Marital vows, before and after swinging

This is a question for those who are long-term marrieds--say a decade or more--and who have been in the LS for a while.

The traditional wedding vows often contain verbiage along the following lines: "Do you, _______, take _______ to be your wife/husband? Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her/him, forsaking all others and holding only unto her/him?"

Interestingly, vow renewals are typically more complex and nuanced, for example: "You have changed since then. I have changed, and the world around us has changed most of all. But one thing has not changed. 25 years ago, I promised to love you, to give of my best to you, to cherish and keep you no matter what else happened. I have not always lived up to my best intentions but I have always loved you. I still love you. I love you more now than I did then because I know you better now. And I've matured: the sharp edges of youth have mellowed, increasing my capacity for, and my pleasure in love. We've watched our babies grow up and become independent. We've moved, we've had successes and setbacks we've weathered a good many storms. Some of the things we worried about turned out not to matter at all. What really mattered was our love. The one constant in our lives has grown stronger and I thank you now for the joy you've given me during these 25 years together. I still promise to love you, honor you, cherish and keep you. I continue to want you, for better or worse, for richer or poorer. Whatever the future may hold for us, we will always have our love. It is enough."

These are not ours, but they are typical samples.

Little question that the renewal vow reflects the realities of marriage and even includes an allusion to infidelity, viz : "I have not always lived up to my best intentions...".

Here is the question:

How has your experience in the LS reshaped your vows, if at all? If you were to renew your vows today, what would be different?

Yeah, easy question, we know.

Somehow I missed this thread when it rolled through. My apologies.

I think we've always thought of our vows as being malleable, upon both of our consent.

I'd say swinging probably has reshaped them. I think we probably both assumed that sex with others was off the plate when we got married, because that's "what married people do", or so we thought. I don't think the vows themselves changed because of that, but our understanding of them did. I think. This is confusing.

I'm not sure how our vows would be different today, mainly because I fulfill the stereotype of the guy that doesn't really remember the original ones.

Like two4you, I'll have to admit I don't even remember our vows. We were married about the time that writing your own vows first started to become a popular thing, and I don't remember even talking about them ahead of time or putting our heads together to write anything, so I expect they were just what was standard and traditional in our neck of the woods.

Since I can't remember ours, then I'll just cheat and use what FL posted, because they were probably pretty close to that. There is one key word there, forsaking. What does that mean? That really strikes directly to the heart of swinging I believe. Conventional interpretation would include the sexual in the forsaking, and the underlying assumption there is because permission would never be given, than anything outside of monogamy means you have broken your vows by failing to forsake all others. If permission has not been given, then indeed you have broken your vow.

But what if permission is given? Now, the couple needs to reevaluate was forsaking others means to them. In the swinging world I think most would answer that with sex is ok, romantic feelings are not ok. It's still possible to fail to forsake all others, just the boundaries have changed, but that's ok, because the only two people that matter in that contract of their own free will redrew those boundaries, and that's all that matters.

Where we to come up with new vows now, I doubt we would do them much differently. We'd probably take the traditional, put it in a little less formal language, and just go with that.

For us, being married eight years before discovering and ten more years after discovering swing, the forsake all others still stands. There is a parenthetical understanding implied -- forsake all others (but, of course, occasional permission makes the exception).

I think that many of you are overlooking the obvious. Is or was your ceremony a civil one or a religious one? If a civil ceremony, you can make your vows say anything you want them to. If a religious one, then you need to take into account the tenets of your chosen religion. I know of few religions that permit swinging. So, where do you go from there? I think that you are faced with a choice, between your faith and your desire to swing. Personally , I don't see how anybody can swing and still take communion. I have no issues with either one, but to do both is hypocrisy.

For us, being married eight years before discovering and ten more years after discovering swing, the forsake all others still stands. There is a parenthetical understanding implied -- forsake all others (but, of course, occasional permission makes the exception).

The actual definition of foresake really has nothing to do with sex. It's to abandon or give up. Even if we have sex with a few other people, we've chosen each other. We have abandoned the idea of a life with someone else. He has given me a part of himself that as a nonpoly couple, I assume he won't be giving to anyone else. Our marriage and life together is much more than just sex. I don't necessarily consider that vow to have changed or been broken by swinging with my consent.

So much this. Couldn't have said it better.

As far as religion is concerned, I'm still working to reconcile myself with this. I was raised Episcopalian, then non-denominational. I believe in God, I believe in Jesus, I believe in a lot of what the Bible has to say, although I am cognizant that humans have translated and manipulated the text throughout the centuries, so I, personally, would never take a literal reading of it. Humans are, after all, fallible. I don't consider myself a hypocrite. I don't believe God will love me any less for swinging, just as he would not love me less for any other sin I will commit (no, I'm not sure that swinging is a sin, I'm still working through that.) Furthermore, I don't feel that swinging would break my marriage vows. I don't remember what exactly they were, but we were married in an Episcopalian church, and I believe my commitment and emotional faithfulness to my husband supersedes anything that non-monogamy could do to undermine those vows, (not that it would.)

Regardless, I have always found that religions that hold tighter to their traditions and ceremonies than to caring for your fellow humans (I'm looking at you, Catholicism) are spiritless and concerned more with judging you than with helping you. That is solely my own opinion based on the little knowledge I have. Although, I like the new Pope.

The actual definition of foresake really has nothing to do with sex. It's to abandon or give up. Even if we have sex with a few other people, we've chosen each other. We have abandoned the idea of a life with someone else. He has given me a part of himself that as a nonpoly couple, I assume he won't be giving to anyone else. Our marriage and life together is much more than just sex. I don't necessarily consider that vow to have changed or been broken by swinging with my consent.

When did religion come into this? We actually did not get married in a church by minister, so I don't think your point is valid for this particular argument.

I am no longer "religious", but consider myself spiritually inclined. I have found that our relationship with the divine is severely limited by the constraints of rigid religious definitions of Christianity, and what is good, moral or right - and conversely what is evil, immoral or bad. I'll take my chances on Judgment Day and stand before the Almighty with a clear conscience, knowing that I made the best decisions I could with what little direction I was given. I'll take my lumps when the time comes, and if I find myself hellbound because I didn't listen to the untrustworthy words of broken people, I'll march myself through the gates of hell without argument; at least I won't have to live with a god I can't respect. But I seriously doubt it will come to that. Jesus is my homie. He's got my back.

Anyway, the question wasn't really about religion, although marriage and religion are pretty intimately related for most people. I just thought I'd throw that in there for what it's worth. Swinging causes you to question a lot of things, and it sure does force you to see life, relationships and marriage differently. If you can't measure the success of a marriage by sexual fidelity, what then is left? What yardstick do we use? That's the real question, isn't it?

So when we started swinging, there was a sad moment when we realized that we would have to put to rest forever the innocence or "purity" of a monogamous marriage. Like one's virginity, it's really just an idea that we have built up in out heads with a lot of sentimentality. When we lost our virginity, or tried swinging "for real" the first time, we realized there was nothing to it; it was an idea we had built up, nothing more. There was no pain, no regret, no jealousy...just curiosity and discovery...and then joy at getting to share this with one another, and the freedom to be done with the nagging doubts that the rest of the world suffers under.

Mr. intuition and I have been married 21 years now. At the tender age of 19, I didn't know what the fuck I was doing or saying; I just knew that whatever came my way, Mr. intuition was supposed to be a part of it. So I trusted that instinct, and I'm glad I did. I love him more than anything. So much that I find myself fearing death, because it's the only thing that's going to take him away. And the clock is ticking. This thread is timely: we are actually thinking of renewing our vows, possibly next year. It didn't take me long to write mine, because I can see things very clearly now. The focus has moved away from sexual fidelity. My promises are now to always tell him the truth, to give him the freedom to be himself, to always be myself, because he has a right to know who I really am, and the right to choose whether he wants to be with that person, and finally, to put his needs and his happiness ahead of my own...because (pay attention to this part) my job here on earth is be his friend, and to help him live as fully and completely as possible, to reach his highest potential. That is my job. It's not always fun or glamorous, it's not always appreciated, and sometimes it's very painful...but that, to me, is what a marriage is about. Promising to be that person's friend as they struggle their way through life's challenges and changes. You promise to love the soul, not the shell. People are just here to experience life and learn from it. Learning these lessons is a hard, painful job, and we are supposed to be compassionate to others who are struggling with their lessons, and they to us. Marriage is when two souls promise to help each other with their homework.

