Do you believe in monogomy?

[Nikki Sahagin]

Yes, I believe in monogamy. God said, I believe it. I do think monogamy is a conscious choice. The body always wants what feels good. Too much food, easy life and sex with anything that looks interesting. That is normal. It is the human condition. But as a higher cognitive species, we should be able to control our emotions and not the other way around. I don't believe you have to be old and crippled to be faithful to your SO, just respectful, even in the bad times.

 

Society is always changing but he word of God is the same, no matter what time in history it is. I base my life on that principle. I know most don't, but with the rise in communicable diseases, maybe it should be considered.

 

So do you think that religion and monogamy go hand in hand in many cases as religion generally dictates a more disciplined and controlled lifestyle?

[sxyNYCcpl]

You're right about men always having had lovers. But men have always been in the most powerful social position. Society is patriarchal. I believe many women would like more than 1 man or fantasise about this. But there is a stigma attached to women that act in this way meaning that women would attach shame and guilt to this that men would not making it an altogether more difficult reality for women to pursue this.

 

I believe you are right.

 

I think there is no fundamental, biological difference between men and women when it comes to their sexual desires. Unfortunately, our society sees to it to pound into girls heads the ideas that "good girls don't" and that ultimately leads to much of the sexual battlegrounds present in so many relationships.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I believe you are right.

 

I think there is no fundamental, biological difference between men and women when it comes to their sexual desires. Unfortunately, our society sees to it to pound into girls heads the ideas that "good girls don't" and that ultimately leads to much of the sexual battlegrounds present in so many relationships.

 

Yes and if you are talking biologically, women are capable of multiple orgasms and men of one. This would suggest that women can have one orgasm and then five minutes later, with another man, have another. This would also suggest women should biologically sleep around and are indeed able to due to their ability to have more than one orgasm.

[EnigmaXOXO]

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

At times it does seem like we’re living in a world that is sex-obsessed. Than again, that might just be the result of having been sexually repressed for so long. Sort of like giving a teenager the keys to the car for the very first time and expecting them not to put the gas peddle through the floor. Who knows. Maybe it will get old eventually like everything else and people will start getting all nostalgic again ... longing for the “old days” when love and relationships were founded on more substance. After all, seems as a species we’re all inclined to only want what eludes us.

 

Me? --- I believe in staying true to your word. I believe in faithfulness, honesty and trustworthiness. I believe that taking full responsibility for your choices and actions inspires you act more responsibly towards others. I believe that the most fulfilling and rewarding kind of relationships (for me) are those grounded in love and mutual respect, rather than the libido.

 

Monogamy (for me) seems the most natural thing in the world. Doesn’t take any more effort or thought than breathing. Because of my biological predisposition, I often have the natural “urge” to pee at the most inappropriate times, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to take a squat while standing in line at the Walmart.

 

Are we capable of being monogamous to one person forever? ... I think so. There are many who have done just that despite the all the arguments, debates and justifications to the contrary. It depends on each individual and how they choose to conduct themselves within the relationships they seek out create for themselves.

 

The bigger question (for me) is whether or not “Love” can last forever. I sure hope so, cause I’m really counting on it this time. If not, than I will still continue to do what has always come naturally to me and remain “monogamous” to whomever I happen to be in a relationship with. I just find it’s so much easier and less complicated than the alternative, so it’s really a no-brainer.

 

I think a LS poster once coined the term “serial monogamy” some time back. Since I only have the patience, energy and intestinal fortitude to handle one man at a time ... I think “serial monogamist” is the term that best fits me.

[Nikki Sahagin]

At times it does seem like we’re living in a world that is sex-obsessed. Than again, that might just be the result of having been sexually repressed for so long. Sort of like giving a teenager the keys to the car for the very first time and expecting them not to put the gas peddle through the floor. Who knows. Maybe it will get old eventually like everything else and people will start getting all nostalgic again ... longing for the “old days” when love and relationships were founded on more substance. After all, seems as a species we’re all inclined to only want what eludes us.

