Author J322Y Posted April 25, 2012 Author Posted April 25, 2012 Originally Posted by J322Y Having said that I can't think of anything gained by imposing the limitation of monogamy on someone. Can you? You can. You just excluded them from the debate by saying that we shouldn't mention the two that you thought of! This reminds me of the " " scene from The Life of Brian. Not everyone wants children. I'm 53 and I don't. So let's say this discussion is for the people who don't want kids or have already had theirs. As for disease-free sex; is that a good basis for creating a loving relationship? I hope there's more. And to repeat; I'm not necessarily talking about having several deep relationships at once. In my case that probably wouldn't happen. I would most likely only be with one person, I just don't think that imposing limitations is a good basis for a loving relationship. I'm interested in freedom, both giving it and receiving it. Having safe sex eliminates that issue from the discussion, but if you don't want to practice that there are still possibilities outside of monogamy. In a non-MR it's possible to have one person that you have unprotected sex with, and a commitment with that person to limit yourselves to safe sex with others. This creates the low risk situation of safe sex plus the benefit of unprotected sex with that one person, most likely your main interest.
Cypress25 Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 I feel that you gain nothing by limiting someone that you supposedly love. If you love them don't you want them to be happy, even if it means they meet someone better suited for them than you? You are assuming that everyone feels the same way about monogamy as you do. Believe it or not, there are some people who WANT to commit to one person because being in a monogamous relationship makes them happy. If both partners feel that way, then monogamy is not limiting either of them. No one should ever feel that they've been forced into a monogamous relationship. It should only be done if both people truly want it, and there are plenty of people who do. They don't want to play the field, they don't want to have multiple partners simultaneously, because that doesn't make them happy. That may be your idea of happiness, but it's not everyone's idea of happiness. You're just going to have to accept the fact that some people are different from you. Different people want different things. For people who get happiness, joy, and deep emotional fulfillment from monogamous relationships, it's hard to understand why anyone wouldn't want that. No one is imposing monogamy on anyone against their will. If two people are in a monogamous relationship, it's because they both wanted it. 2
InJest Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 @MrNate If you reread my my post, I stated that I hate pseudointellectuals. That's where the real passion came in. Shutting down a dip**** that thinks his logic is so profound. As you can see by his lack of rebuttal, his logic is flawed. I don't have a position on monogamy either way. I think I'm on my way to something monogamous with someone right now, thought I haven't been in 3 years. I'm certainly not against monogamy, it's just not something I regularly practice. That's why I think the OP is an idiot because even someone that doesn't practice it can still see the benefit.
Author J322Y Posted April 25, 2012 Author Posted April 25, 2012 People are criticizing the basis for this discussion because (they say) I've eliminated the two important benefits of monogamy. I would change the thread title if I could, but I'll just ask that you get over it if you're offended. My intention is to have a discussion about the basis of relationships that is aimed at the core of our emotions, not at practical considerations like children and unprotected sex. I'll be out for a while but I'm very interested in what you all have to say, even rude @$$holes like InJest. I'll go back and address previous comments when I have time. BTW, I've had two long monogamous relationships, a 10 year marriage and a girlfriend for 13 years. I'm very close to both women and consider that time well spent.
january2011 Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 I'm not questioning whether it's an imposition, I'm questioning its effectiveness as a model for relationship. How can a relationship with someone who is free to do whatever they want be a form of ownership. How is it greedy if your partner(s) have the same rights as you? I excluded children because marriage/monogamy may be the best alternative in that case. Not necessarily, but I'm trying to isolate the basic fundamentals of relationship and as we all know, children complicate things. Safe sex is slightly different case but I wanted to exclude it for the purpose a more pure discussion, but we can talk about it too. If you're making a monogamous commitment for the purpose of having unprotected sex then you could also make a commitment to have only safe sex in a non-monogamous relationship. Also, many people who are in MR's (non-monogamous relationships) find out the hard way that the promise of disease-free sex can be broken by a cheating partner. In that case the person in the MR would have been better served by having safe sex anyway. From experience, I believe that most people don't enter relationships based on effectiveness. If that were the case, LS probably woudn't exist. If you've both agreed to be monogamous then no one has more rights than the other. Yes, children do complicate things, but very few relationships exist in a vacuum. Therefore, I suggest that isolating the basic fundamentals is a task fraught with difficulty. How can the sex be just as safe when you're having it with more than one person? Statistically, the odds of getting an STD are greatly increased. You're at higher risk of catching an STD - how is that beneficial? Regarding catching an STD from a cheating partner - the partner cheated so the relationship is no longer monogamous.
