Col1 Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 OK Cupid has a new profile detail that users can indicate on their profiles about their Relationship Type. Two choices for monogamy are: "Monogamous" or "Strictly Monogamous." What's the difference? Aren't they the same thing?
Candy_Pants Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 Maybe regular ol "monogamous" could imply "open to occasional threesomes or more-somes"? I seriously have no idea . 2
Under The Radar Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 Makes me wonder if OK Cupid is being "Dumb" or "Really Dumb". 4
Author Col1 Posted April 24, 2014 Author Posted April 24, 2014 Maybe regular ol "monogamous" could imply "open to occasional threesomes or more-somes"? This makes sense to me now. Thank you for explaining!
Candy_Pants Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 This makes sense to me now. Thank you for explaining! Oh dear, don't take my word for it!!
Shepp Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 I'd ae a punt, and it is a punt cause I don't even use the site, so I dunno humanly people pick what an'all therest of it, but: if someone presented me with those too options I'd definetly put strictly monogamous - because, I am! I feel supr super strongly that cheating is the pathetic, incrediably low and completely unexplainable! To take it down a knotch and just put monogamy I'd assume they didn't feel quite so strongly, for one reason or another maybe even (and remember I'm guessing) cheated in the past? Totally monogamous now but feel like they can't put strictly? Or even maybe been the om/ow in the past? Maybe even forgave a cheater in the past? Dunno, its like is a it's a punt - but I don't know the site so I have no idea how close to the truth I may or may not be! Or It is a dating site so maybe there just trying to cone across more laid back? Who knows!
RedRobin Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 I dunno. Back when I did it, there was a question that asked if the person was ok with open relationships. I came across a few who said 'no'... .... but then added that they were monogamous but still wanted to see others. WTF? So, basically, they want to have sex with one person and still see other people. Maybe OkC is trying to separate out the FWB people from the ones looking for relationships. A better way might be to put 'friends with benefits' down as a possible option instead of messing up the word 'monogamous'.... lol.
oldshirt Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 In his advice column, Dan Savage often uses the term "Monogamish." What that is is people who live a pretty much one on one lifestyle with a steady partner and from the outside appear to be indistinguishable from a traditional exclusive couple, but they may occasionally hav some form of outside contact under certain rare and irregular circumstances. Many quasi swingers and couples who have somewhat open marriages may fall into that category as would some singles who may be dating someone pretty regularly and consistently but who haven't taken any kind of serious pledge of exclusivity and keep their options open to certain special circumstances. I have no idea if that is what that website meant but I think it would be a better term.
D-Fens Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 My opinion is that 'monogamous' refers to people who would prefer sexual exclusivity but if they cannot have sex, due to illness for example, would accept an open sexual relationship. 'Strictly monogamous' would refer to people who would brook no exceptions to the rule.
Lernaean_Hydra Posted April 24, 2014 Posted April 24, 2014 In his advice column, Dan Savage often uses the term "Monogamish." What that is is people who live a pretty much one on one lifestyle with a steady partner and from the outside appear to be indistinguishable from a traditional exclusive couple, but they may occasionally hav some form of outside contact under certain rare and irregular circumstances. Many quasi swingers and couples who have somewhat open marriages may fall into that category as would some singles who may be dating someone pretty regularly and consistently but who haven't taken any kind of serious pledge of exclusivity and keep their options open to certain special circumstances. Oh, hey that's me. I like this fancy new way of describing my situation:bunny:. Anyway OP, I have no idea what they really meant by the two choices but I pretty much just assumed it meant someone who is very serious about manogamy, no iffs ands or buts about it. Like, no threesomes, etc. But then again this is OKC where very little makes sense.
Recommended Posts