"Yes I like him"

[Weltall84]

At least they're honest about their emotions and realize that they themselves have issues to work out. Not all the characters have the burden of self-awareness. I'm looking at you, Alex and Linda.

Yeah seems they missed the handouts when Self awareness was being distributed.

[redneck01]

#NotAllWomen

Guilty conscience much? I said nothing about women, only generalizing about males. Either you are a male embarrassed by being taken advantage of, or a woman embarrassed by taking advantage of men.

Or perhaps a woman embarrassed by delivering what the attractive male expected.

[Warrl]

Well yes, I grant all the hypotheticals and levels of reality, but in context do you really doubt that redneck01 was indirectly making a comment about women?

Yes, I do seriously doubt that "guys make assumptions like this" is a comment about women.

[redneck01]

Well yes, I grant all the hypotheticals and levels of reality, but in context do you really doubt that redneck01 was indirectly making a comment about women?

I don't think that women have any obligation to treat all the men they go out with alike, and I am absolutely certain that men do not treat attractive and less attractive women alike.

In an open relationship, someone is going to be the loser, and if you don't know who it is, you are probably going to be the loser. The implication of my remark was that the girl who provides one of her male friends with a threesome is a loser, and all her other male friends other than the one she does the threesome for are also losers, that in open relationships there are few winners, all of them males, and a great many losers, most of them males, that everyone is going to get hurt, and everyone who gets something out of it gets something out of it by hurting someone else. That Thad was a winner, that everyone else involved were losers, and that even Thad was hurt.

[Lelobebo]

Well yes, I grant all the hypotheticals and levels of reality, but in context do you really doubt that redneck01 was indirectly making a comment about women?

I don't think that women have any obligation to treat all the men they go out with alike, and I am absolutely certain that men do not treat attractive and less attractive women alike.

In an open relationship, someone is going to be the loser, and if you don't know who it is, you are probably going to be the loser. The implication of my remark was that the girl who provides one of her male friends with a threesome is a loser, and all her other male friends other than the one she does the threesome for are also losers, that in open relationships there are few winners, all of them males, and a great many losers, most of them males, that everyone is going to get hurt, and everyone who gets something out of it gets something out of it by hurting someone else. That Thad was a winner, that everyone else involved were losers, and that even Thad was hurt.

It really bothers me to have the term "losers" and "winners" thrown around regarding relationships. Relationships don't have to be a zero-sum situation where an increase on one side is always a decrease on the other side.

[Warrl]

It really bothers me to have the term "losers" and "winners" thrown around regarding relationships. Relationships don't have to be a zero-sum situation where an increase on one side is always a decrease on the other side.

Nobody said it has to be zero-sum. In fact, I read it as saying that open relationships are negative-sum. Which IMHO is usually true - but not necessarily always.

[clif]

Well yes, I grant all the hypotheticals and levels of reality, but in context do you really doubt that redneck01 was indirectly making a comment about women?

Yes, I do seriously doubt that "guys make assumptions like this" is a comment about women.

Again technically correct. And again based on completely ignoring the implications of what he said.

Gee, if there were only some way of telling if redneck01 thought he was talking about women by implication. Oh wait.

... The implication of my remark was that the girl who provides one of her male friends with a threesome is a loser, ...

No, I'm pretty sure that redneck01 thinks he is talking about women. Along with talking about men of course.

Of course we also have

Guilty conscience much? I said nothing about women, only generalizing about males. Either you are a male embarrassed by being taken advantage of, or a woman embarrassed by taking advantage of men. Or perhaps a woman embarrassed by delivering what the attractive male expected.

I'm pretty definitely male, so that leaves embarrassed by being taken advantage of. And if you define being taken advantage of by the criteria of spending money of a woman and not getting a threesome or at least sex out of it, then okay. But I'm not terribly embarrassed by it. Of course from my point of view, I've not been taken advantage of, because I've always gotten something out of it, primarily enjoyment. And if it led to something else, that's okay too.

In an open relationship, someone is going to be the loser, and if you don't know who it is, you are probably going to be the loser. The implication of my remark was that the girl who provides one of her male friends with a threesome is a loser, and all her other male friends other than the one she does the threesome for are also losers, that in open relationships there are few winners, all of them males, and a great many losers, most of them males, that everyone is going to get hurt, and everyone who gets something out of it gets something out of it by hurting someone else.

And that has to be the craziest thing I've ever heard. And that's interpreting it so that you aren't conflating open relationships with threesomes. Maybe for Trev/Laura and Chris/Jess you could explain how Jess was a loser and how either Laura got nothing out of it or got what she got out of it by hurting someone else.

