Jump to content

Is Monogamy Over-Rated or Under-Rated, or something else?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3355 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

What is your viewpoint on monogamy for a lifetime?

Is that too difficult a challenge for people? 

I was thinking about this couple who have been together since they were 16 and are now in their 50's.  They didn't actually achieve perfect monogamy in their relationship; however, they are still together and probably always will be.  Yet I'm sure their relationship is more a soul mate relationship and one that has them connected as best friends after being together for almost 35 years. 

Anyhow, this couple (which is not me) brought me to think about monogamy in our society.  Why is it so important? 

I'd think after 35 years, sex would/could get pretty boring especially in our modern society where people can communicate with so many more people than they could say even twenty years ago. 

I was looking for some feedback on monogamy, not this couple.  lol

So, what is your feedback about monogamy and it's importance to the human soul, or if you don't believe in a soul - the human being or heart?  Or just your being or heart, how important is monogamy to you?... and could you explain why or why not it is important to you?   

I understand about the jealousy of the human heart, btw.  But what does a couple do if the sex starts to get boring after so many years together?

I'm glad I never got attached at age 16!  That's about all I can say! 

Also men are encouraged to have more partners and more sex before they settle down, but not women.  Women are still somewhat expected to be that saint in the living room and the devil in the bedroom with one man, and not too much more than that when it comes to sexuality.  Do you think women are still chained to some kind of irrational expections and/or victims of a double standard where sex is encouraged for men, but not for women before they 'settle down'?

Also, men are oft encouraged to have sex outside a marriage or get a mistress when or if the sex gets boring, but women if they have an affair society often views that the women should be hanged by the neck or killed even in some societies.   Why does this double standard still exist? 

Also a lot of famous people put up this front that their decades long relationship has been monogamous, when in actuality is hasn't.  So why the front?  What is the importance of this front that oft times doesn't even really exist? 

You also don't need to reply to my questions here in the OP.  You can just go with the title of the thread, such as Monogamy is over rated because.... or Monogamy is under rated because.... (etc)....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Great question... /thinks where to begin.OK have thoughts now..

I have given the state of my current sl relationship to my rl partner.. tho comparisons are not very similar, the  values are.. Being faithful regardless of where  (in distance) we are . If you have ever been with cheating spouse or partner in world or this world then you understand the values of commitment and trust.  I have always been 100% honest with my rl partner .. No..but never strayed from the relationship to cause it damage... I'm a one girl girl... enuff said..

As for the rest, some socities are still living in the dark ages, belifes morals need to change.. but will not happen in lifetime... so in the end....

 

be honest, stay faithful.. love everyone.. be kind to animals

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't view our society as especially being kind of animals.  I became a vegatarian for awhile because I didn't think it too kind to slaughter cows or other animals, and even including horses for dog food, but that's another thread.  lol

However, I do understand the importance of protein and our need to eat to survive.  It was also easy for me to be a vegatarian as I'm an anorexic in rl, so eating is not one of my hobbies that's for sure.   Most times I don't want to eat at all.  Eating food is a challenge for my and has been all my life.  I might have been born one of those vegans, who knows? 

But I don't view society as particularly kind to animals as a generalized statement.  Cows are adorable.  I feel quilty all the time about the adorable cows and how sweet they are (although I eat a lot of fish and I mean a lot), but I do understand the need for protein yet I still don't like it. 

I think society puts up a front here also that this society is kind to animals because I don't see it that way. 

What's with all the fronts, I'm wondering?  There are a lot of fronts and double standards, that's for sure. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mayalily wrote: 

Women are still somewhat expected to be that saint in the kitchen and the devil in the bedroom
with one man, and not too much more than that when it comes to sexuality.  Do you think women are still chained to some kind of irrational expections and/or victims of a double standard where sex is encouraged for men, but not for women before they 'settle down'?

 

My view is that stereotype is dead in most of society (if it even existed in some).  It sounds like some Ozzie & Harriet kind of sitcom thing.  The ideal would be to find someone with whom you could explore all of life's complexities and be fully free to express yourself.

