Quote Originally Posted by ReineD View Post
So you're into threesomes rather than each of you having separate lovers. One word of advice: please make sure that she wants the threesome as much as you do. If in the past you've been the instigator more than her, you don't want your wife to go along with it just because she want to keep her husband.

Also, if the agreement between you is threesomes, then stop toying with the idea of sleeping with someone at the club you describe, no matter how appealing it seems, no matter how much you believe you have her permission (when your gut feeling is telling you otherwise), to the point where you buy an outfit for the evening and actually step out the door.

I'm glad that you and your wife had a discussion last night after you made your original post and she clarified her position to you. I recommend that you bookmark this thread for future reference, when and if the urge to go there manifests itself again.
Yes that is essentially the arrangement. I agree 100% on her needing to be active in the decision (it's rule #4, actually) to have an extra come to bed with us. It's her body, I'd never coerce her or otherwise to do things she isn't willing to do. When we bring someone to bed, it is the both of us doing it. I can't remember an instance (not that there have been many) where it has been instigated by one side or the other. It's usually mutual, talked about well in advance and each other's rules and boundaries respected.

I agree with you on the second and 3rd paragraphs as well. After some thought and discussion on the matter, I'm pretty sure the issue is closed for now. What I do know is it won't remain closed forever. One of the many things I've learned in our marriage, things are always open to revisit, things are always adjustable to new ideas and nothing is ever dealt with for good.

We talked a bit more this morning before I went to bed. As it turns out she has a great understanding of the rules in place, just a different interpretation of them. She interpreted the combination of rules 1, 3, & 4 meant that if given permission to go to "y" and do "x" then it's not outside the rules. However if you include rule #2 then it doesn't fall within the standard set and in my opinion falls too far outside the rules. She's not wrong, and neither am I. They're different interpretations of the same words.

Side note: Think of the effect similar to that in law. The law is written using a single set of words, the art of practicing law on the other hand is the art of interpreting those words. I actually found it awe inspiring when she told me that upon reflection she see's it as within the rules based on her interpretation. Which is entirely the kind of intelligent discourse I am so very lucky to have.

Ultimately the answer is no. I will not be going, ever. After our talk this morning (see, we really do talk everyday) we both agreed that the risk is not worth the reward. Despite that our old methods are not working adds no weight to the argument that it should be done. It's not the end of the world, one day we'll meet the right person and things will be good. Just because the old methods aren't achieving a specific goal, doesn't mean they aren't working. They're working as intended and keeps undesirables out of our relationship. Neither of us see the need to change the rules, though we agree some tweaking may take place in the near future to clarify some points.

Thank you for your input Reine, I assure you I will remember your words of wisdom.