 

Me? --- I believe in staying true to your word. I believe in faithfulness, honesty and trustworthiness. I believe that taking full responsibility for your choices and actions inspires you act more responsibly towards others. I believe that the most fulfilling and rewarding kind of relationships (for me) are those grounded in love and mutual respect, rather than the libido.

 

Monogamy (for me) seems the most natural thing in the world. Doesn’t take any more effort or thought than breathing. Because of my biological predisposition, I often have the natural “urge” to pee at the most inappropriate times, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to take a squat while standing in line at the Walmart.

 

Are we capable of being monogamous to one person forever? ... I think so. There are many who have done just that despite the all the arguments, debates and justifications to the contrary. It depends on each individual and how they choose to conduct themselves within the relationships they seek out create for themselves.

 

The bigger question (for me) is whether or not “Love” can last forever. I sure hope so, cause I’m really counting on it this time. If not, than I will still continue to do what has always come naturally to me and remain “monogamous” to whomever I happen to be in a relationship with. I just find it’s so much easier and less complicated than the alternative, so it’s really a no-brainer.

 

I think a LS poster once coined the term “serial monogamy” some time back. Since I only have the patience, energy and intestinal fortitude to handle one man at a time ... I think “serial monogamist” is the term that best fits me.

 

It's really nice to see someone with that attitude You said you feel this way because of your 'biological disposition'. So can you agree when others claim that there biological disposition causes them to be just the opposite?

[fral945]

You're right about men always having had lovers. But men have always been in the most powerful social position. Society is patriarchal. I believe many women would like more than 1 man or fantasise about this. But there is a stigma attached to women that act in this way meaning that women would attach shame and guilt to this that men would not making it an altogether more difficult reality for women to pursue this. I am also quite sure that in certain societies (I couldn't name them) possibly the Amazons and a certain African tribe? That here it is the women who have loads of male lovers and the men just one women.

 

You are correct. I acknowledged women had lovers on the side, though obviously the stigma was greater for them in that respect. Depending on the male/female ratio and attitudes in each society, there have been societies where women have had multiple lovers when men outnumbered women. However, this has generally been the exception and not the rule.

 

You should read the book "Sex in History" sometime, it's a very interesting read on the history male/female sexual relations throughout history.

 

Also if you see sex just as for survival and reproduction, you must consider that just as nowadays some people don't want children, so didn't people back then. People don't just have sex for reproduction. Most have it for pleasure.

 

Sex for pleasure in a marriage is a modern concept. What you don't realize is individuals were not as free in marriages of old. Arranged marriages where children were expected by the families limited that. The groups' needs (family) trumped the individuals' needs. Children were necessary (based on the customs of the time) to pass down power and keep power in certain families. Whether you wanted children or had sex for pleasure was a moot point.

 

And so to justify being promiscuous as being needed for survival when children wouldn't have been the intention of the act and the fathers and maybe even mothers wouldn't have stuck around...is folly. Also nowadays the world is overpopulated and so definately we could do with LESS sex not more especially as even with contraception, many people choose not to use it, or misuse it altogether.

 

I am not justifying promiscuity, just pointing out why it may be wired in us. Do you realize how many women used to die at childbirth or because of complications to it before modern medicine? And men that died at war? Lifespans were shorter, those who did survive had harder lives, and long term relationships were uncommon.

 

Being able to bond with different human beings (whether emotionally or sexually) was necessary for survival in most of history. Nowadays, you are correct, promiscuity is not as necessary, but obviously many of us are still wired that way.

 

Your last comment is interesting with regard to love and marriage being a new concept. In a way it makes more sense for the marriage partner to be the one with whom you have children and for both partners to have a lover to fulfill the love aspect.

 

Yes, it was more practical. Take the emotional aspect out of marriage and make it more of a contract. I think most people would succeed in marriage if it was that way. That is why I feel those societies in some ways were more practical and less idealistic than we are now, trying to make modern marriage all encompassing.

 

Who knows, though? Maybe we will progress to the point one day where human beings are monogamous. But I think we are far from there yet.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I agree that marriage was seen as more of a contract and indeed still today in many countries marriage is seen in that way i.e. arranged marriages.

