Your Partner Owes You Nothing – In Monogamy and Open Relationships
Eighteen years ago, Shuli and I became a couple. We were greatly influenced at that time by the work of Byron Katie and the lectures on the path of self-transformation. From them, we understood from the very beginning that we do not want to live in any way that someone feels they owe something to another. Therefore, we adopted the principle “your partner owes you nothing” and tried, to the best of our ability, to live by it.
We did not always succeed in this one hundred percent. Sometimes we had, especially me, expectations regarding certain issues from Shuli that were harder for me to let go of. But we taught ourselves to release those expectations and discovered that this principle makes our relationship much more liberated and satisfying.
Eighteen years of living by this principle have led us to understand it on a deeper level each time. Initially, it simply helped us to let go of unnecessary expectations from the other. At the same time, it also helped us to free ourselves from the expectations of the other.
Yes. We don’t have to have sex when the other wants. We don’t have to help with household chores. We don’t have to do the dishes. We don’t have to put the kids to bed. We don’t have to meet the other’s family. We don’t have to go to the same places. We don’t owe anything! And the partner owes nothing!
We act only when it is right and suitable for us. Only out of choice. And we are not willing to do less than that for our partner. What a release.
But over time we understood that there are more depths here. We realized that actually living according to this principle is a more ethical life. Why? Because only when living by this principle do we respect the other’s autonomy to choose.
In our view, there is an important and principled stance here. We do not want to impose anything on the other. We want to respect them. We want to respect their otherness. We want to respect their pace. We want to respect their choices. We want to see them as a separate, whole, and autonomous person, not as an extension of ourselves.
We understood that as long as we think the other owes us something, we are actually treating them as an object. As a thing. As something that is supposed to serve us. And that is not the case. The other is not supposed to serve us. They did not come into the world to fulfill our needs. The other came into the world to realize themselves. Their way. Their choices.
And although sometimes we may be absolutely sure that we know better than the other what is good for them, the truth is that we have no idea. We barely know what is good for ourselves. How can we know what is good for the other?
How can we know if they need to talk to their mother more or less? If she needs to be stricter with the children or less? If he needs to stand more assertively in front of his boss or less? If she needs to open up to anal sex? If he needs to release and open the relationship?
We have no idea what the other is supposed to go through! And it’s time we developed a bit of humility regarding this.
Over time, we noticed that many in our environment have opened their relationships and adopted this principle as well. The principle has taken the following form for them: My partner owes me nothing, but I have certain needs and I do not want to give them up, so I will turn to other partners to fulfill myself.
In recent years, I have heard many partners in non-monogamous relationships talk this way. And on the one hand, I was glad that we share this perception. On the other hand, something bothered me there. And I did not understand what.
It took me several years to understand what was missing in the position that on one hand frees my partner to be true to themselves and on the other allows me to fulfill my needs with other partners.
I understood that partners in open relationships who believe in this principle gain only half of what can be gained when understanding this principle in-depth.
Now, what I am saying is complex. It requires unusual thinking. Try to stay with me:
Think about the difference between the following two situations:
- I free Shuli to be herself, and in those instances where she does not meet an important need of mine, I turn to another partner and get my needs met there.
- I free Shuli to be herself, and in those instances where she does not meet an important need of mine, I remain present with her. I do not go anywhere. I stay.
In the first situation, I meet Shuli only in places that work for both of us. In the second situation, we meet even in places that do not work for both of us. In the first situation, Shuli meets only half or a third of me. And I meet only half or a third of her. In the second situation, we both meet with everything the other brings, even when it’s really not comfortable or pleasant.
Let’s take a few examples. Shuli does not like it when I smoke weed. I smoke weed very rarely, but sometimes I feel like it. The first option I have is to give up my smoking to please her. The second option is to smoke in secret. Alone. With friends. At times when she is not with me. Without her knowing. The third option is to smoke alone or with others but completely openly. To be present there with my desire. And the fourth option is to insist sometimes on smoking in her presence because it’s important to me that she also knows this side of me.
In the first two options, I give up myself. I do not bring my whole self to the relationship. Shuli does not know my whole self. She only knows the parts that are comfortable for her.
In the latter two options, I gradually insist on bringing more and more of myself into the relationship. I am not willing to hide anything. I am not willing to be someone else for her. I am not willing to bring only parts of myself.
Let’s take a more complicated example. Sex! Let’s say Shuli wants much less sex than I do. In the first option, I give in. I hide my desires. I castrate myself, my sexuality, and my passion. In the second option, I cheat. I fulfill my needs but without Shuli’s knowledge. Shuli does not really know my whole self. There are other women who know me, my sexuality, better than she does. In the third option, we openly open the relationship. I do not pressure Shuli to have sex with me. I respect her wishes. But I do share with her openly, at least to some extent, about my encounters with other women. Shuli now knows a lot more about me. Not my whole self. There are still parts that only other women know. But I do bring, at least in words, more and more parts of myself. In the fourth option, I insist on bringing my whole self into the relationship with Shuli.
But what does that really mean? After all, you said that Shuli doesn’t want it. And you also said that she owes you nothing. So what does that mean? Am I even allowed to insist on bringing my whole self to the relationship if Shuli doesn’t want that? Is it possible without pressure? Yes.
We must grasp the deep difference between wanting and pressuring. I think most people completely confuse the two. For most people, expressing a desire is also pressure. Do you know the possibility of expressing a desire completely without there being any hint of pressure? If you’re not familiar with it, try to imagine. Think about it: I am not willing in any way to live a castrated or censored life! I want a life of authenticity. And at the same time, I do not want in any way for Shuli to censor or castrate herself. I want to meet her fully. Completely authentic. I do not want her to please me. Not at all.
So my desire for Shuli to be completely authentic meets my desire to have sex with her. And these two desires of mine meet Shuli’s desires. And then something very interesting happens. The desires begin to evolve. They do not remain static. It can no longer be said that Shuli hates it when I smoke weed and it can no longer be said that Shuli wants less sex than I do. That is simply not the truth. That may have been the truth before we met authentically. But when we both insist on an authentic meeting, we influence each other. Our desires change. Authenticity is not some fixed thing that remains stuck. I would even say that if someone’s desire remains stuck over years, it is a sign of inauthenticity. How can being stuck on something be authentic? How can being stuck on the fact that I always want sex be authentic? How can being stuck on the fact that I always want less sex be authentic? What exactly is authentic about that?
So our desire changes. It mainly changes to a desire for there to be a meeting between us. A dialogue. An authentic dialogue where we both bring ourselves completely. I do not want Shuli to be my best friend and for Miri, for example, to be my best sex partner. I want to have sex with my best friend. I’m not willing to settle for less than that. Because I want a full meeting with Shuli. I want all our parts to be partners in the meeting.
In this way, the principle we started with, “Your partner owes you nothing,” has evolved and become a tool through which we meet authentically and fully. In contrast, when I give up my need and fulfill it elsewhere, I lose that wonderful thing.
