Experiences with FB or FWB only

mmfox

New member
Hi all. I wanted to ask couples about their experiences with keeping outside involvements limited only to "sex (f**k) buddies" or "friends with benefits" status only, and not allowing these interactions to progress to relationships (bf/gf, romantic, etc).

Are there any couples out there that maintain these boundaries? What have your experiences been and how did you go about setting up your own set of rules/guidelines?

(Added at edit) What made you decide to limit outside interactions to these categories instead of allowing for other relationships?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Well, I fear you may be looking in the wrong place (although I may be surprised).

This is a forum about polyamory, which is usually focused on the romantic relationship aspect, rather than the sexual aspect (although it's not without sometimes vast quantities of sex).

The normal terms I hear is that if the relationship is primarily about sex and is not expected to, or has rules in place to stop any sort of romantic developments, this is termed "Swinging".

There are many resources out there for folks who want to pursue those types of relationships, and they can probably much better answer the questions that you have.

So have I misunderstood you? How would what you describe be different from swinging?
 
CDM - I'm not sure that the OP is here seeking those types of relationships for themselves, but curious how anyone who has FWB or FB maintains those relationships.

I know some poly people who have relationships as well as FWB. Personally, I have let my initial FWB revert to a friendship and grew my second one into a full blown relationship. Initially, it seemed that Wendigo's wife was okay with us being physical as long as we stuck to foreplay and no PIV sex. Then when we realized there were emotions involved and did have PIV sex, she asked that we suppress the emotions but was okay with the sex. That went on for a 6 months before she and I sat down and came to an understanding and our relationship started progressing.

With my initial FWB we only saw each other a handful of times a year and while we remained good friends in the interim though chat, text, and phone calls. I was never interested in an LDR. The sex was fun when it happened, but I could take it or leave it and didn't miss it when he was away so I never felt the need for it to move to a different type of relationship with him.
 
Hi all. I wanted to ask couples about their experiences with keeping outside involvements limited only to "sex (f**k) buddies" or "friends with benefits" status only, and not allowing these interactions to progress to relationships (bf/gf, romantic, etc).

Are there any couples out there that maintain these boundaries? What have your experiences been and how did you go about setting up your own set of rules/guidelines?

(Added at edit) What made you decide to limit outside interactions to these categories instead of allowing for other relationships?

Thanks.

I'm not sure that my experiences are the type that you are looking for but I will chime in with my "two cents" anyway.

I have two FWB type friendships that have been in place for years (in one case almost as long as my relationship with my husband). However, it has never been about "not allowing" these relationships to "progress" - these relationships are what they are because that is what they are - not because of a rule or boundary.

Back in the day, I used to have FB type interactions because I didn't want to be hampered by the work/time investment that a romantic relationship requires. A personal choice - a "rule" for myself - to simplify my life, so I could focus my energies on other things important to ME.

Nowadays, I am a believer in letting things progress (or not) without expectation of a particular outcome. NOT every relationship needs to (or should) follow the same trajectory.

(Reminds me of a recent commercial I saw that fed into the "must find mate" meme - girl is looking at a guy, plans out their life/marriage/kids together, now if only she could convince this stranger to say "Hello." - Jeesh! Really?! That's a huge load of expectations right off the bat - How about getting to know people as people without viewing every date as an "application for life-partnership"?)

Sounds to me that you are asking whether it is possible to successfully set up a "FWB/FB only" type set-up (more "open" less "poly"). My impression is that it may be possible if you find people that are looking for the same thing. In practice? Feelings happen. We have very little control in this regard. (Which is how I ended up with MrS...and - 19 years later - Dude. Despite having NEVER "looked for" a relationship... ever.)

JaneQ
 
I'm not sure if my situation applies... In my case I'm poly and dating a poly man. So feelings and relationships are allowed with us, and certainly not restricted with outside partners, although neither of us has been very lucky finding anyone else so far.

However, I briefly had a FWB. There were rules that we were not to be in a relationship, but they were places by him. He was (and still is) mono, and did not want a relationship with someone who was poly. As a result, he wanted to make sure he didn't get attached, and didn't want me to get too attached either.

