Platonic bed sharing while married.

[Belk]

Oh come on. The majority of heterosexuals will not be tempted to have sex with a person of the same sex, but that may change considerably when two heterosexuals of the opposite sex are sharing a bed. Yes, yes, self-control, blah blah - but why even put yourself in the position where you have to exert self-control or where there is temptation? What's the point? I will put myself out there and say that if I could imagine having a really, really close friend of the opposite sex, and for some reason we are in bed - because he's meeting some need my husband doesn't meet - and we're snuggling .. well, maybe just me and my Gallic temperament but I would be tempted .. particularly if intimacy was something missing from my marriage.

(I have never been in these circumstances, so this is all a guess.)

Ah. So the reason some people are having a hard time with this is they can't imagine themselves maintaining a platonic relationship with their friend? They are afraid their sex drive will kick in as soon as the lights go off and then it's all bets are off? That was kind of what I figured but thank you.

 

[Hetta]

Ah. So the reason some people are having a hard time with this is they can't imagine themselves maintaining a platonic relationship with their friend? They are afraid their sex drive will kick in as soon as the lights go off and then it's all bets are off? That was kind of what I figured but thank you.

I can't speak for other people, only for myself.

But no, I never said that my "sex drive will kick in as soon as the lights go off and then it's all bets are off?" I gave a quite specific circumstance based upon what someone else said - that this friend may be supplying something that the spouse does not - and that, imo, is some dangerous ground to tread.

If your spouse is not supplying affection to the point that you have to chase it elsewhere - either make up your mind that can live without affection, or divorce that spouse and marry your friend. That just seems more straightforward to me.

 

[Belk]

I can't speak for other people, only for myself.

Understood, but I would guess that others reactions are in line with yours if not exactly the same.

But no, I never said that my "sex drive will kick in as soon as the lights go off and then it's all bets are off?" I gave a quite specific circumstance based upon what someone else said - that this friend may be supplying something that the spouse does not - and that, imo, is some dangerous ground to tread.

That is what this line of your response seemed to imply

The majority of heterosexuals will not be tempted to have sex with a person of the same sex, but that may change considerably when two heterosexuals of the opposite sex are sharing a bed.

Or am I missing something?

]If your spouse is not supplying affection to the point that you have to chase it elsewhere - either make up your mind that can live without affection, or divorce that spouse and marry your friend. That just seems more straightforward to me.

Why? If you acknowledge that you can not get all of your needs meet by one person why must this specific need be supplied by ONLY your spouse? If your relationship is good otherwise and your SO does not feel threatened by this interaction why is it an issue? Why is it presumed that you should only have this level of intimacy with one person?

 

[Hetta]

Understood, but I would guess that others reactions are in line with yours if not exactly the same.

And again, I don't speak for anyone else.

That is what this line of your response seemed to imply.

You missed this:

if I could imagine having a really, really close friend of the opposite sex, and for some reason we are in bed - because he's meeting some need my husband doesn't meet - and we're snuggling .. well, maybe just me and my Gallic temperament but I would be tempted .. particularly if intimacy was something missing from my marriage.

I am specifically quoting a certain situation.

Why? If you acknowledge that you can not get all of your needs meet by one person why must this specific need be supplied by ONLY your spouse? If your relationship is good otherwise and your SO does not feel threatened by this interaction why is it an issue? Why is it presumed that you should only have this level of intimacy with one person?

Obviously there are some needs that a spouse/SO does not supply. I go to friends for some needs, I go to relatives for others. Like most normal people, I don't expect my spouse to supply everything nor do I expect to supply my spouse with everything. That would be a very intense and exhausting relationship. However, when it comes to intimacy, it has always been my expectation, and I believe the expectation of the majority, that intimate needs will be met by the other person in the relationship. Most people (not all, I know) are looking for fidelity and exclusivity when they marry or commit to another person. There is nothing wrong with this expectation. It builds a close, tight knit bond between two people who trust and rely upon each other. That's why infidelity busts marriages wide apart. It's not just the sex, it's the breaking of that bond of exclusivity. Trust is broken and marriages often end.

I don't think it's unreasonable that most people want that one person in their lives to only sleep with them - whether it's actual sleeping or sex. I wouldn't have signed up for life with a man who wanted to sleep with other women - whether sleeping as in sleeping, or sex. I can't conceive of why someone would make such an arrangement but then *shrug* who am I?

 

[bhsmte]

Ah. So the reason some people are having a hard time with this is they can't imagine themselves maintaining a platonic relationship with their friend? They are afraid their sex drive will kick in as soon as the lights go off and then it's all bets are off? That was kind of what I figured but thank you.

I guess it depends what culture a person has grown up with, that helped to shape expectations.

For me, a spouse needing to share a bed with someone of the opposite sex seems "out there" and to me, is something that should be shared by two people within a relationship.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Why am I still reading this thread? LOL ... since I stated my opinion and pretty much accepted that a couple of the posters here simply had a different opinion, and that was that.

I have to say, I pretty much agree with Hetta on a lot of points.

There was a time when, due to illness, my husband wasn't supplying what I needed in marriage. There was no real companionship, no intimacy, and no sex.

At that time, I had a family member (kind of) helping out. We had been friends for many years, he was actually a double-in-law (no blood relation) and I thought of him more-or-less as kind of a brother. We had gone out a few times (not as a date or anything), shooting pool, that kind of thing. Just relaxed and had fun together. I've done this with my brother as well.

At one point in time, I can't recall the reason exactly, we were both tired, and ended up lying down on a king-size bed. Both fully clothed, on top of the covers, each on our own side, not touching. Just resting, and we both slept. When I woke up, I recognized the intimacy of the situation, and to me it had crossed the line. In a way I WAS tempted, because it had been some time since I got what I needed in my marriage, and I had "loved" this man (in a familial, platonic way) for many years.

This was a danger to my marriage, and I immediately put distance between us, no longer finding companionship with him and certainly not sharing the proximity of a bed. We did nothing inappropriate, but it could have led to such (in my mind) and I felt the wise thing was to recognize that and stop it immediately.

I hadn't recognized the danger at first because he was "platonic" to me (as I said, practically a brother in my mind) and seemed safe.

Maybe those kinds of things wouldn't happen to another person ... but I don't think that's likely to be true. I don't think I'm unusual in that. I think MOST people would begin to be tempted in a situation like that.

Why? If you acknowledge that you can not get all of your needs meet by one person why must this specific need be supplied by ONLY your spouse? If your relationship is good otherwise and your SO does not feel threatened by this interaction why is it an issue? Why is it presumed that you should only have this level of intimacy with one person?

What I'm imagining from your scenario is a marriage where - what? They live together, pay the bills together, have a household in common. But the need for intimacy is met outside of marriage by another person? That's not marriage in my book.

Of course I am acknowledging that that is MY position. And I think one that is shared by many. But you, or anyone else, always have the freedom to do what you think is right.

If the question is one of Christian morals, I don't think this falls within what is right in a Christian marriage. Outside of Christ, the world will always do what it wants to do, and that is not my place to legislate, but between every person and God.

(ETA: I realize my last sentence may be taken in the wrong way. I am NOT saying that everyone outside of Christ would do this. Not at all. I realize most non-Christians have morals that would make this wrong in their books as well. I mean no disrespect. My point was simply that I was posting from a Christian perspective, and as such, I don't believe it is our place to morally enforce the world outside of Christianity, especially on strictly interpersonal matters.)

 

[quatona]

I think there's a missing word in the first question.

Which one?

I don't think it's a sign of 'jealousy' to expect your spouse or SO to sleep only with you. But I guess there we differ.

Just to make sure I read the Wikipedia article on "jealousy" and it seems to fit to a T, including the outraged reactions that we see here.
What´s your definition of "jealousy"?

 

[Cute Tink]

Just my 2 cents (took me a long time to read through this thread)...

If this is something that really is ok with all parties involved (including both spouses), then I guess go for it. I don't really get it though and if that's my shortcoming, ok then. I can honestly understand why some people have a problem with it and I think the solution there is: don't do it. I don't think I could handle my significant other sleeping in the same bed with someone else, but that stems from my own jealousy and belief that I'm not good enough for my spouse (my shortcoming, yes, and I should deal with that, but hey, dealing with reality and all).

 

[Hetta]

Which one?

What an understanding of committed partnership/marriage leads to the opinions expressed here (on both ends)?

Just to make sure I read the Wikipedia article on "jealousy" and it seems to fit to a T, including the outraged reactions that we see here.
What´s your definition of "jealousy"?

I don't see outrage, I see a lot of head scratching and bemusement. I'm never outraged about what consenting adults do together, I really don't care. It does confuse me why people marry if they want to share their intimacy with others.

 

[quatona]

I don't see outrage, I see a lot of head scratching and bemusement. I'm never outraged about what consenting adults do together, I really don't care. It does confuse me why people marry if they want to share their intimacy with others.

The explanation is simple (and I have given it a couple of times already):
Because they draw the line what kind of intimacy should be exclusive differently than you, or because for them their marriage is not (or not so much) about exclusivity and trying to limit the actions of their SO but about other, more important things.
Personally, I find it hard to understand that - even though your feelings are different - you are unable to accept these explanations.

So may I ask again: what´s your definition of "jealousy"?

 

[Hetta]

So may I ask again: what´s your definition of "jealousy"?

Someone who is quite obsessive about another person, and cannot bear to think they might even talk to someone else or hang out with someone else - regardless of gender.

I think of jealousy/possessiveness as two sides of the same coin.

But I don't think about it an awful lot.

 

[quatona]

There was a time when, due to illness, my husband wasn't supplying what I needed in marriage. There was no real companionship, no intimacy, and no sex.

At that time, I had a family member (kind of) helping out. We had been friends for many years, he was actually a double-in-law (no blood relation) and I thought of him more-or-less as kind of a brother. We had gone out a few times (not as a date or anything), shooting pool, that kind of thing. Just relaxed and had fun together. I've done this with my brother as well.

At one point in time, I can't recall the reason exactly, we were both tired, and ended up lying down on a king-size bed. Both fully clothed, on top of the covers, each on our own side, not touching. Just resting, and we both slept. When I woke up, I recognized the intimacy of the situation, and to me it had crossed the line. In a way I WAS tempted, because it had been some time since I got what I needed in my marriage, and I had "loved" this man (in a familial, platonic way) for many years.

This was a danger to my marriage, and I immediately put distance between us, no longer finding companionship with him and certainly not sharing the proximity of a bed. We did nothing inappropriate, but it could have led to such (in my mind) and I felt the wise thing was to recognize that and stop it immediately.

I hadn't recognized the danger at first because he was "platonic" to me (as I said, practically a brother in my mind) and seemed safe.

Thanks for sharing this story, Kylissa.
I hope it at least answers the questions of those who refuse to acknowledge that - even though someone is in a marriage/committed relationship - he/she can have a desire to share certain moments with someone else.

What I'm imagining from your scenario is a marriage where - what? They live together, pay the bills together, have a household in common. But the need for intimacy is met outside of marriage by another person? That's not marriage in my book.

Two things, if I may:
1. You forgot tom mention raising kids together, you forgot to mention a lot of fuflilling things in which they may commit to each other (apart from the more or less annoying and troublesome daily stuff).
2. I can´t manage to read from Belk´s post that the married couple doesn´t have intimacy in their marriage. I think he just referred to cases where certain intimacies (which other persons would like to be exclusive) aren´t exclusively met by their spouses.

