do you believe in monogamy? do you practice it?

a little more expanded, I don't believe we are "designed" for monogamy any more than we are designed for any other false social construct.

Here in the western, judeo-christian, world monogamy is often presented as the only viable option which I think contributes largely to our high rate of failure at personal realtionships.

That said, me personally, nah, I don't really do monogamy too well.

X post w/toby.

i'm sympathetic to tom's point of view (and thus his parrot crowd), but obviously my life has made some changes in the last month or so, changes i wouldn't have made if i didn't feel sympathy towards "the other side" as well. but as always, i'm shying away from ilx threads where my opinion will differ from the majority and i really don't give a fuck about explaining myself.

I guess the unsympathetic bit might be my general feeling that complacency is a good thing too - i.e. if you've found something that's working for you, don't worry too much if you've not tried the alternatives.

As for forced social constructs, I am a great believer in the easiest option. But I don't really think they're always classic. ILX is one for one thing.

boy, we really have ruined your country, haven't we?

julio, get me an old priest and a young priest.

nick that's no way to talk about your parents.

If you look at my life in terms of relationships, I've been monogamous for the past 14 years. By that I don't mean I was having sex at age 11, just that I've moved from one relationship to the next over the years and remained faithful to whichever partner I was with at the time. If I felt like straying or if the other person thought about it (or cheated on me, blah), we ended it. But I'm sure that's not how everyone works.

And I understand how some relationships go through problems you have to work through, but I also think that sometimes people get so caught up in trying to reenforce their monogamous bond that they sacrifice their happiness. I can't imagine what would have happened had my parents stayed together any longer for the sake of the kids. I think they'd both be miserable (and make us miserable too).

I've been with NA for, let's see..., 4 years and 9 months or so. And just being with him still seems very right.

I also have so little patience for the fucking around involved in dating.

Sympathetic, though,
to the ones who don't buy in--
Boys, girls, do yr thing

(as for eating meat:
social constructs don't mean shit.
I shine from within)

Which is not to devalue other experiments or ways of living -- polygamy/polyamory, or total free love, or chastity/solitude are all just ways of testing human relations, and each requires its own discipline. This discipline is the unassailable ingredient as far as I'm concerned, regardless of choice -- if you can't maintain an experiment or a search, you lose the opportunity to truly learn from it.

Ooo, yummy, another thread critic! Someday I hope you guys get paid lots of money for the service you provide all us witless message board users.

There are variations of course, but when you feel it is imposed or forced I wouldn't think it would be worth doing.

Martin wrote:

I have no idea why sexual fidelity is important to most people, but I only ever gave it as a favour really, not as something I thought made sense.

I'm curious, how would you have felt had your wife had affairs?

and this does not mean that you don't love your partner less than someone who is "monogamous". Love and affection are not finite things. Just b/c you give them to more than one person does not mean that either suffers a lack.

This doesn't mean i'm incapable of loving people. I just love them differently then others. I don't like people passing value judgements on things they don't understand.

You said:Just b/c you give them to more than one person does not mean that either suffers a lack.

I was just saying what goes through the head of someone who is in monogamous when they are cheated on, an alternative to 'they love me less now'.

Yes and no. Of course monogamy should never be some kind of religion, always practiced even to the point of ignoring the mental health of the people involved in the relationship. In that capacity, no, it shouldn't be "belived in." But it should be practiced as principal. It should be a strong guideline. I know lots of girls, and I flirt, and sometimes I even let them excite me a little, but I have made up my mind about loving my girlfriend, and I will stick to that. I have that thought with me always, "I love my girlfriend," because I do. And no matter how my perception is warped with alcohol or an exceptional pair of tits, I have this rule. The rule is, "I love my girlfriend." It's not even a rule, really. More of a mantra.

Yes and no. It's different for girls, I guess, but in my experience, it's not EVER a matter of genuinely not being interested in anyone else. It's a matter of keeping your wits about you.

*

I find Mary's view a bit wishy washy. A couple might be able to find their way throughn a bad patch if they're committed to monogamy. If not, they're going to drift apart when the first temptations come along.

Strangely, even though I'd prefer my partner to be monogamous too I've been in relationships where I've been one of two girlfriends and it really hasn't worried me so long as the communication has all been open and I've not been uncertain of what was going on committment-wise etc.

