he didn't.

piscesmoon, no one actually said that to LQ, it's a conclusion she jumped to all by herself.

What people are saying on this thread is each to their own and no one has the monopoly on Real Love.

That is such a good idea. a Board Game -- Monopoly, Real Love.

I'm glad that no one said it-I thought I hadn't read it! I still think that you can't sleep around and be committed to one person. As a DC I would have been horrified if my parents had thought it OK and I would have been very judgemental! I would have thought them immature in the extreme.

"To me, seeing a relationship as making your body someone else's is just a sign of a bad relationship".

My body does belong to my husband and his belongs to me - it is a purely sexual thing for us in that respect, total ownership of each other - that's the turn on.

It doesn't mean he controls my life, or I his, we are individuals.

Nothing, no-one, will ever convince me that true commitment = having other lovers.

Monogamy - Now there's a board game!

Much for fun than monopoly.

I haven't read all the messages but i guess it boils down to what sex means to you. Increasingly these days I feel that there is a trend to 1:joke about sex using lewd terms. 2: Treat it very casually, and 3: demean it with terms like 'shag' 'bonk' etc. I feel sex has increasingly become relegated to simply another bodily function like eating say, or sleeping, or some purely self-pleasure seeking recreational sport, with no emotion involved. Some people today seem to literally hop from partner to partner in very quick sucession, and I can't help but feel confused by their actions. I cannot separate sex from love and fidelity, and don't believe you can 'make love' to a person you feel no sense of committment to, let alone love.

I may be old-fashioned even though I'm in my early thirties. But I guess I will die old-fashioned. I'd rather.

malificence my point was in response to someone saying that they never wanted to be in a monogamous relationship again as all it did was make physical ownership of someone else's body the be all and end all. I'm in agreement with you - the thrill and the many layered depth of long term faithfulness is partly from that very thing, keeping your bodies only for eachother - but freely given, not because you own the other person's. You own yours, and give it - you don't own the other person's. Because if your body truly belonged to your husband he could do what he damn well pleased whenever he liked, and that is not what it's about, is it, You're talking like I am (I think) of keeping bodies only for eachother.

Oh, I don't know about that - the thought of him doing whatever he damn well pleased with me despite my protestations, well lets just say it's led to many a good night.
You certainly couldn't enact a rape fantasy with someone you didn't love and trust 110%, not if you are sane, in any case!

I know I'm being flippant, of course he never does anything I don't actually want him to do - I just like the notion that he "owns" me.

I don't agree in any way that monogamy is merely a "fetish" - my form of extreme monogamy may well be, but not in general.

Humans are NOT monogamous. naturally. that much has been proven as fact. but humans DO have their own spirits and thoughts which allows for every colour of the spectrum as far as sexuality and relationships go.

I personally believe that certain people (couples) CAN have open relationships and be confident enough in their love for one another that sex is no different to eating or drinking in that it is merely something that you can do with your bodies. Others feel the need to own another completely and if you get 2 of those people together then things also work very well.

Monogamy though is a very Victorian notion mostly for the purposes of control (as most things were) and talking about sex was unheard of.

I for one am VERY grateful that we have moved on and away from that mind set. and it dismays me that certain elements of humanity STILL feel the need to preach out of date and irrelevant ideals to everyone and expects them to comply because their imaginary deity of choice says so.

people keep talking about "Feelings" for these other people.

what if the only feeling is lust? you don't HAVE to love somebody to have sex with them. (of course it is more complex with women, but i feel that some of the women here are seeing it from a female perspective only where the 2 things are NOT separate.)

For me personally, more than one partner wouldn't feel like commitment. But if there are people on here saying that they are committed to their partner while sleeping with others, then the answer is obviously yes. It'd be difficult to argue against someone's actual experience.