I am most comfortable in a monogamous relationship.  I cannot speak to the over- or under-relatedness of it as it is a personal choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you picked up on that!  I couldn't think of who I was thinking of, but it was that Father show and I couldn't remember it's name, but now I remember and yes I was going for some June Cleaver type of female.  I think it does still exist in many ways, and that yes woman's sexuality is still stuck in the 50's for the most part.  And in other countries, it's stuck with Mohamid (spelling unknown?) from 900 a.d.  In some societies they are living like the date is 1100 a.d. 

Tho, even in Western society, I think a double standard does still exist.  It's getting better for women, but not a lot better. 

Oh and Venus, you nailed it on the something else... I do think that the opinion that monogamy is a personal choice is a sane one and I was hoping to get that answer as the something else.  I might possibly think that monogamy is a personal choice but if I could have twelve husbands allowed and accepted by society I wouldn't be sad, that's for sure.  I think I might think monogamy is over-rated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maya..

   I could not agree more.. I'm the proud partner of two adpoted doggies.. (note) not owner...  we co-esist with each other porviding love and support..  So please don't be to haste in judging society by the meat eaters... there are pplenty of peeps out there with animal rescue.. Riases hand...

  So as society as a whole grouped togehter might be bad... but it is unfair to group everyone together in socitey

 

(hugs my dogies)

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many viewpoints on what is kind to animals and what isn't.  We could discuss that in another thread, as it's an interesting or not so interesting subject. 

I'd be a vegan if I could, but once a vegan gets involved with a meat-eater, and in these tough economic times, we have to compromise on our meal planning.  It's too expensive to cook a meat-eater meal and a vegan one, let alone a lot more work. 

We kind of do half and half; sometimes he eats vegatarian meals with me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smiles... Unfortunately.. MY doggies snob their noses at my cooking.. the advantage of just the 3 of us... I can have cheese and crakers for dinner.. and they get the gawd awful smelling doggie food..  Thinks they are not very interested in cucumber salad.. oh well.. Still my best friends..(back to work) sighs...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think honesty is underrated.

people are flexible to different degrees on pretty much any social phenomenon, and in general too worried about what other people are doing even when it doesn't affect them, and not honest enough with the people in their lives who do affect them because of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my wife and I haven't been together quite as long as the couple you mentioned, but we met at 18, were married by 20 and are still married at 50.  But maybe that's long enough to be able to try and answer at least some of the things that have been brought up.

 

"Perfect monogamy" is an achievement?  Hmm, I never thought of it as such.  But if it is, then both of us missed on getting that merit badge.  More than once.  Not a big deal, one has to be understanding of human nature.  I'd have to say it never was something I considered particularly important.  More of an issue sometimes would be "You slept with *that*?  Schedule an appointment to get checked over to make sure you didn't pick up anything contagious."  

 

Bored with sex.  Well, let's look at it by analogy to some other necessary comfort of life.  How about chocolate?  You can get bored with chocolate, but you'll most likely get over it. Some things in life are hard to stay bored with.

 

Ok, those maybe come off as a little tongue in cheek, so far as responses go.  But I'll be very blunt on this next point.  The problem is not in being with the same person for years.  The more likely difficulty is that they change over the years and aren't the person you thought you knew when you met.  That's natural, and you will change too over time.  So staying together isn't so much a static sort of unchanging thing.. I'd say it's more a matter of falling in love with the person all over again, over and over as the years go by.  That probably sounds pretty weird, but it's about the best way I can explain it.  I may not be typical, either, and it's just how I personally see it.

 

Back to the topic of monogamy, it's possible to be in love with more than one person at the same time.  What is not possible is for there to be more than one person who is the absolute most important person in your life at one time.  Be honest with all parties involved, and you can avoid a lot of trouble.  Betrayal can happen if you try to mislead either/any of them, and that could probably be fatal to a relationship.  I don't know for sure, because I never have risked being less than honest with my wife and never risked that sort of dishonesty with any of the women I ever had sex with.  (I'm hetero, so that's not some dodgy way of saying things.)  Not ever, even before I met my wife.  I may be odd, but I've never had sex with anyone I didn't love and care about.  It was always someone that I considered at least a very dear friend.  Maybe that's odd, I don't know.

