Reply With Quote
How could it contradict each other if it's what they want? You can dedicate your love to someone and not feel that sex is cheating.
My gf and myself have had that discussion. Whilst we have eyes only for each other, it would not only be absurd to say that you find no one else in the world attractive as well, but it would be a blatant lie. Hit takes more than attraction to hold a relationship together, it takes trust. Honesty and hard truths go a long way in establishing this. So long as you communicate , there's little that can go wrong with relationships. People can be polygamous, but I have never known a couple to ever be that way. Maybe I don't know many couples, but it seems redundant to be marries and polygamous. The two contradict each other.
How could it contradict each other if it's what they want? You can dedicate your love to someone and not feel that sex is cheating.
Talking about marriage specifically. My point is that marriage is for monogamist and not being married is for polygamists.
There are plenty of married couples with open relationships. Check out that second episode of Penn and Teller I linked.
lol, I dunno man. I just see the question as "whats the point in being married and being monogomous" and I would rather know whats the point in being married and being polygamous. It seems like a more interesting take on the subject. I suppose you think that monogomy is willingly giving up ones sexual freedom. You never give up something without gaining something in return. For some this will be a big issue, for others not so much an issue at all.
Well, you gain them not having sex, but some people don't NEED that. They're okay with sharing their partner.
marriage is more of a protection than just a commitment. i prefer monogamy over polygamy as i know we'll probably be together still when i'm old and no one else will want me. unless one of us dies young or goes senile.
it might be outdated now, i'll admit, since my son could just put me in a home when i'm older and won't really NEED the other's help in that case. also, the chances of me selling my wife or kicking her out to live on the streets on a whim for a new better wife are slim to none since she has legal protections from the state in this era. so yeah, i guess you are right, why not just be polygamous? of course, you could ask alan moore about that.
I practice monogamy because I love my wife. That's the entire point of it. It doesn't matter what nature or instincts intends, because at the end of the day, I choose what I want to do, and I choose who I want to be with, and I have only chosen one person.
Anybody who practices or believes in polygamy is obviously single, desperate, and kind of pathetic. Polygamy is a cruel power trip for men, extremely slutty for women, and shows that you don't give a shit about the person that you're with. Relationships aren't about sex, and polygamy is only about sex.
I gotta agree, but since I don't have a gf yet, I'm ok with polygamy. And then it's still questionable. Love doesn't have to be limited to one lover only, imo. It is harder to find time to love more than one person, but it's still possible. Still, I'm leaning more to monogamy than polygamy.
If they practice polygamy...they're not si- wait...what am I doing.Originally Posted by Christ Eastwood
The point of monogamy is to sincerely give a shit about your partner's feelings and expectations.
When in a relationship, I have always been monogamous, even when given permission not to be. It is simply a choice and because I don't like having conditional morals, I have chosen to be unconditionally monogamous.
If I feel like being faithful to the girl I am dating is not important, it is because I no longer respect her. In that case, the solution is simple: nut up and break up.
I honestly believe that most people who cheat at all is not due to a momentary lapse of will power, but of always possessing the desire and lack of giving a shit about their partner. They simply finally got an opportunity and will do the same when the opportunity eventually presents itself again.
Something that shocked me while I was living abroad was the realization that most people try as hard as they can to get some action and simply fail most of the time. It may or may not have something to do with the fact that most people are assholes. Either way, from what I've seen, most people would jump at the chance to get some strange.
For me, it's not a rare and precious thing to bone a home-wrecking bimbo. What is rare for me is a serious relationship. So, in my case, I jump at the chance for a real, meaningful relationship, rather than to bang a slam-pig.
As for couples who agree to allow promiscuity,
I don't get it. Seems similar to the weirdos who go around asking me to bone their wife while they watch. I can't imagine how that is a fetish, I don't get most fetishes anyway.
No, the point of being in a RELATIONSHIP is to care about someone's feelings. 3 people that equally love each other have the same feelings and respect, and people in open relationships just don't care about sex like most people, they understand it's generally meaningless. Honestly, the people that I've known that have been in open relationships have been some of the happiest and most in love people I've ever met.
What does sex have to do with respecting and loving someone? If you're both open to the idea and have no qualms against it, how is that somehow treating them badly? Sex is a natural and necessary part of life, if you don't view it as some magical thing that only people in love should do, you realize how pointless and meaningless it is. It's just an action. What makes it so taboo is our insecurities and possessiveness.I honestly believe that most people who cheat at all is not due to a momentary lapse of will power, but of always possessing the desire and lack of giving a shit about their partner. They simply finally got an opportunity and will do the same when the opportunity eventually presents itself again.
