Considering an open relationship? Don't read this Reddit forum
In May, the President's on-again-off-again best friend appeared in the Oval Office visibly bruised. He laughed it off and said his five-year-old child had done it.
The internet had other ideas. Soon, a round of extremely unconfirmed speculation began about an alleged – and I cannot stress the word 'alleged' enough – throuple: Musk; Trump's deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, and his wife, political adviser Katie Miller. The Democrats even weighed in with a post of an empty hotel room chair, a notorious signpost of cuckoldry.
I'm not alone in finding perverse joy in other people's relationship dramas. Reddit's crowdsourced advice sections, particularly r/relationships and r/amitheasshole, have long been staples of viral posts. They're portable soap operas – or in some cases, sitcoms – with the added spice that they're (probably, sometimes, maybe) real.
The Musk-Miller saga led me to r/openmarriageregret, a subreddit mining and reposting threads from other relationship and polyamory boards for cautionary tales of open relationships gone wrong. Maintaining a relationship with another human being contorts us into new ugly shapes. Maintaining a relationship with two or more other human beings can break us apart.
The page opens with a sober preamble: 'Life is about choices. Some we regret, some we are proud of – and some will haunt us for ever.'
It's all very 'don't try this at home'. Sure. This is for educational purposes.
Many posts are as you'd imagine: a man pressures his wife into an open relationship and is then shocked to discover that she's a sought-after 10 and he's sexual kryptonite. But things can get so much worse.
One user asks if they're in the wrong 'for leaving our honeymoon because my husband and his boyfriend kept leaving me and my girlfriend out'.
Another writes of a very contemporary woe: 'My husband wants to open our marriage for his AI girlfriend and says it's the next step in their relationship.' Her partner has been acting distant lately, she says, spending a lot of time on the phone, smiling to himself, hiding away in the home office. Then he says he has something to tell her. Is he having an affair?
No. It's far worse. The user continues: 'He told me he wants to take the next step with her.' This involves introducing the AI to their children. 'How do I stay married to someone who's half emotionally checked out of our life and into a fucking chatbot?'
In the comments, several people share their experience of male partners becoming enamoured of a simulation of a woman who doesn't talk back and is programmed to think everything he says is brilliant.
The voyeurism of the group is twofold: of course the relationship dramas are engaging. But so are the way people discuss these real scenarios. The commenters bring their own baggage and bias, perhaps not realising they're part of the drama themselves. The group's diehards subscribe to one central thesis: that those opening their relationships want novelty and attention, and the person who provides this is functionally irrelevant.
The thesis, of course, doesn't necessarily hold water. As much as non-monogamy continues to rise, we've been gawking at successful open arrangements for decades. Not that it matters to the group's frequenters, who forge forward in their cynicism, however misinformed. 'I know absolutely no one in an open relationship or marriage,' says one user, who is in the top 1% of commenters in the group.
I know, by my slightly unsettling investment in the group, that I'm complicit. But I can't look away. Who are these commenters? Who hurt them? Why are they so devoted to other people's romantic dramas, their crumbling marriages? Why am I? The emotional zing of gossip is strong. Even the usually humourless Democrats are in on it.
So, putting ill will to one side: I truly hope the alleged Musk-Miller polycule patch things up. Alleged! I mean alleged! They're made for each other.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump says he 'loves Sydney Sweeney' as president responds to the actress's 'great jeans' advert controversy
President Donald Trump was elated to find out that actress Sydney Sweeney was registered as a Republican after her controversial American Eagle jeans ad caused a political firestorm. Daily Mail asked Trump his reaction to Sweeney's surprise voter registration after he landed in Allentown, Pennsylvania, and the president didn't shy away from his excitement. 'Oh, now I love her ad,' Trump responded. 'You'd be surprised at how many people are Republican. That's one I wouldn't have known but I'm glad you told me that,' he continued. 'If Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic.' Daily Mail previously revealed that Sweeney registered with the Republican Party of Florida in Monroe County last June, according to public voter records. The reveal comes as Sweeney's controversial advertising campaign with American Eagle sparked intense backlash among liberals who accused it of subtly promoting white supremacy and eugenics. But the controversy led many to leap to Sweeney's defense, pointing out that the reference to 'great genes/ jeans ' was simply a play on words about Sweeney's good looks and its denim line. In the promo, a camera pans on Sweeney putting on her jeans as she explains how genes are passed down 'from parents to offspring.' She tells the audience that genes determine 'traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color.' As the camera pans up her body, Sweeney then seductively concludes, 'my genes are blue.' She continues: 'My body's composition is determined by my genes...' before exclaiming: 'Hey, eyes up here' as the camera cuts back to her face. The ad generated intense backlash with critics claiming that the reference to 'great genes' is a subtle comment on her whiteness. A report in Salon argued that praising someone's genes has a historical connection to celebrating thinness, and conventional attractiveness. American Eagle denied accusations that the ad had any nods to racism in a statement that read: '"Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans" is and always was about the jeans'. 'Her jeans. her story. We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone'. Prominent figures on the right have also defended the ad, criticizing accusers of jealousy for Sweeney's attractiveness or extracting unnecessary meanings from the pun. Republican Senator Ted Cruz weighed in on the debate, writing on X: 'Wow. Now the crazy Left has come out against beautiful women. I'm sure that will poll well….'
Reuters
42 minutes ago
- Reuters
White House defends firing of labor official as critics warn of trust erosion
WASHINGTON, Aug 3 (Reuters) - White House economic advisers on Sunday defended President Donald Trump's firing of the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, pushing back against criticism that Trump's action could undermine confidence in official U.S. economic data. Later on Sunday, Trump again criticized BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, without providing evidence of wrongdoing, and said he would name a new BLS commissioner in the next three or four days. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CBS that Trump had "real concerns" about the BLS data, while Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, said the president "is right to call for new leadership." Hassett said on Fox News Sunday the main concern was Friday's BLS report of net downward revisions showing 258,000 fewer jobs had been created in May and June than previously reported. Trump accused McEntarfer of faking the jobs numbers, without providing any evidence of data manipulation. The BLS compiles the closely watched employment report as well as consumer and producer price data. The BLS gave no reason for the revised data but noted "monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors." McEntarfer responded to her abrupt dismissal on Friday in a post on the Bluesky social media platform, saying it was "the honor of her life" to serve as BLS commissioner and praising the civil servants who work there. McEntarfer's firing added to growing concerns about the quality of U.S. economic data and came on the heels of a raft of new tariffs on dozens of trading partners, sending global stock markets tumbling as Trump presses ahead with plans to reorder the global economy. Investors also are watching the impact of the surprise resignation of Federal Reserve governor Adriana Kugler, which opened a spot on the central bank's powerful board and could shake up what was already a fractious succession process for Fed leadership amid difficult relations with Trump. Trump said on Sunday he would announce a candidate to fill the open Fed position within the next couple days. In an interview with CBS' "Face the Nation," Greer acknowledged there were always revisions of job numbers, "but sometimes you see these revisions go in really extreme ways." Brian Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America (BAC.N), opens new tab, said large revisions of economic data could undermine public confidence and that government officials should develop ways of improving data quality. "They can get this data, I think, other ways and I think that's where the focus ought to be: how do we get the data to be more resilient and more predictable and more understandable?" he said on CBS. "Because what bounces around is restatements ... that creates doubt about it." Critics, including former leaders of the BLS, slammed, opens new tab Trump's move and called on Congress to investigate McEntarfer's removal, saying it would shake trust in a respected agency. "It undermines credibility," said William Beach, a former BLS commissioner and co-chair of the group Friends of the BLS. "There is no way for a commissioner to rig the jobs numbers," he said. "Every year we've revised the numbers. When I was commissioner, we had a 500,000 job revision during President Trump's first term," he said on CNN's "State of the Union." Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, who worked in both the Clinton and Obama administrations, also criticized McEntarfer's firing. "This is a preposterous charge. These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals," Summers said on ABC's "This Week." The BLS surveys 121,000 employers - businesses and government agencies - each month, seeking their total payroll employment during the week in which the 12th day of the month falls. The response rate has fallen sharply since the COVID pandemic, from 80.3% in October 2020 to about 67.1% in July. Knowing that, BLS allows late-arriving employer submissions, and revisions to earlier submissions, to be taken into account over the next two months. That means each month's initial estimate of employment for the immediately preceding month also contains revisions to the two months before that. The revisions in Friday's report were large by historic standards. The downward revision of 125,000 jobs for May was the largest between a second estimate and third estimate since a 492,000 reduction for March 2020. That was the largest ever and was reported in June 2020 for the payrolls report for May 2020.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Legal cases could prise open Epstein cache despite Trump's blocking effort
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed that his administration would release a tranche of documents in the criminal investigation into disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein. But since Trump returned to the White House, his promises have fallen flat, with few documents released – and backtracking about releasing more records. The lack of disclosure has prompted not only dissatisfaction among those seeking information about Epstein's crimes, but political flak Trump can't seem to deflect, especially about his own relations with the convicted sex trafficker. But where political pressures have so far failed, legal pressures that have largely sailed under the radar of the fierce debate about Epstein's crimes could yet succeed and bring crucial information in the public eye. Several court cases provide some hope that even if Trump's justice department fails to make good on calls for transparency, potentially revelatory records about Epstein, his crimes and his links to some of the most powerful people in the US might still see the light of day. Moreover, it is possible that the justice department's unusual request to unseal grand jury transcripts, in Epstein and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's criminal cases, could also undermine opposition to it releasing records. One lawsuit brought by the news website Radar Online and investigative journalist James Robertson stems from their April 2017 public records request for documents related to the FBI's investigation of Epstein. This request came years after Epstein pleaded guilty to state-level crimes in Florida for soliciting a minor for prostitution – and before his 2019 arrest on child sex-trafficking charges in New York federal court. Radar and Robertson filed suit in May 2017 after the FBI did not respond to their request; the agency ultimately agreed that it would process documents at a rate of 500 pages per month, per court documents. 