Not much happened as a result. The impossibility to develop a relationship with him made me less eager to spend time with him in a sexual way, so we mostly maintained our previous (and current) status as just friends, with a bit of flirting and sex, but only a couple of times over a year, so nothing major.

Then he met someone he wanted to be monogamous with, as we both knew would happen, and the friendship lost its benefits.

I can talk more about my experience if you want, although it's not exactly what you asked for.
 
This discussion is off topic. While there are poly folk who do swing or have open relationships for casual/NSA sex, this subject isn't on topic for a board dedicated to discussion of polyamory.
 
I'm confused...

...as to why the thread "Experiences with FB or FWB only" was closed.

It seemed like the thread was generating thoughtful and insightful responses from poly people who have had some experiences relevant to the topic.

Unless there were other inappropriate posts that were blocked or something?

I guess I don't understand why the thread was considered off-topic. Wouldn't a discussion of other forms of non-monogamy, and how they relate (or don't relate) to polyamory, be a reasonable topic for a polyamory forum? Haven't there been similar threads that were not closed to discussion?

I'm not trying to complain or provoke an argument--I genuinely don't understand, and was hoping a moderator could provide a public response to my question.
 
That makes two of us.
 
and three.
I was contemplating my reply (since I am married, with 2 other loves, and at the moment am considering to evolve a friendship I have to a FWB state) when I saw the thread was closed. So, yeah, confused.
 
perhaps NOT really about FWB...

This thread is an outgrowth of the thread that I would agree, was wrongly shut down. mmfox wanted to discuss friends with benefit arrangements, seems like a totally appropriate discussion for this forum. So, try again?

I think the issue has to do with attachment, jealousy and boundaries.

In Poly, I would say relationships need to be allowed to develop organically. I really identified with what is written at morethantwo.com - a relationship in itself is an entity all it's own, just like an individual.

As well, the old adage, "the best laid plans" comes to mind.

I think where Autumnal Tone got it wrong was in lumping FWB relationships with swinging. To me, swinging can be either with known partners or strangers and FWB would imply a friendship but not a "romantic relationship"...

Here are some previous, relevant threads:
"he wants to be in love"

play vs. partner, boundary equality?

"poly or swinging"

"What are Your Poly Guidelines and Boundaries"

"Double standard"
 
Last edited:
My relationship with my boyfriend (what's probably my only other romantic relationship besides the one with Woodsmith) started as a FWB situation. Yes I do love the other people in my family but to that amount and having it reciprocated back is only in those two.

But I actually had a point here. What was going to be just a FWB situation ended up having deeper feelings develop so I am a big believer in letting things go organically.
 
Glad other people were confused too.
 
I definitely didn't think it should have been closed, but I think the reasoning was that it was pretty unrelated to polyamory. I guess an analogy would be someone asking about dogs on a cat forum. Sure, they're both pets, but there are forums for dogs, and this forum is obviously about cats!

But since there are many people who own and/or love both cats and dogs, I would say that if the thread is actually being posted in and all, there is no reason to lock it.
And if it's not being posted in, there is no reason to lock it either since it will just fall off the front page and not be relevant.

But we do get a lot of people who think polyamory is just about sleeping around, so I'm guessing that's why it triggered the moderation wrath?
 
I did not see the other thread before it was locked, but I would have added that just because a relationship is considered "Friends with Benefits" (as much as I hate that term) does not automatically mean that there is no love. It most certainly is not the same as NSA sex. For me, the friendship part of FWB is hugely important - and I sure as hell can love my friends. It may not be the same as what we call romantic love, but it is love. I think it is sad that most people really think of a FWB as just another name for Fuck Buddy. There are more than a few of us here who have loving relationships that are not partner-y and have more casual parameters but are full of love and loving, caring qualities, and are definitely not NSA or swinger-ish at all.
 
I think there are lots and lots of threads on this forum that go into semantics and that the semantics as they relate to "non-monogamy" are broad and broadly interpreted. Why suddenly shut down discussion?

There are also tons of threads on here that talk about the progression from one form of non-monogamy to another, i.e. polyamory.

I guess I didn't realize this forum was so narrowly focused. I've always enjoyed the breadth of topics and viewpoints to be found here...
 
But we do get a lot of people who think polyamory is just about sleeping around, so I'm guessing that's why it triggered the moderation wrath?


I think there are lots and lots of threads on this forum that go into semantics and that the semantics as they relate to "non-monogamy" are broad and broadly interpreted. Why suddenly shut down discussion?

There are also tons of threads on here that talk about the progression from one form of non-monogamy to another, i.e. polyamory.

I guess I didn't realize this forum was so narrowly focused. I've always enjoyed the breadth of topics and viewpoints to be found here...




That is precisely why a thread like that would be relevant and discussion would be beneficial.

Another reason that thread was good is because "swinging" and "friends with benefits" are NOT the same thing. Often, swinging LEADS to love and/or friendship, as we have seen in many people's stories on here.

The moderator could have moved it to the Fireplace if it was "off topic". I don't think the OP or anyone else who posted in it was trying to present swinging as a form of polyamory. And the moderator who moved it even says in his signature that people in poly relationships often do engage in FWB/casual sex relationships - even though those things are not "really poly", they are not "really swinging" either. "Swinging" is usually a structured recreational activity that often involves joining clubs and attending scheduled events, and often these clubs and organizations have rules that members are not supposed to socialize outside of the sanctioned club events. All these things are very "un-poly". But FWB and casual sex often DO involve love, emotion, and affection, just of the "friendly" type (instead of being "in love"). Also, "swinging" typically involves partcipation AS A COUPLE, while casual sex/FWB can be (and usually is) practiced on a one-to-one basis (not "monogamous" - just two people in a particular place and time).

I believe that there is considerable opportunity for overlap and relevance with and to polyamory, and that is why a thread like that should not be considered "off-topic" and shut down. It's really along the lines of treating people like children. Can we not have a discussion about something that affects people in polyamorous relationships, even though these "things" might not "be" poly in and of themselves? I could see if someone came on here INSISTING that swinging was a FORM of polyamory, and trying to get people riled up and arguing about it, but all it was was someone looking for other people's stories and experiences - AS poly people - with these variations of relationship styles.

Either that, or it could have been merged with one of the other threads about casual sex or sex with people you like as friends but aren't "in love" with. That is hardly what "swinging" is all about.
 
Here's a link to a thread about Casual Sex (which i believe is also in Golden Nuggets).

And here's a link to the other thread that was spawned as a result of the FWB thread being locked:

I'm confused...

I am suggesting that "I'm confused" and this thread and the FWB thread all be merged together and allowed to proceed nominally. I'd do it myself, but you know, I'm not a moderator, etc.
 
Last edited:
The original thread title: Experiences with FB or FWB only
(the use of "only" caught my eye - not "in addition to other relationships").

In the text, the OP specifically said that it was about "keeping outside involvements limited only to "sex (f**k) buddies" or "friends with benefits" status only, and not allowing these interactions to progress to relationships (bf/gf, romantic, etc)."

I took that "not allowing" to mean that it was about restricting any involvement to purely sex and that all romantic interactions, let alone relationships were verboten. So this isn't about people choosing a specific relationship to be suited to a FWB relationship, but that there were restrictions in place than the only thing allowed outside the primary couple was sex.

So based on my (possibly flawed) interpretation of it, I don't think that it is relevant to a poly forum at all, and tried to steer the poster to a place that they may get better answers about how to restrict a relationship to be sex only.

Based on my conversations with swingers, it is far broader than a club or an organised social event, although it can be that. It can be simple "swapping" (hard or soft), or organized threesomes. In other words a relationship that is only allowed to be for sex, even though friendships can develop.

And I put no relative value on poly vs swinging, either.
 
Yes but she also states this as an added question:

"What made you decide to limit outside interactions to these categories instead of allowing for other relationships?"

To me, this clearly represents someone trying to define poly for herself and her partner. If this site is not intended for that kind of exploration than, wow, that's a shocker to me.
 
Back
Top