Something that shocked me while I was living abroad was the realization that most people try as hard as they can to get some action and simply fail most of the time. It may or may not have something to do with the fact that most people are assholes. Either way, from what I've seen, most people would jump at the chance to get some strange.
I do too, and that's the whole point.For me, it's not a rare and precious thing to bone a home-wrecking bimbo. What is rare for me is a serious relationship. So, in my case, I jump at the chance for a real, meaningful relationship, rather than to bang a slam-pig.
Everyone who's different MUST be a "weirdo".As for couples who agree to allow promiscuity,
I don't get it. Seems similar to the weirdos who go around asking me to bone their wife while they watch. I can't imagine how that is a fetish, I don't get most fetishes anyway.
What? you have never met people who are in a relationship for fear of being single or that there is no other option?
The point of a relationship to most is to not be single.
It is completely possible to care about someone's feelings without being in a relationship with someone (that's usually the friendzone, but whatever... the point stands).
Does anyone beyond the age of 5 think that?if you don't view it as some magical thing that only people in love should do
I would argue no. Don't be a condescending douchebag.
The rest of whatever you were saying is an extension of this assumption, right? I'll just ignore it.
You're right, we are like the same exact person!I do too, and that's the whole point.
Ignoring the fact that you are arguing with a wall of text about why I am monogamous...
If what you do works for you, great. I don't get it.
Actually, yes. Ignoring convention and established social norms is strange. Putting the obvious aside, I don't have to endorse anyone else's choices or opinions and I am entitled to dislike, like and be confused by whatever I choose. Lifestyles, relationships, fetishes and lack thereof.Everyone who's different MUST be a "weirdo".
As far as triangles, I don't get it and I don't try to. I mean, I can see that it would make sustaining a dual-income household much easier but who sleeps in the middle? Is that like riding bitch in the back seat of a packed car or is it like being the center of attention? I can only imagine that every single argument becomes two against one and always includes the words "You sound like my father right now!"
So, there are some pros and cons.
Well, maybe I should have said a loving relationship, but you know what I meant
Kind of ironic coming from the guy dropping ad hominems. You're the one that called it cheating, sex in and of itself is not cheating, cheating is breaking a promise you made to a loved one for selfish gain, if there were no promises to be monogamous, it's not at all cheating.Does anyone beyond the age of 5 think that?
I would argue no. Don't be a condescending douchebag.
The rest of whatever you were saying is an extension of this assumption, right? I'll just ignore it.
I'm not arguing WHY anyone is monogamous, I'm just stating that monogamy isn't the only option for a loving relationship, it can and does work, if you can handle it. Honestly, the reasons for our hesitance are based on our surroundings and how we've been raised and so on.You're right, we are like the same exact person!
Ignoring the fact that you are arguing with a wall of text about why I am monogamous...
If what you do works for you, great. I don't get it.
It's strange in the sense that's it's different from the norm, but weirdo is a very pejorative term. I'm not saying you should have to change what you do or anything, but you shouldn't judge people from doing things differently that don't effect you.Actually, yes. Ignoring convention and established social norms is strange. Putting the obvious aside, I don't have to endorse anyone else's choices or opinions and I am entitled to dislike, like and be confused by whatever I choose. Lifestyles, relationships, fetishes and lack thereof.
lol, I never imagined sleeping situations, I'd say they don't think about it, whoever goes to bed first is in the middle or whatever. Perhaps individual beds, I'd somewhat prefer that, myself. It would seem like arguments and disagreements would be easier with more than two people. When it's one on one, it tends to be more personal, but if there is any significant clashing in ANY relationship, it's probably not going to work out, then again, having more people means you can take a break from whoever you're mad at and such. I'm sure it has it's own set of problems, but I can't see it being any worse than monogamy.As far as triangles, I don't get it and I don't try to. I mean, I can see that it would make sustaining a dual-income household much easier but who sleeps in the middle? Is that like riding bitch in the back seat of a packed car or is it like being the center of attention? I can only imagine that every single argument becomes two against one and always includes the words "You sound like my father right now!"
So, there are some pros and cons.