'Despite the FBI identifying at least 11,571 pages of responsive documents, 10,107 of those pages remain withheld nearly 20 years after the events at issue,' according to court papers filed by Radar and Robertson. Although Epstein killed himself in custody awaiting trial, and Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence, the FBI is fighting release of more documents. The agency has invoked an exception to public records disclosure that allow for documents to be withheld if their release would interfere with law enforcement proceedings. The Manhattan federal court judge overseeing this public records suit sided with the FBI's citation of these exemptions, but Radar is pursuing an appeal that could be heard in the second circuit court of appeals this fall. 'In court, they insist that releasing even one additional page from the Epstein file would hurt their ability to re-prosecute Ghislaine Maxwell in the event the supreme court orders a new trial,' a spokesperson for Radar said. 'It's a flimsy rationale and we are challenging it head on in the court of appeals. Our only hope of understanding how the FBI failed to hold Epstein accountable for over a decade – and preventing future miscarriages of justice – is if the government releases the files.' It's also possible that the justice department's request to release grand jury transcripts in Epstein and Maxwell's cases could bolster arguments for the release of records. 'The DoJ's core argument against disclosure for the past six years has been that it would jeopardize their ability to put – and keep – Ghislaine Maxwell in prison. They say that releasing even a single page could threaten their case,' the Radar spokesperson said. 'Naturally, any support they offer to release material undermines their claims.' Separately, developments in civil litigation involving Epstein and Maxwell could also potentially lead to the disclosure of more documents surrounding their crimes. A federal judge in 2024 unsealed a cache of documents in the late Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre Roberts's defamation case against Maxwell. Some documents were kept under seal, however, and journalists pursuing release of documents appealed against that decision. On 23 July, the second circuit decided that it found 'no error in the district court's decisions not to unseal or make public many of the documents at issue', but it also ordered the lower court to review possibly unsealing them. Robert's attorney Sigrid McCawley reportedly said she was 'thrilled with the decision' and also said she was 'hopeful that this order leads to the release of more information about Epstein's monstrous sex trafficking operation and those who facilitated it and participated in it', according to Courthouse News Service. Others who have represented Epstein victims have called for disclosure of public records – and voiced frustration about being stonewalled in their pursuit of documents. Jennifer Freeman, special counsel at Marsh Law Firm, who represents Epstein accuser Maria Farmer, previously told the Guardian she had made a public records request for information related to her client, with no success. Spencer T Kuvin, chief legal officer of GoldLaw and an attorney for several Epstein victims, hopes that public records battles could help pull back the veil on Epstein information. 'I think that the Foia requests will absolutely assist in the disclosure of information. The DoJ has made blanket objections citing ongoing investigations, but through Foia litigation the courts can test those objections by potentially reviewing the information 'in camera',' Kuvin said. 'This means that an independent judge may be appointed to review the information to determine whether the DoJ's objections are accurate or just a cover.' Roy Gutterman, director of the Newhouse School's Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, cautioned that calls for disclosures – and even government requests to release some files – might not be a panacea for access to extensive documents. 'This case is already complicated, and there were already too many cooks in the very crowded kitchen, and it's getting more crowded as more public interest grows in the grand jury materials as well as the now-settled defamation case,' Gutterman said. But stonewalling could also continue. With the public records requests, it's possible that US federal authorities could still successfully cite the investigation exemption and keep documents out of pubic view. 'Using Foia for FBI and law enforcement materials related to this case, might be a creative newsgathering tactic, but the law enforcement exemption the government is citing might be legitimate because some of the materials are grand jury materials and some other materials might include private or unsubstantiated allegations,' Gutterman said. 'The reporter in me thinks there is an important public interest in revealing these documents, but the law might end up keeping most material secret. Even with the widespread and growing public interest, it might be too big an ask to unseal a lot of this material. 'Practically speaking, the DoJ might also be very selective in which materials it would want to release as well because of the political element involved here, too.'