When did religion come into this? We actually did not get married in a church by minister, so I don't think your point is valid for this particular argument.

BUT... you specifically quoted me and questioned my p.o.v. on this without knowing anything about my religious status. I answered the OP's question which asked for personal opinions vs what our pastors and church congregations might think. I stand by what I said whether any priest agrees with me or not. And whether or not the church sees it as a sin is another conversation.

I am no longer "religious", but consider myself spiritually inclined. I have found that our relationship with the divine is severely limited by the constraints of rigid religious definitions of Christianity, and what is good, moral or right - and conversely what is evil, immoral or bad. I'll take my chances on Judgment Day and stand before the Almighty with a clear conscience, knowing that I made the best decisions I could with what little direction I was given. I'll take my lumps when the time comes, and if I find myself hellbound because I didn't listen to the untrustworthy words of broken people, I'll march myself through the gates of hell without argument; at least I won't have to live with a god I can't respect. But I seriously doubt it will come to that. Jesus is my homie. He's got my back.

 

Anyway, the question wasn't really about religion, although marriage and religion are pretty intimately related for most people. I just thought I'd throw that in there for what it's worth. Swinging causes you to question a lot of things, and it sure does force you to see life, relationships and marriage differently. If you can't measure the success of a marriage by sexual fidelity, what then is left? What yardstick do we use? That's the real question, isn't it?

 

So when we started swinging, there was a sad moment when we realized that we would have to put to rest forever the innocence or "purity" of a monogamous marriage. Like one's virginity, it's really just an idea that we have built up in out heads with a lot of sentimentality. When we lost our virginity, or tried swinging "for real" the first time, we realized there was nothing to it; it was an idea we had built up, nothing more. There was no pain, no regret, no jealousy...just curiosity and discovery...and then joy at getting to share this with one another, and the freedom to be done with the nagging doubts that the rest of the world suffers under.

 

Mr. intuition and I have been married 21 years now. At the tender age of 19, I didn't know what the fuck I was doing or saying; I just knew that whatever came my way, Mr. intuition was supposed to be a part of it. So I trusted that instinct, and I'm glad I did. I love him more than anything. So much that I find myself fearing death, because it's the only thing that's going to take him away. And the clock is ticking. This thread is timely: we are actually thinking of renewing our vows, possibly next year. It didn't take me long to write mine, because I can see things very clearly now. The focus has moved away from sexual fidelity. My promises are now to always tell him the truth, to give him the freedom to be himself, to always be myself, because he has a right to know who I really am, and the right to choose whether he wants to be with that person, and finally, to put his needs and his happiness ahead of my own...because (pay attention to this part) my job here on earth is be his friend, and to help him live as fully and completely as possible, to reach his highest potential. That is my job. It's not always fun or glamorous, it's not always appreciated, and sometimes it's very painful...but that, to me, is what a marriage is about. Promising to be that person's friend as they struggle their way through life's challenges and changes. You promise to love the soul, not the shell. People are just here to experience life and learn from it. Learning these lessons is a hard, painful job, and we are supposed to be compassionate to others who are struggling with their lessons, and they to us. Marriage is when two souls promise to help each other with their homework.

Having said that, If my GF and I were ever to get married, I would make sure that it was a civil ceremony and that we would write our own vows, stressing commitment, and honesty.

BUT... you specifically quoted me and questioned my p.o.v. on this without knowing anything about my religious status. I answered the OP's question which asked for personal opinions vs what our pastors and church congregations might think. I stand by what I said whether any priest agrees with me or not. And whether or not the church sees it as a sin is another conversation.

Fortunately, there is an easy way to check your interpretation out. Run it by your minister or priest, and see what they say about swinging and religion.

How is that relevant in the slightest? Are they a party to the vows? No, they are not. The only two people involved are the two exchanging vows, and those vows are to each other, not me, not you, not the minister, not the organist, not old Uncle Joe sitting third pew from the back, not anyone other than themselves. The vows are THEIRS, no one else gets to be involved, and so how they define and interpret them is up solely to them.