 

[MoneyGuy]

I would be PO'd if my wife said she wanted to cuddle with another man, in bed or otherwise. I'd expect similar indignation from her if I asked for approval.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Thanks for sharing this story, Kylissa.
I hope it at least answers the questions of those who refuse to acknowledge that - even though someone is in a marriage/committed relationship - he/she can have a desire to share certain moments with someone else.

Well ... what I desired to share with someone else was just "time spent" as I would with any friend. Like I said, we went out and shot a few games of pool. That's pretty much about it. I didn't have anyone else around, and was caring for an invalid. And I would have gone to shoot pool with my brother, my friend, my cousin, or whoever. It's not that it was a "moment" that I desired to share with a special person. I just needed to get out of the house for a little while, and any person would do. My husband wasn't able to do anything, so it couldn't be him right then. And that was an extenuating circumstance, though to be honest, I don't see a problem ever with going out to shoot a game of pool with a friend, or anything on a similar level.

The fact that we ended up sleeping on opposite ends of the bed was NOT a moment of intimacy I desired to share with him. That was something I recognized as a danger, so if that's the point you are wanting my story to make, it doesn't.

Two things, if I may:
1. You forgot tom mention raising kids together, you forgot to mention a lot of fuflilling things in which they may commit to each other (apart from the more or less annoying and troublesome daily stuff).
2. I can´t manage to read from Belk´s post that the married couple doesn´t have intimacy in their marriage. I think he just referred to cases where certain intimacies (which other persons would like to be exclusive) aren´t exclusively met by their spouses.

Oh, I wasn't referring to anyone's marriage in particular. I was just imagining a marriage in which the parties deliberately met their needs for intimacy outside of the marriage. Yes, I did neglect to mention a lot of things they might do but ... it still stands to me that the picture I was imagining is not a marriage ... at least not according to my definition.

 

[quatona]

Someone who is quite obsessive about another person, and cannot bear to think they might even talk to someone else or hang out with someone else - regardless of gender.

Thanks for explaining. I, however, used the term "jealousy" more in the way the dictionary documents its use. Hence the misunderstanding.

But I don't think about it an awful lot.

Yes, I noticed that already.

 

[quatona]

Well ... what I desired to share with someone else was just "time spent" as I would with any friend. Like I said, we went out and shot a few games of pool. That's pretty much about it. I didn't have anyone else around, and was caring for an invalid. And I would have gone to shoot pool with my brother, my friend, my cousin, or whoever. It's not that it was a "moment" that I desired to share with a special person. I just needed to get out of the house for a little while, and any person would do. My husband wasn't able to do anything, so it couldn't be him right then. And that was an extenuating circumstance, though to be honest, I don't see a problem ever with going out to shoot a game of pool with a friend, or anything on a similar level.

The fact that we ended up sleeping on opposite ends of the bed was NOT a moment of intimacy I desired to share with him. That was something I recognized as a danger, so if that's the point you are wanting my story to make, it doesn't.

I didn´t mean to misrepresent you. I was, in particular, referring to your statement " In a way I WAS tempted, because...".

Oh, I wasn't referring to anyone's marriage in particular. I was just imagining a marriage in which the parties deliberately met their needs for intimacy outside of the marriage. Yes, I did neglect to mention a lot of things they might do but ... it still stands to me that the picture I was imagining is not a marriage ... at least not according to my definition.

Well, what I meant to point out was that your picture wasn´t the picture the person you responded to had painted. That was all.

 

[Cearbhall]

Well, I felt I had explained it and given examples.
And in return I only got replies that pointed out how the SO should be able to cover all the needs, how two people who allow each other such experiences have a problem, etc.

I personally never said ALL the needs, but I draw the line somewhere and physical security while sleeping is well within the boundaries of what a spouse should be providing, in my opinion. If you need to bring in a friend to do this on a regular basis because your spouse isn't there or won't give you that, then there's probably an issue in the marriage. Or a lot of business trips...

 

[quatona]

I personally never said ALL the needs, but I draw the line somewhere and physical security while sleeping is well within the boundaries of what a spouse should be providing, in my opinion.