Why get married ot be in an committed long-term relationship if you *aren't* monogamous? I mean isn't that the point from the outset? Me, I want a monogamous person when I am in a relationship and I am monogamous when I am in one. That's why they call it "cheating" if you're not.

Intentions don't matter, ACTIONS matter.
"I didn't intent to cheat" is lack of consideration and a lame excuse for dishonesty.

Too damn true. I've always tried to live be "treat others the way I'd like to be treated". I'd like to believe I'd be monogamous---I'd certainly do my best. However, I've never had the 'trial by fire' of being in a relationship.

If I choose to be with someone, he would indeed be my main focus.

I don't understand this. I'm not trying to be juvenile, but, out of all the things two people can do together, why is the mutual manipulation of genitalia the most important & the only one that must be banned? Sure sex can be 'sacred', but so can eating together, and most couples don't prohibit dining with other people.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't only fuck one person, if that's what they want. And if that's the deal understood by both parties from the beginning, then breaches CAN be called "cheating".

But what's the urge to monogamy? Something to do with children along way back? It's not only that, though - some people don't want kids, homosexual marriages, etc - and I'd be interested to hear someone try to analyse why they want monogamy for themselves and for the person they're with.

Well, much as you know we are no longer friends, I am not inclined to discuss her sex-life in public - it wouldn't be right. I will say that this was not some one-way hypocritical thing at all - all of the time that she wanted monogamy from me, she knew she had complete sexual freedom as far as I was concerned. I had no objection at all to her having sex with anyone else.

Trust, initmacy and prior agreement.

But the question is why these words are applied to sex above anything else. Is the most intimate and precious part of me my willy? I don't feel that it is. Tell me why you disagree.

1. A lesbian (in a long term relationship) having sex with a gay man (also in a long term relationship), just to see what it's like.

2. A lesbian (in a long term relationship) affectionately stroking the ear of another girl.

Okay, forget the lesbians. Pretend I'm asking you to marry me. You say, "I never thought of you that way, Eyeball, but what the hell. As long as it's exclusive". And I say, "How do you mean, exclusive?" What is your answer?

Coz there's only so many ways for only two people to be tied up and spanked?

Careful what you ask for, Eyeball....

Exclusive = sexually exclusive; initmacy exclusive. no flirting with, touching others in a sexual way, no initiating lame flirty emails with others, no "my wife doesn't understand me" crap, no lying, no cheating. That is exclusive. But you knew that.

But it doesn't work for me, and it hasn't for a long time. For whatever reason, I prefer to have more than one lover - which means that I don't go out looking for someone, but when I do meet and find myself attracted to someone new, then I am free to consider pursuing something with them. However, there are constraints with my polyamorous relationship: honesty before all else; everyone must be accepting of the situation and the new person; everyone must know their value and viability within the relationship(s) and so forth.

I used to try to practice monogamy, but it didn't work: I was always feeling trapped and miserable. And I was constantly fighting my desires to get to know others, in an emotionally intimate manner, with the societal laws that said it was wrong of me to be interested in someone new. So now I practice poly and feel true to myself and true to my lovers. My life and desires are fulfilled and I am happy with who and what I am.

I'd be jealous of his job before I'd be jealous about outside sexual activity: It's his job that makes him stressed out or takes him out of town for a week. Hot guys don't do that.

One of my straight female roommates has decided to buck the burden of (heteronormative, patriachal, capitalist-ownership-modeled, etc) monogamy by having one main beau but remaining open to seeing others if she wants. They have an agreement and it seems to work.

As for me, I have doubts as to whether it is realistic to believe that I can be with just one person (sexually) for the rest of my life, without at least an occasional foray into group activities. That's what I think I want, but I'm afraid it's not what is best for me.

Anyway, how about that monogamy, eh?

This has been my take on it. I'm more interested in honesty and committment than strict physical fidelity. After 13 years of various committed non-monogamous relationships I am now in a de facto monogamous one. The only reason I can do this is b/c I am less committed to my fierce ethics/ideals than in my youth... and b/c I know that the GF won't absolutely freak out if I choose to (for example) sleep with an old lover.

However, knowing that she won't like it has kept me faithful and worry-free for almost a year. More importantly, this has been my personal choice as opposed to something being forced on me. A tenuous balance, but we seem to keep it with grace and respect.

