It's like the terms open or swingers (which is a slightly separate thing I get, but in the same space) didn't exist before or are no longer acceptable.

[–] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think ethical nonmonogamy casts a wider net. I wouldn't call myself a swinger. I don't do parties or anything like that. But I'm still not monogamous and it's still not cheating since my partner and I have an existing arrangement and regular check-ins.

[–] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 3 points 9 months ago

I guess I'm more getting at the term itself than the concept. People for a while have sometimes said 'we have an open relationship' which to my mind is functionally the same thing. The other nearest option would be non-partnered in which case a title isn't needed anyhow.

The part that seems weird to me is by specifically labeling it as ethical, it implies that the standard non-monogomy is unethical which seems like a strange stance to tie a lifestyle to if usable terms exist.

Just the philosophical musings of a fairly vanilla middle age dude navigating the modern social world though. 🙂