Open Relationships


There are things I just don't *get* about open relationships. Yup, I'm going there. Check out today's vlog on open relationships (consensual non-monogamy) to hear my thoughts and questions about this kind of relationship arrangement.

And let me know your thoughts in the comments section!

Find me on social media:

tpkyteroo luebeck
I find it hilarious how many people took offense because your opinion is not THEIR opinion. ROFL Then, there is the whole "not indepth enough" argument. Well, I supposed Mayim could have gotten out her medical degree and started speaking in a three hour long treatise on the subject, and gotten out the Hebrew and stated Biblical verses and concepts, then gotteon out all the research that PROVED that those who do are liberal or are in open relationships or have srx before marriage, are more likely to divorce. I think the percentage was over 75%. Why? They have no commitment. They are only committed to themselves and making themselves happy. Why compromise when you get a laid anywhere? You don't have to. :P I prefer monogamy. Mayim's opinions are valid and I support them fully!
Michael King
Mayim,. you are 100% INCORRECT in your comment that men are allowed to have more than 1 wife in Australia.
Could you talk about the books you have in the background? Give us an insight into your interests!
Charles Gancarz
I think everyone has different preferences. I know some people who would only accept being in a monogamous relationship, and some people who would only ever consider open ones. And I also disagree that it goes against anyone's biology. What matters in the end is that we know what we want and chose the people who want the same thing to get into relationships with.
Mr. Moo
She must only have one friend. How can she possibly make time for any more? Men are different than woman, they will never be equal in many ways. Woman want one man while men want many woman. Men don't have babies.......
"I would like to have the sex with that person"
Clyde Day
My take on open relationships are like them saying "You will do for now", but I want to see other people. Then after they have played the feild they will find someone better than the other person, and leave them. I am in a closed, monogamous relationship, and we just celebrated our 11 year anniversary. My brother however is in a open relationship, and he has gone through a lot of partners because he stays with one until he finds another to be with.
Mayim, why does your evolutionary "lean into your biology" argument that men and women are different in terms of what is important to them, finally ignore the bitter truth, that it leaves us with absolutely NO reason for either sex to try to change their natural way of being and adopt ANY of the other's biological dictates? Supposing you are 100% right - that , when you really analyze them, the biologically ideal relationship setup for hetero men and women are ultimately completely divergent and therefore quite incompatible in their goals. My question is why THEN, do you somehow think this means either sex needs to try to compromise their innate drives just to suit the other (indicating that women favor "selectivity" and "valuable relationships" and "emotional connections" and yes, EVEN "perpetuating the species".... what happens if all of these ideals are just not that important to males, period??) ? Why do you assume that MEN should be the ones to continue to compromise their natural way of being, just to fit into someone else's mold?
You're 1 of 7 billion+ people, and as I'm certain you already know, you're you're entitled to your opinion, but making your point as something meant to at least attempt to sway the opinions of others is the most annoying part of this conversation.

I respect your side of the coin. I don't agree with it, but knowing you're both heterosexual and monogamous, I have absolutely no reason to try to convince you otherwise... There are approximately 2 billion people (age, sexual orientation, etc.) that I can meet who may already want what I prefer.

My question is this... You want to be recognized as an intellectual, intelligent person who can make a point. What is your need to make your point known and so clearly understood? Are you so pompous to think you need to be the voice of others who can't decide for themselves? Are you so worried that women who prefer this as a choice are merely brainwashed into settling for a lesser life?

I do enjoy your clear articulation though. Other than that, it felt like a crusade to "inform"
STDs aren't a reason to stop having sex or to just engage in monogamous relationships. There are many ways to protect yourself from STDs: Condoms, gloves, dental dams - and no, its wrong that sex with protection isn't any fun at all. Also what's more fun: In the moment having protected sex with a hot person and stay healthy - or doing it without any barriers and spending the next time or even the rest of your with itching sensations, constantly seeing a doctor and worrying about who will love you now that you have an STD?
Captain Everyman
We are who we are socialized to be. Biological influences are minor an incidental to human behavior in most contexts. Based on biology alone, homosexuality wouldn't exit, yet it does, so obviously there's more to human sexuality than mere biology.
Captain Everyman
The word, "patriarchy", is a trigger for me, because it's linked a derivative view of history the conflates the privilege and behavior of a few elitist men with the overwhelming majority of lives men have lived throughout human history.
Drae Jones
Is this the girl from Big Bang theory?
Shasta Bare
And those are all reasons for you to advocate for monogamy. Outside of a minimal, though incredibly well informed scientific stance, your view on non manigains sounds to be purely opinion. All while there was no need for you to comment on it. Your passionate advocacy for monogamy is enough. Or have you been inundated by questions from confused and hurt non monogamists?
Erin Vaughn
Zarah, well said !
Fabian Archibold
I would like to try and open relationship
Christopher Bronson
I love your shirt!
It's nice to see someone putting this much thought into a subject most people sweep under the rug. Unfortunately, I'm an asshole know-it-all on the Internet, so I have to ruin it by putting in my own two cents.