What I would like for myself is to be able to eradicate jealousy, evny and possesivness in myself and others. Jealousy is not necessarily a result of not trusting someone, but it does corrode trust.

Why, if two people really love each other, why should a single fuck-up (cheating) be such a big thing that it cancels out all the other, deeper, more meaningful aspects of the relationship?

The part of a relationship that I value is the part where two people are there for each other always and ideally, for a lifetime. Exclusivity, the "only" portion of LTRs...what good is that? As long as there is commitment and trust, why do I feel the need to include the burden of not having purely physical contacts with other people? If I we still love each other and are there for each other after messing around with another person, what's the big fucking deal?

And what if it keeps happening, or there is a strong emotional component?

That is almost exactly what I was going to write.

Monogamy works for some and not for others. It doesn't work for me.

And what if it keeps happening, or there is a strong emotional component?

What I'm asking is, if someone fucks up in a relationship in another way, it's not the end of the world, so why should physical infidelity be such an end-all? I ask this rhetorrically, because for me it would be, but I wish it weren't.

can you value monogamy on a personal and/or societal level and still be a supporter of social justice?

just looking for more things to needlessly stress out about this week.

what do you mean "still be a supporter of social justice"? do you mean still support alternatives to monogamy and others right to engage in such arrangements?

sure why not

can you value monogamy on a personal and/or societal level and still be a supporter of social justice?

without some clarification that moves this question toward making more sense, I'd have to say it is very silly as it now stands. btw, the answer is yes.

crut ffs cmon here

i really don't know what you mean by "value monogamy". sort of feel like that is a question / way of putting a question that can't be asked in good fatih, i.e. forming it is also dooming yourself to some kind of unsatisfactory answer. so i'm not sure if you have a real question underlying that or not.

more generally i don't think there is anything wrong with "being involved with one partner". i am because i'm introverted and any more would be too much. but it can seem a bit problematic when a lot of the structural power tie-ins that benefit this form of relationship and un-benefit others are unquestioningly taken advantage of / assumed to be the prevailing reality / touted as naturally valuable and good by people who are ostensibly equality-minded.

good answer tbh

u give me hope matt where little exists

I think of monogamy as a very non-utopian social compromise -- one that I ultimately support -- that has taken on the aura of a sacred moral value. I think it IS a sacred moral value for people who agree to it, i.e. if two people enter a relationship with the understanding that it's supposed to be monogamous, violating that is a serious moral breach. I don't feel that monogamy is somehow *objectively* moral, i.e. for everyone. If there are people who say they are able to comfortably exist in non-monogamous relationships, I tend to take their word for it. Although when it comes to raising children I am still a sketptic about polygamous relationships and the like, although I'm not saying it can't possibly be done right.

i am monogamous and i generally support people engaging in whatever kind of arrangement they want

i think the thrust of the question is more, 'if i am committed to social justice should i be trying to be less hung up on monogamy?'

croot, i wonder if comparisons would help you with your question

you could also ask

1) can you value conventionally gendered relationship roles on a personal and/or societal level and still be a supporter of social justice?

(man mows the lawn, woman cooks the dinner, etc)

2) can you value conventional heterosexuality on a personal and/or societal level and still be a supporter of social justice?

with (1) you can imagine ppl saying, for themselves and their partners, 'we found an arrangement that works for us' as far as fairness goes - maybe they just happen to be fine with being the lawn-mower, the dinner-cooker, etc., whether they compensate for that in less traditionally gendered ways elsewhere or not. but at the same time, fully insisting that apportionment of responsibilities, burdens, roles in the relationship ought to be freely determined by both parties and equal to their satisfaction, as should be true for everyone.

with (2) you find maybe a much greater comfort w/ ppl saying, 'i fully support non-traditional or unconventional forms of sexuality, w/ no stigmatization, full recognition by society, etc', while still saying, 'but for me, personally… hetero is the way to go'. with a kind of 'natural' (in terms of 'feels right to me', 'intuitively', etc) justification that isn't thought to need to be accountable to legacy notions of gender

but in terms of commitment to effecting changes in the more widespread adoption/acceptance of alternatives, you will get people saying, on the basis of a commitment to social justice, 'maybe what is comfortable for you is a problem, and you should try washing some more fucking dishes'. but many fewer people saying, 'maybe what is comfortable for you is a problem, and you should be experimenting more with your normo sexuality'.

yes, one must possess multiple sexual partners to truly appreciate the struggles of the less fortunate

practice is such a funny term in this context

lol @ the implication that non-monogamous relationships are somehow more just/fair

maybe it's just the people I know/the circles I travel in but all the polyamorous people I've ever come into contact with were self-absorbed assholes/never saw any "open" relationship that lasted more than a few months and/or didn't end with someone feeling deeply resentful/mistreated

monogamy's no walk in the park either and happiness is not guaranteed but I just lol at the suggestion that there's something inherently wrong or unfair about it as a general concept

I don't really think of monogamy as intended to be a "guarantor of happiness" anyway, that seems fundamentally different from the purpose. "minimizer of sadness" maybe.

"Optimizer of happiness/sadness ratio"

And also "you can't be a true fighter for social justice while practicing monogamy" just sounds like something a selfish partner would say to guilt you into an open relationship.

I'm into monogamy because I only have time for one person in my headspace/schedule, dear god. If I had to juggle TWO of them, when would I do what *I* want??

also wtf at j automatically conflating monogamy with heterosexuality upthread

maybe it's just the people I know/the circles I travel in but all the polyamorous people I've ever come into contact with were self-absorbed assholes/never saw any "open" relationship that lasted more than a few months and/or didn't end with someone feeling deeply resentful/mistreated

― Οὖτις, Friday, October 31, 2014 4:22 PM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what about the straight people you know?

I believe in monogamy like I believe in civilization: it's a construct that's only tenable to the extent that all involved parties are willing to work at making it tenable. Same with polyamory. I'm doing pretty well with monogamy these days.

what about the straight people you know?

these *were* straight people! my homo friends run the whole gamut - committed monogamous couples w kids, confirmed bachelors completely uninterested in long-term relationships, lonely singles lookin for partners, etc. but I don't think I've ever known any gays/lesbians in poly relationships. again, maybe it's just the circles I travel in, but where I live you'd think I would've run into some successful ones if they were such an awesome alternative to monogamy.

love hearing straight guys in committed mono relationships get "annoyed" at polyamorous people

literally no one is saying it's better.

whose annoyed

all the polyamorous people I've ever come into contact with were self-absorbed assholes

Oh word?

Both "monogamy" and "polyamory" are stupid ideas and I've found it's better to be committed and permissive and communicative and flexible

otm

sure I can get with that

Oh word?

my city is full of jerks

I've found it's better to be committed and permissive and communicative and flexible

emotionally too

Every poly arrangement/open relationship I've known has split up because one member feels their license-to-screw-around precludes any feelings-of-being-left-out in their partner. Partner feels left out, arrangement dissolves. As for monogamous relationships, the typical incapacity for affairs is incredibly frustrating also.

lol @ the implication that non-monogamous relationships are somehow more just/fair

also wtf at j automatically conflating monogamy with heterosexuality upthread

obviously i was not; i was associating widespread conceptions of normatively sanctioned forms of relations with others, with the one cruet asked about presumably because he was concerned about its normative status

there is certainly thinking afoot in pro-poly circles that ethical non-monogamy can be less un-rewarding un-satisfying emotionally limiting etc for people whose attachment styles, sexual or emotional needs, etc aren't readily satisfied within the bounds of serially monogamous relationships. i don't think it's much of a leap from there to thinking that a prejudicial attitude toward the status of monogamy or non-monogamy can contribute to the unhappiness of people who would be better off ahem loving freely.

I can only guess that the unspoken assumption lurking behind the question is that valuing monogamy somehow requires one to condemn all other approaches to relationships, but that is a shallow and baseless assumption to make, so I'm thrown back to believing crüt is just pulling our legs.

hi dere I have had four separate poly relationships that lasted well over a year, both parties had other partners in each case, all but one are current friends

j otm about the snooty behavior of poly folks, I was guilty of that when younger

xp so the justness / fairness problem arises not so much on the level of individual relationships (you could always say, take it or leave it, there, if your partner said 'i've been thinking…'), as at the level of the social costs/benefits/permissions of engaging in other forms of relationship that would, in a sense, allow for a better overall distribution and provision of the goods of being-in-relationships

"Snooty behaviour" ime usually comes from the difficulty in talking about >1 relationships, and finding that line between "I am telling you useful information" and "I am bragging".