[LadyObvious23]

Sounds more like nice guy syndrome. :/ Because somehow if you buy a woman a drink,she owes you something. Or if your in an open relationship that your not getting anything.



It's natural to get jealous but I think if it gets bad then maybe Katia and Thad should sit down. And talk about it.

[benwhoski]

In an open relationship, someone is going to be the loser, and if you don't know who it is, you are probably going to be the loser. The implication of my remark was that the girl who provides one of her male friends with a threesome is a loser, and all her other male friends other than the one she does the threesome for are also losers, that in open relationships there are few winners, all of them males, and a great many losers, most of them males, that everyone is going to get hurt, and everyone who gets something out of it gets something out of it by hurting someone else. That Thad was a winner, that everyone else involved were losers, and that even Thad was hurt.

Wow. A lot of misconceptions about open relationships here. It is entirely possible to have healthy open relationships where no one is "losing". Sure, there are those who treat it as a competition (but those types exist in all relationship models, not just open ones).

The equating open relationships with threesomes is also a huge misconception. I'm polyamorous (one form of open relationship). There are no threesomes in my relationships. My relationships with my partners are separate, although they know about one another (likewise with their other partners).

In my experience, it's not about who is getting more of what from whom. It's about whether each person's relationship needs are being met.

That said, I get the impression here that Katia wants to keep things open, but Thad would prefer to date someone exclusively. In that case, Katia's jealousy may not be rational, but it's understandable. If Thad wants exclusivity, and pursues someone else, that means he will not be available to her as a romantic interest anymore. Just because you know your preferred relationship styles don't mesh, doesn't mean you necessarily stop liking the person and feeling a bit jealous or confused.

Katia's new to dating in general. She doesn't know what she really wants. Going through these feelings is part of figuring that out.

[cursormortis]

Sounds more like nice guy syndrome. :/ Because somehow if you buy a woman a drink,she owes you something. Or if your in an open relationship that your not getting anything.

Sounds to me like he's conflating open relationships with cuckoldry.

As for the comic: can't have your cake and eat it, too, Katia. If Thad can come to terms with you being non-exclusive, you can do the same for him.

[Caliban]

Everyone has some inherently selfish tendencies. Some people are better at recognizing them and dealing with them than others. Katia is a step ahead of most people - she's recognizing her selfish urge (jealousy) and trying to understand and deal with it rather than just accepting it like a lot of people do. (i.e "If I feel bad/jealous/angry it must be someone else's fault.")

[TheNewCecilo]

Sounds more like nice guy syndrome. :/ Because somehow if you buy a woman a drink,she owes you something. Or if your in an open relationship that your not getting anything.



It's natural to get jealous but I think if it gets bad then maybe Katia and Thad should sit down. And talk about it.

The problem I have with that argument is that, if you ARE In a relationship, and still only giving, then there is a fundamental problem with that relationship. It is supposed to be a partnership, granted if a partner does just keep giving, and giving and giving mindlessly, they have other problems, other than the faulty relationship.

As for the topic at hand, to those saying that an open relationship doesn't have to have a negative, it is true, it doesn't have to be if all the people involved are okay with it, but I do not believe Thad is actually okay with it, I think he is trying to stay with her, in the hopes that when she has had her fun, and he is still there she will wind up with him. And maybe that mindset is changing.

[Warrl]

Well yes, I grant all the hypotheticals and levels of reality, but in context do you really doubt that redneck01 was indirectly making a comment about women?

Yes, I do seriously doubt that "guys make assumptions like this" is a comment about women.

Again technically correct. And again based on completely ignoring the implications of what he said.

The only implication I'm ignoring is one that anything a man says about gender or relationships is necessarily anti-women and you should keep reading it until you find how it's anti-women - because failure to do so is anti-women.

Sorry, that's where I feel like you're coming from.

[redneck01]

And hiding not too far behind that are several unpleasant corollaries about how women should be treated.

And these unpleasant corollaries are?

[redneck01]

It is entirely possible to have healthy open relationships where no one is "losing".

In practice, in open relationships, one man gets a lot more and better sex than any of the other men. And the other man picks up the socks.

A man can have several girls, and consciously try to treat them each the same, and if he tries hard, will sort of mostly succeed. But usually he will not try and if he tries will not succeed. A girl won't even try, and in the unlikely event she tries, even less will she succeed.

So, always winners and losers. It is a competition, not everyone can win, but everyone can lose.