oaks Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 As for disease-free sex; is that a good basis for creating a loving relationship? I hope there's more. You're changing the premise of the argument. I'm saying (and so are you, although you discounted it from discussion in your opening post) that a positive thing that comes from commitment is disease-free sex. That's not the same as saying that having disease-free sex is a good basis for having such a relationship! But there is more, as my other post (and several posts from other people) have suggested.
quankanne Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 I like Woggle's explanation best: I've tried it the other way, too, and realized that for me, this is what worked best. Yeah we drive each other nuts, and don't always think along the same lines when it comes to important stuff, but there's something about being in a relationship with someone who has the same view of it, that it's just the two of you in a special little world, if you will. That no one or nothing can ever compare, it's just that unique, and the trust that's built is like nothing you've ever had with anyone else. is it a security thing? Possibly. Mostly, though, it's an opportunity to share with someone who believes that the other person is important enough to pledge him/herself to wholly, and believe me, that's a serious brain buzz as for safe sex ... shee-yut ... do you know how incredibly good it feels to be able to have barrier-free sex with someone who is committed solely to your relationship, and who respects it enough to not bring cooties into the picture? It's the ultimate trust in a sexual relationship, IMO
threebyfate Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 You're changing the premise of the argument. I'm saying (and so are you, although you discounted it from discussion in your opening post) that a positive thing that comes from commitment is disease-free sex. That's not the same as saying that having disease-free sex is a good basis for having such a relationship! But there is more, as my other post (and several posts from other people) have suggested.Yup, he opened the thread negating two key logical arguments, then accused me of not wanting to debate with someone with logical arguments against monogamy, then flipped to say that this thread is about emotional arguments, which have nothing to do with logic. :double facepalm: 3
dasein Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 Monogamy was something of a general social necessity in the not too recent past. Other cultural models brought unacceptable levels of risk to the survival and health of the village. It is no longer a necessity for humans, just a preference, no longer a tool towards social ends. More choice is good IMO, though we are going through growing pains. I believe that people will have much more flexible agreement-based relationship tools and structures at their disposal than "one size fits all" state-governed marriage for life in the future.
OliveOyl Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 Much less jealousy. That seems to be the obvious benefit. 1
mesmerized Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 Much less jealousy. That seems to be the obvious benefit. And the biggest one. People make all kinds of excuses for why they want monogomy. But if you take STDs and kids out, it's almost always simply because of jealousy and insecurity. 1
threebyfate Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 And the biggest one. People make all kinds of excuses for why they want monogomy. But if you take STDs and kids out, it's almost always simply because of jealousy and insecurity.If you take sex out of polyamory, all that's left is commitmentphobia. 1
mesmerized Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 If you take sex out of polyamory, all that's left is commitmentphobia. lol sure. There is nothing wrong with admitting you get jealous and insecure if your partner goes with others. For most people, it's a "natural" feeling as long as it's not to an excessive manner.
threebyfate Posted April 25, 2012 Posted April 25, 2012 lol sure. There is nothing wrong with admitting you get jealous and insecure if your partner goes with others. For most people, it's a "natural" feeling as long as it's not to an excessive manner.As there's nothing wrong with being commitmentphobic and incapable of pair bonding, right?
mesmerized Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 As there's nothing wrong with being commitmentphobic and incapable of pair bonding, right? Paid bonding meaning? A lot of people in open relationships have amazing bonds with each other, probably way more than "monogomous" couples. They don't have to lie and fight jealousy and they can be much more honest with each other. As far as commitment phobia, no I don't see anything wrong with that either. As long as you are honest with yourself and people that you are with.
threebyfate Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Studies have found genetic variants that impact on behaviours where certain individuals aren't genetically inclined to pair bond (allele 334) or get such a rush from dopamine (dopamine receptor DRD4) that they find sexual pleasure with others, near irresistible. In both situations, these genetic indicators just predispose the individuals towards non-monogamy but don't guarantee non-monogamous behaviours. Wish more non-monogamous people would admit to their inclinations and leave monogamous people alone. Paid bonding meaning? A lot of people in open relationships have amazing bonds with each other, probably way more than "monogomous" couples. They don't have to lie and fight jealousy and they can be much more honest with each other. As far as commitment phobia, no I don't see anything wrong with that either. As long as you are honest with yourself and people that you are with.Refer to my post in another thread about polyamory. I don't see anything "wrong" about either type of relationship but the bolded is key, whereby the OP of this thread invaded monogamous turf and is trying to validate his beliefs at the expense of other people's values.
xxoo Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Paid bonding meaning? A lot of people in open relationships have amazing bonds with each other, probably way more than "monogomous" couples. They don't have to lie and fight jealousy and they can be much more honest with each other. Lying and jealousy happen in poly relationships, too. Why would poly couples have more amazing bonds than mono couples? Probably depends on the couple. There is nothing about monogamy or polyamory that precludes amazing bonds.
mesmerized Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Lying and jealousy happen in poly relationships, too. Why would poly couples have more amazing bonds than mono couples? Probably depends on the couple. There is nothing about monogamy or polyamory that precludes amazing bonds. Probably because they tend to be more honest with each other and themselves. Those things happens in poly relationships too, but they are aware of it and instead of acting on their jealousy, they tend to find ways to deal with it/fight it.
xxoo Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Probably because they tend to be more honest with each other and themselves. Those things happens in poly relationships too, but they are aware of it and instead of acting on their jealousy, they tend to find ways to deal with it/fight it. And people can do that in monogamous relationships, too. 2
joystickd Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 poly and mono has both pros and cons. Both consist of the partners communicating and being honest. I just think people just love the idea of being in a relationship than actually being in one. I will also say this people need to stop idealizing their partner. Hell its like they can walk on water. They are not perfect and once that happens all the bullsh*t that happens with dating and relationships won't be such a bother
mesmerized Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 And people can do that in monogamous relationships, too. Sure. But I'm sure most monogamous husbands are afraid to tell their wives that they sometimes fantasize about the hot female neighbor. Or the women telling their husbands that the sight of a bigger penis than their husband's penis turns them on more.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Monogamy is seems like ownership of another person and I don't think it benefits anyone. Wrong! It benefits ME! Whether you think it ought to or not, it does! I am monogamous. I don't think I own my husband, he doesn't feel owned, he does not think he owns me, etc. To us (monogamous people), it does NOT seem like "ownership of another person." Monogamy benefits my husband and me in many ways. Both of us have been divorced; both of us have spent a lot of time single. We choose this. For the sake of discussion I won't include couples who want to raise children. Also for the sake of discussion let's leave out STD's by assuming that safe sex is being practiced. As it's already been pointed out to you, YOU have obviously thought of two very reasonable benefits of monogamy, which we are not supposed to talk about, according to you. Having said that I can't think of anything gained by imposing the limitation of monogamy on someone. Can you? I don't think that imposing a limitation on someone would be very positive either. Though you included this concept in your original talking point, evidently you don't think it should be discussed after all: I'm not questioning whether it's an imposition, I'm questioning its effectiveness as a model for relationship. Well, those are two different issues. Do you want to discuss it as an effective or ineffective "model for relationship," or as something imposed upon someone else and a form of ownership? They are not the same thing. You haven't even acknowledged the good answers you've already received so I am not going to bother outlining the many benefits my husband and I are reaping from our choice to travel the path of life side by side, forsaking all others (for sex and a particular emotional intimacy, anyway). You can take my word for it, though - they exist.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Though I agree that "less jealousy" is a good benefit of monogamy, it has nothing to do with my choice to be monogamous at this time of my life. Nor does insecurity.
threebyfate Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 When jealous, I find myself shutting down on partners. It's like a wall comes slamming down and I no longer want to be with them so I start withdrawing. 2
Disenchantedly Yours Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 How do your partners usually react to that 3byfate.
Recommended Posts