I guess it'd be >2 actually, I haven't found a good term

'weird'

nb i didn't mean to imply that i would ever condemn any individual or group for being non-monogamous. "some of my best friends are polyamorous" etc. i'm not pulling anyone's leg (intentionally) so much as i keep running into a wall when i think about my emotional & sexual desires and personal experiences vs. the bigger picture of humanity & sexual politics. (shocker!) i have a lot of feelings and hangups but i don't know what they are and i don't know how to express them. i think maybe i have just had a string of bad luck with people who have different expectations than i do and it's made me feel inadequate. i don't really know what i'm asking so that's why my post made zero sense but i definitely appreciate the feedback.

as someone with zero experience with poly relationships, I would imagine there HAS to be some crazy power dynamics going on there. like open relationships must be more advantageous for some people than others

as someone with zero experience with poly relationships,

fortunately monogamous relationships don't have crazy power dynamics

NOT THAT THIS IS A FUNCTIONING BINARY

u must be a hit at parties mattresslessness

creut, that sounds kind of like why i spent some time thinking about non-monogamy, aside from just general speculation abt ~timely social phenomena~. i seem to be monogamous in my bones but i had three serious relationships in a row in which at least the idea of non-exclusivity was floated, or something more serious than that. people in their twenties, ugh. and i was really torn between just saying ~~no way~~, and trying to be ok with it for intellectual reasons, since in principle i didn't see why it should be a problem (my circumstances were weird, i never really had to entertain the idea of my sexual partner being non-monogamous, at best having other kinds of relationships). i was troubled by the idea that my attachment style, one person at a time, little real motive to even get out and have the possibility of relating to lots of others, was very ~male~, in the way that men can be so presumptive about what is theirs. so i thought maybe being more ok with something that was not a standard monogamous romantic relationship was something i should work at. and work at for others; because i was with women who were happy with me at the time but were kind of chronically dissatisfied with the ways they were expected to have relationships.

it didn't really go anywhere for me because my heart just wouldn't buy it. but i have a lingering question about it because i know i'm just not the kind of person who feels like everything is in balance, if i'm relating to few people but my partner is relating to lots (in a more intimate way); and the only way to explore that seems to be to try more to relate to lots of people myself, to see if i could come up with my own way to compensate for possibly feeling 'left alone' by a partner. but i don't know if i'll ever go for that, or care to try.

Most of my >2 relationships have been in gayworld and therein the power dynamics are pretty chill. I read, statistically, that 50% of all participants in poly arrangements are gay men (compared to 4% of the general pop.) so maybe the gays have no place in this thread except to high-five each other

http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/open-relationships-reduce-jealousy-12-surprising-facts-about-non-monogamy?page=0%2C0

my ex-boyfriend was poly-amorous. Problem is I wasn't

u must be a hit at parties mattresslessness

― quarter pound cronenburger, Friday, October 31, 2014 3:35 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i usually do well at small parties with friends. one basic rule i've learned is, don't pretend to be anonymous.

"as someone with zero experience with poly relationships,"

yeah, I threw this in to acknowledge that I didn't have knowledge of how this worked and was just curious, but A+ to you for following along

"fortunately monogamous relationships don't have crazy power dynamics"

mind would definitely be more complicated if I started fucking everybody

fgti's link v amusing in its conflicting conclusions and un-sourced claims

fair enough and yes i'm sure throwing gender into the equation doesn't make it any easier. xp

and its psychology today links

xp

I'm into monogamy because I only have time for one person in my headspace/schedule, dear god. If I had to juggle TWO of them, when would I do what *I* want??

― Orson Wellies (in orbit), Friday, October 31, 2014 4:35 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is a key point btw

it is difficult even for bill paxton

xxp lol I didn't notice

I'm into monogamy because I only have time for one person in my headspace/schedule, dear god. If I had to juggle TWO of them, when would I do what *I* want??

yeah it seems like it would have to be one's primary hobby. on the other hand, if your significant other were going off to spend time with someone else, think about how many free nights you'd have to yourself?

ftr that would happen like once every few months in my relationships, not on any kind of regular basis

both myself & my partners were pretty good about not abusing the privilege, classic "primary partner" stuff

if it's only about time and headspace management, there are probably no 'monogamous' relationships because people have other passions like taxidermy