That´s ok, but other people draw the lines differently.

If you need to bring in a friend to do this on a regular basis because your spouse isn't there or won't give you that, then there's probably an issue in the marriage.

I have seen this being claimed countless times throughout this thread but I have never seen it explained - except from people´s personal feelings and what they personally expect from marriage.
Now, everyone is entitled to their expectations and feelings - but constituting a problem for someone else just because what they do goes against your personal feelings and expectations isn´t very convincing. These people quite obviously have different feelings and expectations than you, and as long as what they do isn´t in conflict with their feelings and expectations, yours or mine are pretty much irrelevant for the question whether they have a problem.

On another note, I am a little tired of the repeated use of "If they need to..." in many posts. This has never been part of the question, it has never been claimed that they "need to X" (the scenario was about people who want to X and possibly do X).

 

[~Anastasia~]

I didn´t mean to misrepresent you. I was, in particular, referring to your statement " In a way I WAS tempted, because...".

Well, actually that is worse ... I'm not sure if on my part or yours, LOL. I wasn't tempted in the way that I considered doing anything, but it was in the way that I recognized that intimacy of proximity was a danger. I do want to be clear about that, since I did post a personal story. But I freely admit the danger is there, which is why I consider it unwise even in my case (though I didn't recognize it beforehand due to circumstances). And the case being posed in the OP is purposely sleeping together and cuddling - that is very different from what I mentioned, so I think it even MORE unwise in that context.

However, as has been repeatedly acknowledged, it's a "to each his own" issue. I think nearly everyone on the thread just can't understand why one would do it, or a spouse would allow it.

I have to wonder actually back to the why the OP asked the question? If it's ok with them and they don't care what anyone else thinks, then I wonder why ask?

If it's because the platonic friend's husband objects - which in itself I think is enough reason NOT to do this, then perhaps it was to get a measure of how many may agree with the husband?

 

[quatona]

Hi Kylissa, and thanks for your response.

Well, actually that is worse ... I'm not sure if on my part or yours, LOL. I wasn't tempted in the way that I considered doing anything, but it was in the way that I recognized that intimacy of proximity was a danger. I do want to be clear about that, since I did post a personal story. But I freely admit the danger is there, which is why I consider it unwise even in my case (though I didn't recognize it beforehand due to circumstances). And the case being posed in the OP is purposely sleeping together and cuddling - that is very different from what I mentioned, so I think it even MORE unwise in that context.

I feel there´s an ongoing misunderstanding.
The question "Is it unwise, according to my moral convictions?" is a different one than "I don´t understand why anyone would do that."
Because the second one was asked multiple times in this thread I have been trying to answer this one.
It seems to me that everyone who has been tempted has an idea why someone would do it.

However, as has been repeatedly acknowledged, it's a "to each his own" issue. I think nearly everyone on the thread just can't understand why one would do it, or a spouse would allow it.

Yes. However, what strikes me as confusing is the fact that I have tried to give several potential reasons in several posts, but nobody even seems to take notice, and even less to address them. People just keep repeating "I don´t understand it, and most everybody else doesn´t, either."

I have to wonder actually back to the why the OP asked the question? If it's ok with them and they don't care what anyone else thinks, then I wonder why ask?

Yes, you and I had already agreed that this is an interesting and important question. It´s a question only the OP can answer.
Personally, I don´t understand why anyone would ask for personal advice on an internet forum, anyway. But maybe the OP didn´t mean to ask for advice and instead just wanted to provoke a discussion.

If it's because the platonic friend's husband objects - which in itself I think is enough reason NOT to do this, then perhaps it was to get a measure of how many may agree with the husband?

Yes, it´s possible that he is making personal decisions according to majority vote, or something.

What I personally take home from this thread: I wasn´t aware how broadly accepted certain concepts of partnership/marriage still are - concepts of which I thought they had been at least questioned by a considerable number of people (and which, I may add, I think deserve to be questioned and challenged).
That´s useful information.