How is that relevant in the slightest? Are they a party to the vows? No, they are not. The only two people involved are the two exchanging vows, and those vows are to each other, not me, not you, not the minister, not the organist, not old Uncle Joe sitting third pew from the back, not anyone other than themselves. The vows are THEIRS, no one else gets to be involved, and so how they define and interpret them is up solely to them.

Beautifully stated!

How is that relevant in the slightest? Are they a party to the vows? No, they are not. The only two people involved are the two exchanging vows, and those vows are to each other, not me, not you, not the minister, not the organist, not old Uncle Joe sitting third pew from the back, not anyone other than themselves. The vows are THEIRS, no one else gets to be involved, and so how they define and interpret them is up solely to them.

Fascinating to see how this conversation evolved two months after our original post.

1. The inclusion/intrusion of religious beliefs is interesting. Many if not most of our LS friends worship with reasonable regularity, attend baptisms, weddings, funerals etc. Regardless of what the spiritual leader (rabbi, minister, priest,...) might say, our friends consider themselves adherents to their faith. Most followers of most faiths have to find compromises between faith doctrine and the realities of daily life. Sex and sexuality is one of the areas where compromises are commonly made.

2. The original post was never intended to launch a conversation on religion and vows. Rather, it was intended to explore the deepening of understanding that comes with long-term relationships. While not a statistical sample, our long-married LS couples that we spend time with have partnerships that have depth and strength and mutual committment (vows are pronouncements of personal committments, right?) that are simply extraordinary. What was...and remains...of interest to us is the way in which that depth, strength and mutual committment grows. The trust that underlies participation in the LS--the willingness and comfort that is essential to seeing/letting your partner intimate with others--accompanies that depth,strength and mutual committments.

Was it your changing concept of your marriage that allowed you to consider joining the LS?

Or was it your participation in the LS that led to deeper understanding of your relationship?

Sort of a chicken/egg question...

Hmm. Mr.Prufrock and I have only been married seven years, but we've been together for 10. My view going into marriage was that there would be times where we would absolutely not love each other. Where we get on each other's nerves, where life gets in the way and we screw up and don't treat each other the way we should (this happened a lot during our kid's newborn periods,) but we made a commitment to each other. And that commitment means that we are partners. We are in this together, and that we will tackle what life has to throw at us together and come out stronger on the other end. That if something is wrong, we will work together to fix it, instead of giving up and leaving to find greener pastures. I'm lucky in that we are still very much in love, not the puppyish new love, but a deep-running love that connects straight to our cores. Sure there have been arguments and moments where we didn't like each other, but they were transient, and few. We've never had to really test our commitment. If swinging leads to testing that commitment to each other (and I don't think it will) then we've both agreed it's not for us. I think those that enter into marriage and the lifestyle only thinking about themselves will be, in the end, displeased and unhappy in both endeavors.

Edit: to answer your question, I don't think it was a changing concept of our marriage, but rather a changing concept of ourselves. I'm not sure that makes sense. Our commitment stays the same. Of course getting married we didn't think we'd ever have sex with other people, but sex was never the foundation of our marriage.

I definitely think, for us, it was a changing view of marriage and, as JAPrufrock said, ourselves that allowed swinging to be a possibility.

Was it your changing concept of your marriage that allowed you to consider joining the LS?

Or was it your participation in the LS that led to deeper understanding of your relationship?

Sort of a chicken/egg question...

For us, the answer is simple... our concept of our marriage hasn't changed dramatically. "Forsaking all others" wasn't part of our vows and monogamy was never an assumption of our marriage, even before we knew anything about swinging. Participation in the LS has helped provide us with a vocabulary to better express our non-monogamy and given us the experience to help clarify our expectations and desires.

Without intending to promote controversy, one wonders whether the view of a marriage can evolve without both partners willing to support that evolution. The marriage can change only with the consent and support of the married. Indeed this is what marriage counselors often seek to facilitate.

The theme of partners-come-hell-or-high-water is so important.Not all marriages start that way. Not all stay that way. It is nevertheless clear to us that it is precisely that partnership that makes for an enduring marriage and further supports the LS.

Well, I think some of your idioms are a little flippant...

Yeah, well life is too short to take that seriously.

...but I agree with a lot of what you say. My main disagreement is the idea that you (pl) can get a mulligan on your marriage vows, just because you decided to swing. If that's OK then I have some loans that I want to renege on, because I don't want to pay them any more, or the reason I took them out is no longer important. A vow is a vow, a promise is a promise. Swinging is much more than just a way to slide around your marriage promise.

Having said that, If my GF and I were ever to get married, I would make sure that it was a civil ceremony and that we would write our own vows, stressing commitment, and honesty.

Well...Bob...a marriage is not like a car loan. The most similar parallel I can think of would be a mortgage, because it, like marriage, is literally a "death pledge". You still renegotiate it every five years.

I'll be honest with you, I'm really NOT all that hung up on contracts regardless of with whom they were struck. I worship the Truth, not a contract. Please don't mistake my disregard for an earthly contract with disrespect for the holiness of a union. The heart trumps the marriage contract held by the church. If there is no joy in the union, if either party's life is being eroded by the forced continuation of the relationship, the contract is null and void. It is an abomination to continue a relationship that undermines its own purpose, simply because people are too stubborn and prideful to admit they've got it wrong and instead need to do a major overhaul. Or perhaps they revel in martyrdom, I don't know.

This is my interpretation, and you are most certainly welcome to yours. All I know is my relationship has moved WAY beyond being owned by anyone or anything but Mr. intuition and me. It certainly isn't owned by the church. If you're talking about no longer being legally married - which is what that contract thing is all about - our marriage is still valid, because swinging (up here in Canada) just falls under the kink umbrella of consenting adults doing whatever they are wont to do. The government doesn't give a shit what we do as long as we are keeping our business to ourselves.

If it's God Himself that you're concerned will be pissed off that we've broken our contract, I seriously doubt He's that anally retentive. If your mortgage said you had to reside in that house in order to not be in breach of the contract, what then would you do when that house burned down? Those rules no longer work. Well, let's just say our house burned down. So we rewrote the rules.

Without intending to promote controversy, one wonders whether the view of a marriage can evolve without both partners willing to support that evolution. The marriage can change only with the consent and support of the married. Indeed this is what marriage counselors often seek to facilitate.

 

The theme of partners-come-hell-or-high-water is so important.Not all marriages start that way. Not all stay that way. It is nevertheless clear to us that it is precisely that partnership that makes for an enduring marriage and further supports the LS.

I think flexibility is really important to the success of a marriage. By that, I mean your vows/promises should also take into account the naturally occurring personal growth that happens to people as individuals and as partners in a marriage. As we've grown, our understanding of what marriage is (and is not) has deepened exponentially, and our vows need to be redefined according to our new understanding. Like upgrading your operating system to Marriage 2.0.

Without intending to promote controversy, one wonders whether the view of a marriage can evolve without both partners willing to support that evolution. The marriage can change only with the consent and support of the married. Indeed this is what marriage counselors often seek to facilitate.

 

The theme of partners-come-hell-or-high-water is so important.Not all marriages start that way. Not all stay that way. It is nevertheless clear to us that it is precisely that partnership that makes for an enduring marriage and further supports the LS.

For us, the answer is simple... our concept of our marriage hasn't changed dramatically. "Forsaking all others" wasn't part of our vows and monogamy was never an assumption of our marriage, even before we knew anything about swinging. Participation in the LS has helped provide us with a vocabulary to better express our non-monogamy and given us the experience to help clarify our expectations and desires.

Yeah, well life is too short to take that seriously.

 

 

 

Well...Bob...a marriage is not like a car loan. The most similar parallel I can think of would be a mortgage, because it, like marriage, is literally a "death pledge". You still renegotiate it every five years.

 

I'll be honest with you, I'm really NOT all that hung up on contracts regardless of with whom they were struck. I worship the Truth, not a contract. Please don't mistake my disregard for an earthly contract with disrespect for the holiness of a union. The heart trumps the marriage contract held by the church. If there is no joy in the union, if either party's life is being eroded by the forced continuation of the relationship, the contract is null and void. It is an abomination to continue a relationship that undermines its own purpose, simply because people are too stubborn and prideful to admit they've got it wrong and instead need to do a major overhaul. Or perhaps they revel in martyrdom, I don't know.

 

This is my interpretation, and you are most certainly welcome to yours. All I know is my relationship has moved WAY beyond being owned by anyone or anything but Mr. intuition and me. It certainly isn't owned by the church. If you're talking about no longer being legally married - which is what that contract thing is all about - our marriage is still valid, because swinging (up here in Canada) just falls under the kink umbrella of consenting adults doing whatever they are wont to do. The government doesn't give a shit what we do as long as we are keeping our business to ourselves.

 

If it's God Himself that you're concerned will be pissed off that we've broken our contract, I seriously doubt He's that anally retentive. If your mortgage said you had to reside in that house in order to not be in breach of the contract, what then would you do when that house burned down? Those rules no longer work. Well, let's just say our house burned down. So we rewrote the rules.

I can't even remember the vows we declared to each other all those years ago. We eloped, both of us marrying outside of our religions and what was expected of us. We ran away together hand in hand three months pregnant and made the important phone calls to loved ones after the fact! I don't even think the tongue tied Mr G understood most of the words he broke his teeth over as he repeated after the officials leading the tiny civil ceremony of just the two of us in our flip flops. I'm glad there were no guests to video the occasion, we would have needed subtitles...But one thing we said to each other before, after and to this day is that our only vow to each other is 'choose one and make it work'! and if I had to do it all again today my promise would remain the same.

My point is not to say that a marriage cannot change, but that if you make the promise, you keep the promise, unless you renegotiate it.

We did. And we still do constantly. Our rings were off at one point, and completely renegotiated our marriage. We just never bothered gathering all our dearly beloved to share in what was a very naked, vulnerable time in our life. Regardless of the lack of witnesses - and maybe even partially because of it - our marital bond is now one of the few constants in my life. That, taxes and death. Mr. intuition, God and I stood in our kitchen, remaking our promises to one another, simply, with gravity, and with deeply held conviction, and we put our rings back on one another. I would laugh at the insinuation that it was not a valid ceremony, just because the church wasn't invited. My business is with the Almighty, not his fan club.

This is not about religion, it is about honor. I keep my promises.....all of them. I kept my wedding vows, until the marriage ended. I had a Church wedding, so I took the vows of that church, and kept my vows to my wife AND to the church, that is the honorable thing to do. In my opinion, if people want to swing, and have already had a church wedding, they should renew their vows to include the possibility of extramarital sex. In that way, the would fulfill their promises to each other and to God. Honesty is always better than hypocrisy.

I agree, honesty is better than hypocrisy. I could be wrong, but I don't think my vows addressed the church. God, yes, but not the church. What, in your opinion, constitutes a renegotiated marriage contract, so that a couple would not be considered hypocrites or liars?

As a couple who met and were married (civil) because of the lifestyle, our vows reflected honesty and not changing who the other person is.

Background: Red was early 40s, never married, no children, me late 30s divorced,2 children w exwife.

Honesty:

No matter how much financial infidelity my ex-wife incured like hidden credit cards, surfing credit card balances from one card to another, asking her parents for loans to attend multilevel marketing seminars behind my back, getting behind enough on car payments that it was to be repossessed (except for the fact we had moved 900 miles away from our prior address two months before it went to repo) and that i threatened to throw her out twice due to this stuff,those problems were just "financial issues that everyone else has" and i stayed with her for better or worse. Yet when I committed adultery by ordering hookers into my hotel while on a couple of business trips "that was adultery worthy of divorce".

Yeah, but I had a last comment when my credit-addict devout-Catholic ex-wife went after an annulment to our marriage. Guess whoasked for space, guess who asked me to move into the basement, guess who threw me out, guess who wouldn't attend completly paid for Catholic marriage repair counseling, guess who filed for divorce, yeah her.

So we're still married in the church because they rejected her request for annulment.

Honesty and the lifestyle for me after that deal and I never expected to meet another woman and get married.