 

But then why now do people WILLINGLY choose to get married? Why do they make that committment? There's no obligation, there's no force, yet we CHOOSE it and then trash the vows we make?

[fral945]

But then why now do people WILLINGLY choose to get married? Why do they make that committment? There's no obligation, there's no force, yet we CHOOSE it and then trash the vows we make?

 

Societal pressure and expectations. Most people still see marriage as the ideal and most socially acceptable way of creating male/female partnerships. No one is FORCED, but pressure from family and society is definitely there. I can tell you I have been constantly questioned as to why I am not married since I graduated college.

 

Marriages are trashed more nowadays for a whole host of reasons, but three I think are the biggest factors are:

 

1) more and higher expectations of a marriage partner

2) more freedom to get out of marriage

3) length of marriages (marriages last much longer than they ever have before)

[sxyNYCcpl]

But then why now do people WILLINGLY choose to get married? Why do they make that committment? There's no obligation, there's no force, yet we CHOOSE it and then trash the vows we make?

 

I think many people, even those who end up "trashing" their vows later entered into their marriage with the intent of living up to them. But we're humans and therefore imperfect, and things change.

 

It's somewhat cynical, and I certainly cannot claim authorship of it, but I've heard it said that men enter into a marriage expecting their wife will stay the same, and she doesn't, and women enter expecting her husband to change, and he doesn't either.

 

I've spoken to men over the years who consider themselves lucky if they get a little marriage bed action more than 2 or 3 times a year. In other cases, one or the other of the partners (or both!) will let themselves go physically to the point they're no longer sexually attractive. Or it could be that they were (both!) putting on a bit of a front during the dating phase and hiding who they really are, but as time goes by that front gets dropped. Or perhaps they were in denial about who they are themselves.

 

Obviously, I don't believe in sexual exclusivity, as I really don't understand the point. I've learned that it's possible to have the best of both worlds. But back to the point of nature vs. nurture, we are taught certain things about how our sexuality is "supposed" to be, and one of those things is that it's more socially acceptable to cheat on your spouse than to throw away the unnecessary shackles of monogamy. And if you think I'm wrong, think about how the people at work (or school, or whatever) would react to "I heard Bob stepped out on his wife" vs. "I heard Bob and his wife are swingers!!!"

[EnigmaXOXO]

You said you feel this way because of your 'biological disposition'. So can you agree when others claim that there biological disposition causes them to be just the opposite.

 

I said I must empty my bladder because of my biological predisposition ... not that my uterus mandates I must procreate with the cute guy behind the counter just because he’s fertile and he winked.

 

I do think that some folks have better impulse control than others. Or for whatever reason, have just acquired a different set of coping strategies ... some learned, some inherent to their personalities. Can’t really attribute people’s behaviors to being “situational” since two people may respond very differently even if finding themselves facing the same exact scenario. I think it has more to do with our individual personalities ... a function of our brains. But “who” we are is not just determined by biology, rather by nurture and social conditioning as well.

 

WHOLE other thread!

[Lizzie60]

Do you believe in monogamy?

 

Not at all.

 

Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime?

 

It is natural for a little while.. for a lifetime? not a chance..

 

Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

I think it is, as you say, only later in life.. when both partner has lost their libido.

 

I also think it's easier for a woman to be faithful, especially after she's a mother... she has no time to go elsewhere..

 

Women are naturally more monogamous than men.. IMO.

[Trialbyfire]

I strongly believe in monogamy. If you've got self-control, it's not a big deal. If you don't, you're going to crash and burn. C'est la vie.

[Geishawhelk]

I will put in here what I put elsewhere.

Desire is a natural instinct.

Fidelity is a commitment.

 

I really believe it is a completely natural thing for people to NOT be monogamous.

I actually believe we are not naturally programmed to remain monogamous to one person only, for ever.

 

However:

If we undertake to make a commitment, make promises, take vows, whatever, and we do this with our significant other person - then we have to put our money where our mouth is.

If we do not think we can keep this promise, we shouldn't make it.

If we find ourselves in a situation where we are sorely, strongly tempted to break this promise, we should recognise the danger signals and do something to either prevent it, or facilitate it with as little collateral damage, and as much honesty, dignity and integrity, as possible.

 

I told my partner the other evening:

If I were ever to find out he'd strayed and had sex with someone else, that wouldn't be a problem for me.

What the problem would be, is that he lied to me and went behind my back.

The deceit and subterfuge would be the deal-breaker.

Not the sex.

[D-Jam]

I think everyone has their own beliefs.

 

I believe in monogamy because I just have seen way too many screwed up, messed up, flaky, immature, psycho chicks out there to make me think I'm better off banging them all. It's like many men say..."I'd give them all up just for one sensible, beautiful, intelligent woman."

I also think that many believe in the idea of deep love...and thus can't fathom being able to have that with multiple people at the same time.

 

However, others don't believe in all that. They like having loads of options, fresh flesh, different people and experiences. They look at monogamy as boring. I notice they also don't believe in the idea of deep love, and would rather love themselves and keep others out when it comes to deep emotions.

 

I don't think we should judge one side or the other, but learn to really be 100% HONEST with each other. So you're the guy who doesn't believe in monogamy. Don't lie to women saying you do in the hopes of shagging them. So you're the woman who does believe in monogamy. Don't get all over the guy who doesn't believe in it and try to "change him" to want monogamy...especially when there are loads of guys out there who do believe in it.

 

Same deal on men. If I meet women who say they don't believe in monogamy, or they don't want to be in a RL or commitment...then I friendzone them at the most. If they want my heart and love...then it comes with a price.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I think everyone has their own beliefs.

 

I believe in monogamy because I just have seen way too many screwed up, messed up, flaky, immature, psycho chicks out there to make me think I'm better off banging them all. It's like many men say..."I'd give them all up just for one sensible, beautiful, intelligent woman."

 

I also think that many believe in the idea of deep love...and thus can't fathom being able to have that with multiple people at the same time.

 

However, others don't believe in all that. They like having loads of options, fresh flesh, different people and experiences. They look at monogamy as boring. I notice they also don't believe in the idea of deep love, and would rather love themselves and keep others out when it comes to deep emotions.

 

I don't think we should judge one side or the other, but learn to really be 100% HONEST with each other. So you're the guy who doesn't believe in monogamy. Don't lie to women saying you do in the hopes of shagging them. So you're the woman who does believe in monogamy. Don't get all over the guy who doesn't believe in it and try to "change him" to want monogamy...especially when there are loads of guys out there who do believe in it.

 

Same deal on men. If I meet women who say they don't believe in monogamy, or they don't want to be in a RL or commitment...then I friendzone them at the most. If they want my heart and love...then it comes with a price.

 

I agree here about the deeper the love quote. I think you can experience something so intense, profound and passionate with another person then any other person just disapears in comparison to that person. Definately also I think some people are more sensitive, more emotional, more deep, more intense - these people I think have the capacity to stay with one person because the intensity of what they feel for them constantly brings up new things to love, to cherish, to enjoy about that person. Other people are more flightly, they like novelty and they are more easily bored.

[Holding-On]

Q: Do you believe in monogamy?

For myself personally....not something I want nor have chosen, no.

 

Q: Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime?

 

You can choose to be monogamous for the rest of your life if you so desire it. It is no more natural than marriage. However, pair bonding for at least a period of time is pretty natural or so it seems.

 

Despite the rhetoric on here, I personally believe you can be faithful (true to your vows), devoted (there for the other person in good times and bad) and committed for a lifetime to having the other person as your love to care for... without writing monogamy into the vows.

 

I do not understand what is so hard to understand about getting married and not including monogamy in it. Go to dictionary.com. Type in married. MONOGOMY does NOT appear in any of the definitions. REally, honestly, it does not.

 

Getting married confers legal rights to my husband, establishes our children as his, protects him if I should die, allows me to put him on my health benefits (and him for me when he had the benefits and I didn't), establishes the general jist of our importance to the outside world, was an important ceremony in which we vowed to care for each other for the rest of our lifes (among other things) in front of family and friends and other whose opinion we care about.

 

 

 

Q. Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

no. If you really want to be monogamous for the rest of your life you can do it.