 

I suppose monogamy is important if it's important to you and your mate, but other than that, I personally wouldn't think of it as indispensable.  So I guess I'd say that I feel it is over-rated.  I would say it is a lot less important than love is in the first place.

 

As to the "saint in the kitchen", excuse me, but *I* am more the kitchen saint.  I do most of the cooking and always have.  All false modesty aside, I'm good at it.  A lot of guys cook,actually.  So that's one stereotype we could toss out the window. 

 

So far as society, I can't speak for society or various cultures of the world.  But life is short, and they aren't who is living your life.  If somebody is going to make the "rules" for your life, it had better be you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, don't misunderstand me there about the cooking.  Some of the best chefs in the world are men, imo.  Not that I eat a lot or ever have in my life, but men are some incredible chefs, that is for sure!

There is just an old saying that does possibly come from the 50's, that women should be 80% angel in the living room, and 20% devil in the bedroom.  So actually I got that kitchen thing wrong, it should have said "living room".  In the U.K., I don't know what they call a living room, but perhaps they call it a parlor or a family room, not actually sure?   lol  Sorry about getting that mix up in the OP; I should have said living room, not kitchen. 

Thanks for your honesty in your answers.  A lot of people seem to be reading this thread, but afraid to answer for some reason? 

I think it's over-rated because if I could have 12 husband's accepted by society (random figure), I don't think I would be exactly sad or unhappy about it unless I got an STD, as you eluded too.  I wonder if STD's drive a lot of monogamy.  Condoms aren't exactly a fun way to have sex, imo.  But this is not say that STD's are in any way fun either.  No one would want one of those. 

ETA:  I changed the OP to say living room, not kitchen.  That was my mistake in the OP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and in a tool belt with a ladder so I could get a lot of different views while he was on that ladder, lol. 

You can blame Dres for that one, he put the fantasy of Jagger on a ladder in my house and in a toolbelt in my head, and I can't let go of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, another question, why do humans get so many STD's, while other creatures not so much? 

To me our species doesn't seem particularly geered towards monogamy, yet we have the most STD's.  Interesting?  Or else someone will come on here and correct me about STD's in regards to other mammals? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 20%?  The 50s must have been kind of dull. 

 

So far as you having 12 husbands, well it's maybe not possible legally for you to actually marry them in most countries, but they could still be "significant others".  It might take a very large house to manage that, but if that was the way things worked out for you, why not? 

 

"Significant other" is how I usually officially describe my live-in girlfriend, our "third", who has lived with us now for over 13 yrs.  We don't bother to hide it, but we don't push it in other people's faces either, and most people haven't ever had much of a problem with it.  It has never been a problem with taxes, landlord, or parent/teacher conferences, for example.  Now, if I actually married her, then it would be a bad legal situation.  Sure, some things take a bit of thought, like having medical proxy documents so in an emergency any of us can be contacted or make emergency treatment decisions, but it's at least somewhat workable.  Other concerns like shared property can be handled by written agreements where necessary, to keep things fair and etc.

 

My point is, if that is actually what you'd like out of life, or it's how life turns out for you.. To heck with what anyone thinks about it except you and the 12 guys involved.  I don't know how Mick Jagger will react when you pitch the idea to him though.  LOL  But hey, if you don't ask, you'll never find out.  The worst that could happen is Mick or some of the other 11 guys say "no thanks."  Oh well, at least you tried. 

 

Ok, I gues I'd better change my statement to "Monogamy is *way* over-rated" in my personal opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

/Thinks lots to ponder today..

Okies..Maybe from the other op's. That  people are slow in response to the monogamy issue, b'c they come to sl to get away from one on one relationships.. (not justifying it) just stating observations.. Not sure if correct but throwing it out there..

As for STD... nods yes ... every living breathing organism can get STD's not a doctor, but just think out loud... hmmmm wonders if anybody is listening

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, some legalities do fall into this, although there are some countries that possibly would accept a female with more than one.  Maybe the Netherlands or Switzerland?   However, those same countries accept males having more than one and even consider it weird if a man doesn't have more than one.

I recall watching a documentary about Pierre Trudeau, an ex Prime Minister of Canada who basically said he found it weird that our (America's) Presidents don't have open mistresses, as in France if a man has mistresses he is taken more seriously, or something to that affect.   France is very different from America, eh?  Or perhaps just Trudeau's views were different?   lol  But, I thought that was a very honest response from Trudeau, although he left women out of that picture, except for himself and other men.  Notice, Trudeau never said anything about women being taken more seriously if they had some misters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Mayalily wrote:

  Notice, Trudeau never said anything about women being taken more seriously if they had some misters. 

Most serious women are taken, seriously.  To women it's all about the romance and commitment: the two issues most men don't take as serious, seriously.   This is why most women of 'power' do NOT have some misters [sic].  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Mayalily wrote:

What is your viewpoint on monogamy for a lifetime?

Humans are not really a monogamous species. Most Eurasian human populations and their descendants practice a limited form of social monogamy that was strongly selected for during the last ice age. Women were less able to provide for themselves in ice age Eurasia since game was the primary food source, and male hunters simply couldn't afford to provide for more than a single woman and her offspring. But even so, relationships rarely ever last a life time (romantic love only lasts up to seven years and can already wear off after a few weeks) and both genders are prone to cheat on their partner (social monogamy does not equal sexual monogamy).

Not only men cheat btw. There are estimates that about 10% of all children weren't fathered by the person who thinks of himself as their father, and my guess is that these estimates are pretty low. It is a very common strategy to pick a mate with considerable wealth and/or a high social status and then find a younger and healthier sire behind his back. Still, men are even more prone to sleep around than women, seeing that they traditionally had nothing to lose by fathering children out of marriage.

Some other human populations who haven't undergone this selection for social monogamy still practice polygyny (multiple wives) and sometimes polyandry (multiple husbands). It is more common in environments with an abundant food supply, such as rainforests, where women, who are typically gatherers rather than hunters, can easily provide for themselves and their children without male help.

Now that the same holds true in Western countries thanks to gender equality and theoretically equal job opportunities, our traditionally monogamous family and relationship structure is undergoing a slow change. There is still a trend to be socially monogamous thanks to cultural norms and instincts that have evolved over the course of tens of thousands of years, but it has become very common for couples to only stay together for a few months or years and then go their separate ways (or trade up for a better partner).

I don't think that polygamy will ever be common around here, but we will probably see a lot more people who raise their children on their own while having a series of short-term relationships. That is neither good nor bad, it just is. Morality is relative, and our moral views are evolving to reflect the change in our social behavior.

 


Also men are encouraged to have more partners and more sex before they settle down, but not women.  Women are still somewhat expected to be that saint in the living room and the devil in the bedroom with one man, and not too much more than that when it comes to sexuality.  Do you think women are still chained to some kind of irrational expections and/or victims of a double standard where sex is encouraged for men, but not for women before they 'settle down'?

This is another result of age-old instincts. There used to be a good reason for this double standard. Overall, males have a lower STD risk than females. Some STDs are primarily transmitted by women, such as candidiasis (yeast infection). The vaginal flora is easily upset, and every new male partner introduces a wide range of microorganisms that can throw it off balance and lead to all kinds of infections. (Candidiasis is also behind the banning of oral sex that used to be very common, since yeast infections can spread to the mouth and throat).

Another reason for this double standard is that men can father a multitude of children without having to invest anything beyond a few food calories and a mild infection risk, whereas women easily got pregnant in times before modern forms of contraception. Pregnancy used to a considerable health risk and raising a child is a huge investment. It was therefore quiet sensible for women to be a lot more selective than men, and still is.

Not to forget that men have a greater tendency for violent behavior, which also puts promiscuous women at a greater risk than promiscuous men. This is the reason that men chase everybody who pleases the eye, whereas women tend to take their time getting to know their potential partner. And let's not forget that women also used to look for (and are still instinctively looking for) a provider who is willing to make a long-term commitment or at least material offerings (also known as "he is so romantic!"). Finally, women also have a lower sex drive than men. The libido of both genders is controlled by testosterone, which women have very low levels of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for HONESTY being under-rated.  Monogamy.  Well that's something terrific if you are so inclined, as many of us are, if for no other reason then there are only so many hours in a day, lots of interesting things to do and explore unrelated to sex.  Now if sex is (as it really IS for alot of people) their "hobby", then monogomy is going to be a challenge.

There are an equal number of men and women I'm guessing, who don't put alot of emphasis on monogamy, yet are very committed to their significant partner in life.  However, if they are living by a double standard/lying about their infidelity because the fear their spouse will take their lead and go off and explore their own wild side, well things swing back to honesty and fairness.

Marriage isn't only about love.  Its a financial arrangement and usually involves the welfare of children.  If there is assets spent that are needed for college funds, bill paying, etc. that are spent on an affair without the agreement of all parties effected..well that's no different then the person secretly gambling, spending money on illegal drugs, etc.  If the people in their committed relationship are going to have to pay the price, then again.  Dishonesty.

So lying to anyone, the third party, the spouse, oneselve via rationalizations is the issue.  Also not being protective towards the other parties in disclosing potential exposure to harmful STDs..which can also effect newborns and have lifelong consequences runs right back to the issue of honesty.

To me monogamy is something you do for yourself.  You can't demand it from others.  If you care about it you should clearly state the behavior you expect from yourself and your partner  going into a relationship,.  But it's honesty that either holds them to the agreement or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Pregnancy used to a considerable health risk and raising a child is a huge investment. It was therefore quiete sensible for women to be a lot more selective than men."

The reality is most women didn't have much opportunity until recent generations to actually make their own decisions as to who they might partnered with.  Infidelity in many parts of the world, for the woman,at least, was/is still legal grounds to for the woman to be put to death for dishonoring her familyor at the very least, lose all rights to her children and property.

In these societies and most societies in the past, marriages for the most part were arranged in a manner that best served the ecconomic, religous an social needs of their parents, family, and male relations in particular.

I maintain that women have a history of a greater adherence to monogamy out of fear.  But in reality, thinking about the range of married couples I'm aquainted with on a personal level, the women equal the men as to infidelity.  The womens sex drives are often much stronger then their male spouse's. And for every cheating heterosexual male, there's a female partner who has an equally strong libido.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.  I don't see too many STD's even among Farrell cats that are born.  I have adopted Farrell cats and the vet never said they had any type of STD's.  They got their shots for feline leukemia, etc, etc, but that was about it, and some cats have litters with many 'fathers'.  My Mom and two other ladies from her neighborhood have taken care of Farrell cats and none of them had STD's either and they each looked different and the Mama's offspring obviously came from many different 'fathers'.  The mother of these Farrell cats just died recently, but she lived to be 13, which is considered a very long time for a Farrell cat.  (oh just wanted to add that these Farrell cats were captured so they could be spayed and neutered, but the offspring are still living, so this is a long time for Farrell cats to be surviving and they survive in the outdoors only as they are pure Farrell and will not allow humans to even touch them; they cannot be domesticated, but they are friendly from a distance.  How these ladies caught these Farrell's was miraculous). 

From what I'm reading, STD's in other mammalian seem to come from unsterilized milk sources as the most common cause, and humans can also get the disease from unsterilized milk, but it's not spread as an STD when a human gets it from a milk source. 

Maybe Ishy knows something about this and will chime in when she gets the time. 

However, with the human species STD's seem rampant in comparison. 

Also, all the birds and the bees seem to be doing just fine where I live without sicknesses.

Also, these STD's in other creatures don't seem to be as life threatening as the ones humans get. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree with this. ^^^^^

Also some societies (or many societies) have not cared how many children women bore because they had slaves, and made women into baby making machines on purpose.  Just think of the female slaves in America's past, some could bare up to twenty children per one mother.  Doesn't sound like they cared too much there.  (They meaning the male land barons of yore). 

(This last paragraph of my post is eluding to something that Ishy was saying in her post, not Nacy's). 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Mayalily wrote:

Not necessarily.  I don't see too many STD's even among Farrell cats that are born.  I have adopted Farrell cats and the vet never said they had any type of STD's.

 

I have adopted Farrell cats [sic]

The wiki article link you have is correct.  The use of [sic] indicates that errors in the original were copied exactly from the original (in this case, you).  In this example, you are referring to feral cats, not Farrell cats. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...