For almost everything I wanted to say throughout this video, I kinda just have to point to Alex Reith, who says it all better than I could. I'd just like to add that, if you actually looked into the science rather than just put thought into what most people know (which, no, I'm not criticizing you for that; it's great to see someone doing that. Just, sometimes, it's not enough.) you might learn a couple of other things:

1) If you look into what actually makes people happy in the long run and how other primates (particularly chimpanzees and bonobos, our closest living cousins) behave, it turns out that we're not straight-up monogamous, but serial monogamists. You make it sound like a bad thing, and it certainly can be in a cultural context that promotes lifelong monogamy (psychology and sociology being inextricably linked can cause problems sometimes), but recognizing that even the most intimate relationships change allows people to end monogamous partners gracefully and with minimal or even no emotional penalties. That's not to say that you just need to change the way you think, because people can also be assholes in any context; it's difficult if not impossible to predict what your emotional response will be in any given situation; and because everyone's different, the people in a monogamous relationship may be ready to move on at different times, and sticking it out because your partner's still into the relationship or splitting before your partner is ready to move on can both be damaging for obvious reasons. Just, if you're lucky enough for everything to line up, serial monogamy seems to be the key to human happiness (in the majority, but not the totality, of the population).

2) This is still a not-very-well-understood aspect of our evolutionary biology, but one interpretation of how prominent mammaries (tits, for anyone in the comments who doesn't feel like parsing that) came to be a secondary sex characteristic for humans is that it made cheating more viable _for women_, which sounds to me like a biological reason not to equate male and female sexuality, but to recognize that having multiple partners is not at all a male-only preference. (Polygamy in the sense of one man with multiple wives and not the other way around, incidentally, is highly correlated with patriarchal societies. I haven't studied the subject enough to point out a causal link, but that's something worth thinking about, at least.) The reasoning goes like this:
* Prominent mammaries indicate that a woman is not currently capable of bearing children (currently or very recently pregnant), which means her monogamous mate isn't watching her that closely or the males around her. I mean, there's no danger of someone else's genes being passed on in favor of his if she isn't currently capable of passing on genes at all, right?
* If humans only had sex for reproduction purposes, that'd mean that women with large breasts would have less sex. However, pretty much all of the great apes have sex for fun as well (see, again, bonobos, which are nature's ultimate swingers), which means that, while women with smaller breasts would have an easier time finding a monogamous mate, women with larger breasts would have an easier time finding guys to bang on the side.
* Some pre-homo-sapiens women have a gene for bigger breasts and/or breasts that don't shrink after weaning. These women bang guys on the side while fertile (whereas women whose breasts remain small or shrink after weaning might scare off the side-guys, who don't want to piss off her mate by getting her pregnant), which causes that trait to be passed on. Because their breasts are permanently large, their mates don't think of them as fertile, which means they aren't as watchful.
* Having guys on the side is apparently so common that this trait spreads throughout the entire population and becomes a morphogenic marker for the species.

3) As a heterosexual male, I don't understand male homosexuals or bisexuals. (Or female heterosexuals or bisexuals, for that matter. My mind says: Men are ugly; who would want to have sex with that?) Homosexuality also flies in the face of the concept of sexual reproduction. Does that mean that male homosexuals should "lean into their biology" and restrict their sexual relationships to women? No. They should do what makes them happy (and doesn't violate anyone else's rights) and have sex with other males. Or transsexuals. Or females. Or other. Or no one. Or anyone. Or _everyone_. Whatever floats their boats. I'm not trying to claim you have anything against homosexuals (I've read how happy you were at Jim Parsons' wedding); I'm just pointing out that saying you "don't understand" why someone has a given sexual preference is pretty much the same non-argument when the subject goes beyond homosexuality.

4) In general, the biology of sexual behavior (by which I'm committing the cardinal sin of putting sex, romance, and intimacy into the same category, which they actually aren't, but they're related enough for a YouTube comment) is not well-understood. It's this mishmash of genetics, epigenetics, sociology, psychology, hormones, and neurotransmitters that no one really gets. It can be affected by things as apparently-unrelated as whether you're the first, middle, or last child in your family. (Later children are more likely to be homosexual, apparently.) Even if I don't agree with the overall message of this video, I actually agree entirely with the message "lean into your biology," because all that means in the end is, "The best kind of relationship is the kind you feel comfortable in, regardless of what anyone else has to say about that kind of relationship, because they don't have your body and brain."

Huh. That wound up longer than I thought, especially considering how little of it actually applies to me. (I'm a monogamous lower-class cis-hetero white male living in the US near but not in a major city, which pretty much means I have no personal stake in the struggles of any minority.) Still, I'm a big fan of facts, and I just can't watch someone put this much thought into a subject and manage to skip so many facts that the overall message ends up wandering into left field.
Wow, this is an extremely uneducated viewpoint, lol. This video made me cringe
Jesse Prescott
When you said "carve out time for my kids' needs", I thought you said "carve out time for my kidneys". I laughed... haha.
Jeff Relf
PornSexuals are the flowers of modernity/capitalism.
I don't buy lottery tickets; likewise, I don't date.
Vince Amendola
I have to totally agree with you and I have to say I love the way your brain works. Thank you for sharing your heart in such a concise way.
Dean Curry
No, open sex is not cool. Ifen i had one wish.../to meet my beloved wife, and marry her "when we were young" i love her soooo much! D
If women only produced one egg a month, there would never be fraternal twins or triplets.
Alejandra Gazca
You are my Role Model beautiful and smart ass Lady 😊
Birdie Perchy
So if out biology is so important what abot LGBTQIA+ people?
Kahlee Bear
Australia? Multiple wives in Australia? Where? I live here and you never hear of that...
Ben Newton
i like that you addressed this issue. But I disagree entirely with your statement about "men especially". All the people I have ever meant that are willing and interested or currently invested in open relatioships are women. Not because women are hornier. Just because they are more interested in having options
Of course anyone can have their own opinion about open relationships and polyamory, its not something that suits everyone.
However, there is absolutely no need to be so insulting or judgemental about it. You live your monogamous life, thats totally fine. But do not tell us we cannot love more than one person or make us look desperate for sharing our hearts and bodies with more than one person.
You dont like open relationships? dont have one. easy as that.
Dont be that suburban mum on facebook who says "gay people cant get married because they cant have children, thats just science"
everyone should just be a whore
A Place of Heart
Yes!!! Monogamy is awesome! :D
Go girl!
Robert Lambert
Thank you. It is satisfying to see such intellectual honesty. Not many can delve into this subject without injecting emotional trappings. If more people could look at sexual constructs with a more analytical perspective there wouldn't be so many people seeking this path to sexual expansion. Or, I have no idea what I'm talking about. Not sure.
Cassie Leigh
I think everyone is entitled to live their life as they see fit. I am a bisexual woman, married to a man. We have 3 children and 1 on the way. I still feel the pull to the other side of my desire. I wish to have a female partner. Does this mean I'm wrong?? Am I denying my biology??
Gabriela Jimenez
Now everyone auto-determinate in a weird way (or with a weird adjective) their gender to hide their simply promiscuity. keep confusing the Free Will with some auto-destructive behaves but then don't complain about the results in the future -HIV-HPV-unwanted pregnancy, to after blame everyone else about your consequences. Promiscuity is not a gender (nor derivative) is just a irresponsible behave that brings consequences, not even when having agreement this can be sustainable with the time, this deteriorate real relationships and confidence, a promiscuous person is barely reliable also distorts the mental health since is not possible to maintain any real connection with tons of people that you barely get to know (you are just feeding your primitives instincts, we are humans to develop our minds and evolve over all those instincts). Maybe Mayim couldn't clarify her point but for me seems to be simple... bringing half of the city to your bed is simply destructive. Building strong relationships, worthy and healthy ones (hetero, homo, lesbo... doesnt matter) is the best way to have real relationships between humans.
Joe Elgart
Love what u are saying and agree 100%, great points
king kong
you aren't even 50 and your calling yourself old???
According to you I'm designed to form valuable relationships with members of the opposite sex. As a lesbian I don't think that makes sense and find it a bit offensive. Heteronormative 'scientific' explanations are a nonsense.
Rebekah Russell
Read sex before dawn. Both female and male biology are designed for non-monogamy. Your opinion is biased.
Birdie Edlen
I'm a serial monogamist too I can't even think about another person when I'm with someone else maybe channum Tatum but that's about it
That's why it is a choice... right?
The fact that a woman produces only one egg a month doesn't mean she can't be selective with whom she fertilises the egg in any given month, ie not the male from the 'primary' relationship. Open relationships can facilitate more parents to tend to children and households than a two person relationship. This is because they aren't just about sex they are also about loving and respectful connections and commitments - these can be one-off or long lasting as in a marriage. The problem most have with this concept is shedding their own insecurities ie jealousy and low self esteem. There are many healthy relationships like this where all of the adults involved are equal in ability to express their needs, concerns, empathy and are able to negotiate for the harmony of their family - childless or not. It's ok to be monogamous many people see themselves that way, but we should also try to understand - absent our own personal bias, a wider set of relationship constructs - as long as all the participants are humans (yes I am clearly stating this to an open forum), adults, free of mind and body to choose whether they stay or go. The key to open relationships is honest communication, reflection and acceptance.
mel No
i rolled my eyes and almost freaked out when you talked to me (':
Joe Reilly
Hey now, I am 55 yo. You aren't an "Old Person" young-un. :)
Mayim, you've spoken the words of reason. Thank you for being strong enough to share taboo opinions in this age of inappropriate liberalism. Believe it or not, pleasure is not something you always need/have the right to obtain. And no, pleasure does not refer only to sex. Discipline and boundaries are something we're uncomfortable with these days.
Travis Chandler
You dont know me