I called cheating "cheating" because I was referring to cheating explicitly and exclusively.You're the one that called it cheating
Hold on, because there is another misinterpretation later in your post and I'm going to put it here:
That's not what I said.I'm not arguing WHY anyone is monogamous
I said that you ARE arguing WITH a wall of text.
Not one statement I made was an implied matter of fact, therefore the entire post was one of reference to myself and my actions to state that monogamy is a simple preference and not a necessity. I assume it is a preference which is taken seriously by most.
In fact, I did not even touch on the subject of 'open relationships' until the final two or three sentences of my post and even then only to stat that I don't get it.
That is a literally disgusting level of defensiveness. I actually grimaced while reading that.but weirdo is a very pejorative term. I'm not saying you should have to change what you do or anything, but you shouldn't judge people
Let's all agree not to get our panties in a twist over some colorful language. I wonder if you think you are progressive, but you are so uptight you can't even handle the word 'weirdo' being typed out in reference to a subject or group which is understandably easy to categorize as 'weird'.
I am in FACT going to change what I do. I'm going to address you with less respect from here on because you get uppity about an open ****ing use of an applicable term in an appropri-mother****ing-ate situation, you nose-up stuffy prick. Chill out, smoke a Jay, it's a new generation, man.
And I will continue to JUDGE as I see fit, for I am the final ****ing say of who I like, dislike and classify as a 'weirdo'.
And as I like to misquote:
"Judge me, for ye hast been judged."
Opens a whole new world of confusion, huh?lol, I never imagined sleeping situations
Nah, I couldn't see that. It has to be one giant one! You wouldn't want to miss out on spontaneous bonings, would you!?Perhaps individual beds, I'd somewhat prefer that, myself.
Maybe not worse, but definitely different. Still, I'm fairly positive all arguments would be two against one, just like three siblings living in the same house.I'm sure it has it's own set of problems, but I can't see it being any worse than monogamy.
Here's another question:
If you are in an open relationship and your partner is gone for two days without calling or anything.
What do you get mad about?
Do you yell at them for not having as much fun at the strip club as they could have been?
Do you yell at them for not picking up as many one nighters as they could have?
Fair enough
I don't mind it outside of intelligent discussions, but it has no place inside of oneThat is a literally disgusting level of defensiveness. I actually grimaced while reading that.
Let's all agree not to get our panties in a twist over some colorful language. I wonder if you think you are progressive, but you are so uptight you can't even handle the word 'weirdo' being typed out in reference to a subject or group which is understandably easy to categorize as 'weird'.
I am in FACT going to change what I do. I'm going to address you with less respect from here on because you get uppity about an open ****ing use of an applicable term in an appropri-mother****ing-ate situation, you nose-up stuffy prick. Chill out, smoke a Jay, it's a new generation, man.
And I will continue to JUDGE as I see fit, for I am the final ****ing say of who I like, dislike and classify as a 'weirdo'.
And as I like to misquote:
"Judge me, for ye hast been judged."
I prefer to imagine what it was like with Osama Bin Laden type situationsOpens a whole new world of confusion, huh?
Eh, I doubt they strictly have threesomes.Nah, I couldn't see that. It has to be one giant one! You wouldn't want to miss out on spontaneous bonings, would you!?
Bigger arguments results in better make up sex~Maybe not worse, but definitely different. Still, I'm fairly positive all arguments would be two against one, just like three siblings living in the same house.
You get mad for the same reason you'd get mad if someone did that in a monogamous relationship o.OHere's another question:
If you are in an open relationship and your partner is gone for two days without calling or anything.
What do you get mad about?
Do you yell at them for not having as much fun at the strip club as they could have been?
Do you yell at them for not picking up as many one nighters as they could have?
If Neil Degrass Tyson uses terms such as "wierdo" in formal settings and interviews, I think it is logical to state that such words do not detract from the intelligence of the speaker or the audience.I don't mind it outside of intelligent discussions, but it has no place inside of one
That's probably more out of duress. I mean, he lived like garbage in caves mostly from what we saw in the videos, but he WAS rich in a relative sense. There's some incentive there, but I would be surprised if all of his wives wanted to be married.I prefer to imagine what it was like with Osama Bin Laden type situations
In which case, I would assume that most of them tried their best to avoid any direct attention at all.
Oh, great. Next you're going to tell me they don't use ball gags, handcuffs or sex swings. What would be the point!?Eh, I doubt they strictly have threesomes.