I believe the construct of relationships in general are dying

I will NEVER be in any relationship...PERIOD

and its all because of how society is nowdays
Erin Vaughn
Иван Калашников
Anybody that is using heteronormative as a talking point against biology needs to step back, and find out what can be measured scientifically and what is a figment of imagination
Nikki Diamond-Christudas
I so relationship is more than enough...and friendship is more than enough for when partner is at work or out of town. This new modern way of twisting words and adding new made-up words like polyamory doesn't fulfill need for deep connection and bonding.
Stuart Macleod
I still turning my eyes
Related Videos
Thumbnail: 5 Things You'd Be Surprised to Know About Me
Thumbnail: Divorce
Thumbnail: People Guess the Sexual Orientation of Strangers
Thumbnail: Why I'm a Vegan | Mayim Bialik
Thumbnail: Response to Mayim Bialik's vlog on open relationships: six poly myths busted
Thumbnail: Hitting Kids
Thumbnail: 5 Facts You Probably Didn't Know About Emilia Clarke
Thumbnail: Talking Fun With Flags on The Big Bang Theory | Mayim Bialik
Thumbnail: #Cleavagegate: Mayim Bialik Flashes Hers to Piers Morgan
Thumbnail: Science and Religion
Thumbnail: 10 Women Who Are Complete Plastic
Thumbnail: I'm In An Open Relationship
Thumbnail: The Big Bang Theory - Jim Parsons and Mayim Bialik on Amy and Sheldon
Thumbnail: 10 Secrets The Kardashians Don't Want You To Know
Thumbnail: Does Age Matter In Relationships? | Tell My Story
Thumbnail: The Truth about waiting to have Sex till Marriage | India Batson
Thumbnail: Mayim Bialik & Johnny Galecki Remember Their Teenage Kiss - CONAN on TBS
Thumbnail: Quizzing my mom on Cannabis!
Thumbnail: Mayim Bialik Slams Ariana Grande: Why Is She In Her Underwear?
Thumbnail: Mayim Bialik Bloopers on The Big Bang Theory
Thumbnail: He’s Not Ready for a Relationship? Say THIS to Him… | Matthew Hussey, Get The Guy
Thumbnail: Dr. Mayim Bialik
Thumbnail: Monogamous Vs Open Relationships with Shan Boody | Hannah Witton
Thumbnail: Microblading: 6 Things I Wish I'd Known!
Thumbnail: What If He's Asking For An Open Relationship?
Thumbnail: "Girl" vs. “Woman": Why Language Matters
Thumbnail: Hurts To Be Different
Thumbnail: Mayim Talks Wonder Woman
Thumbnail: Could You Ever Be in an Open Relationship?
Thumbnail: If We Love | Short Film
Thumbnail: Talking Butt Tattoos w/ Mayim Bialik
Thumbnail: Craig Ferguson and Geoff get Married in Vegas!
Thumbnail: Breast-feeding your child beyond infancy.
Thumbnail: Why Can't We Let Go? | Eating with My Ex: Jas And Ash
Thumbnail: Mayim Bialik Settles The Difference Between 'Nerd' and 'Geek'
Thumbnail: ❤Keep Him From Pulling Away: How To Get A Guy To Open Up And Like You Before The Relationship
Thumbnail: Answering Your Questions
Thumbnail: The Beatles Song That Helped Mayim Bialik Land Her Role in Beaches | The Oprah Winfrey Show | OWN
Thumbnail: Too Emotional
Thumbnail: Miyam Bialik's big crash
Thumbnail: Monogamy VS Open Relationships | The View
Thumbnail: Dating in the 21st Century Quiz
Thumbnail: Should I be in an Open Relationship - with JP Sears
Thumbnail: Chad & Mayim Time
Thumbnail: My Ex Has Changed Into A Different Person: Why And How To Make Them Love Me?
Thumbnail: The 14 Red Flags of Dating | The Art of Manliness
Thumbnail: What Our Two-year-old Vegan Toddler Eats in a Day
Thumbnail: Losing My Voice
Thumbnail: Non-monogamous couple shares all || Interview by Conor and Brittany