I wouldn't know. I cut my losses at the first sign of trouble, so no arguments means no make up sex.Bigger arguments results in better make up sex~
As far as my own knowledge, it may as well be a myth. I'd have to take your word for it, however, I doubt that's true 100%.
Well, you wouldn't accuse them of cheating (in the case of open relationships). You would have to come up with some other baseless accusation.You get mad for the same reason you'd get mad if someone did that in a monogamous relationship o.O
It doesn't, but in a serious situation, it's a lot more insulting than it normally would be. It seems more like an attack
Yeah, but at the same time, they were probably too afraid to not placate his wants or needs...I still just wanna see a bed with all that going on.That's probably more out of duress. I mean, he lived like garbage in caves mostly from what we saw in the videos, but he WAS rich in a relative sense. There's some incentive there, but I would be surprised if all of his wives wanted to be married.
In which case, I would assume that most of them tried their best to avoid any direct attention at all.
lol well, they obviously occur, but not everyone's in the mood at the same time.Oh, great. Next you're going to tell me they don't use ball gags, handcuffs or sex swings. What would be the point!?
Well...theoretical of course...I do the same, when I get pissed, I just shut up and take my leave.I wouldn't know. I cut my losses at the first sign of trouble, so no arguments means no make up sex.
As far as my own knowledge, it may as well be a myth. I'd have to take your word for it, however, I doubt that's true 100%.
Well, whenever it happens to me, I'm just upset that they didn't tell me anything and just disappeared while I don't know if they're dead or what. Though, cell phones tend to help. Just ditching with no warning is ****ed no matter how you look at it when someone loves you.Well, you wouldn't accuse them of cheating (in the case of open relationships). You would have to come up with some other baseless accusation.
I found a piece of information the other day that relates to this topic, and I figured I might as well share it, even though this thread has been inactive for nine months.
I read a study which suggested that more intelligent men tend to value sexual exclusivity than less intelligent men. The reason for this is because monogamy is a fairly new concept to humans. Essentially it's bred into us to want to have relations with as many women as possible in order to ensure the survival of our species. Intelligent men have an easier time fending off these primal urges, and commit themselves to a single romantic partner, although, simply being intelligent doesn't mean you're immune to cheating. It basically comes down to a conscious choice, but the study suggests that intelligent men have an easier time making the right choice.
Interestingly enough, the study also suggested that intelligence played no factor on whether women cheat or not.
The thing I like about monogomany is that it gives me a chance to exercise the morals I critically value. I've always known loyalty to be my strongest value, but what good is morals and value's if you never get a chance to prove them not only to others, but to yourself? This is why monogomy is a perfect practice at proving who you really are.
A real man can tell if his girlfriend/wife is the kind to cheat.
I agree with Rowan here. A real man or woman can tell if their partner is one likely to be loyal or not.
I learned that the hard way, and realised I should have followed my gut when it was far too late.
In saying that though, I think a real man or woman, looking for a real and genuine partner can tell deep down if their partner falls under that category.
Emotion can cloud, but I believe deep down you always know.
The point of monogamy, I think, is genuinely that it's the best way to maximise happiness as a human. (In my humble opinion.)
I've done the single thing, I've done the unhappy relationship thing, and I've done the leave a few girls hanging at once for a thrill thing, but I can genuinely say from my experience that the happiest I've ever been in my entire life is in a monogamous, two-sided, mutual relationship.
The idea of having one person who knows you through and through, and that will accept anything you say or do and help you through is a beautiful thing that can't be replicated any other way. When other people are thrown in that mix, it clouds it. It dilutes and contorts it.
But that's just my opinion I suppose based on a bit of experience.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with either. Both have been seen in the natural world, in our species and others, throughout history. Both have contributed to our species thriving in some way. Religion may have created marriage, but monogamous coupling for extended periods of time started before the practice. Marriage is no longer considered a religious practice anymore either, as the non-religious and Atheists practice the tradition as well now.
In the modern era, it really depends on each individual's personal preference and views on relationships and sex. Some feel more secure being monogamous, as they feel that special act of intercourse should be preserved only for each other, or they might feel insecure about themselves if their partner enjoys the pleasure from another. Others believe recreational sex with other partners doesn't hold any meaning to it, as it's just a different experience from the usual, but still feel that connection when with their partner that they're side-rides can't really give them.
I see nothing wrong with either. Everyone has different sexual preferences. To each their own.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks