Thoughts on monogamy in today's world?

[Bigboobbabe]

I can't imagine being with anyone else but my wife.
However, we have been in such a rut, I guess that's why I'm on here looking for answers.

You can't equate mon-monogamy with cheating. They are very different.

My husband and I often enjoyed welcoming a male friend to play with us. Technically non-monogamous.

When we hit a rough stage, and his performance and interest was down, I sought satisfaction elsewhere. Cheating.

When my husband began taking female hormones, sex and intimacy was gone. I requested an open relationship and was denied. Because they wouldn't be present, they saw it as cheating. (And became judgmental and vile in conversation)
I wanted open communication and to continue to love my spouse. Non-monogamy

We live separately, 3 years now. They know I am sexually active. And they still judge me for "cheating".

If you seek pleasure behind her back, that's cheating.

 

[AchtungNight]

I plan to tell my next spouse up front I want to stay with them yet still enjoy my whims, masturbation needs, and fantasies. I will also forgive swinging, threesomes, side pieces etc as long as I know about them beforehand and she knows also I intend to be her primary partner and have her as mine. But there are three things I will not accept. Manipulation, exploitation, and dishonesty. I have suffered enough from these things in my life already.

 

[v_indigo]

In this economy??

 

[Escierto]

I have absolutely no judgement on anyone who is non-monogamous or even on anyone who cheats. Without being able to stand in someone else's shoes and understand everything they are going through, how can you judge? I think most people are doing the best they can with the cards they have been dealt or circumstances they have chosen.

For myself and my girlfriend, we have chosen monogamy but that's just us.

 

[Devinter]

I have absolutely no judgement on anyone who is non-monogamous or even on anyone who cheats. Without being able to stand in someone else's shoes and understand everything they are going through, how can you judge? I think most people are doing the best they can with the cards they have been dealt or circumstances they have chosen.

Monogamous or non-monogamous, there's still such a thing as being hurtful or empathic towards your partner. As much as I am for normalizing people doing whatever they want in their own relationships, can we please refrain from normalizing treating each other like dirt, and embracing our inner narcissism? That's not likely to lead to a positive outcome for either party. Abusing and betraying the person/people you're in a relationship with and that trusted you is objectively kind of fucked up, and shouldn't be confused with or muddle the views people have on polyamorous relationships which are usually built on mutual understanding and respect.

 

[Escierto]

Monogamous or non-monogamous, there's still such a thing as being hurtful or empathic towards your partner. As much as I am for normalizing people doing whatever they want in their own relationships, can we please refrain from normalizing treating each other like dirt, and embracing our inner narcissism? That's not likely to lead to a positive outcome for either party. Abusing and betraying the person/people you're in a relationship with and that trusted you is objectively kind of fucked up, and shouldn't be confused with or muddle the views people have on polyamorous relationships which are usually built on mutual understanding and respect.

"Treating each other like dirt"? "Abusing and betraying"?

Simply because one person cheated on another? How do you know whether the cheated on partner actually had it coming? Maybe the cheated on partner is abusive and controlling? I am not suggesting that cheating is a good thing but you seem very quick to judge anyone who cheats as the lowest of the low. I believe that there are worse things someone can do to another in a relationship.

[Content removed by moderator]

 

[Devinter]

"Treating each other like dirt"? "Abusing and betraying"?

Simply because one person cheated on another? How do you know whether the cheated on partner actually had it coming? Maybe the cheated on partner is abusive and controlling? I am not suggesting that cheating is a good thing but you seem very quick to judge anyone who cheats as the lowest of the low. I believe that there are worse things someone can do to another in a relationship.

This is a thread about monogamy and polyamory. You bringing cheating into it besmirches the entire conversation, in my opinion. These are not the same things at all, and in fact, are not related in any way to an open relationship. Cheating, by definition, means that you go against the established boundaries of your relationship - whatever those may be. It means you are therefore lying to, and betraying, the person/people that you're romantically involved with. It's abusive behaviour.

You cannot justify that by saying that you have absolutely no judgement upon anyone who cheats. This is an incredibly poor argument. Everything we do is because of something else. We are affected by the choices of the people around us. Somehow justifying and normalizing poor behaviour isn't helpful towards anyone. Imagine how weak your argument would be if we replace cheating with any other negative and hurtful behaviour? Can you steal from someone "because they had it coming"? Can you sexually violate or rape someone "because they had it coming"? Can you murder someone "because they had it coming"? If you think so - fine, own that opinion - but I have to disagree with you. Some acts are simply wrong. Deep down inside, I think you know that too. It's not even about morals and ethics - it's about being a functional part of society, and/or of a relationship. You're defending something that I believe we both agree isn't right..

 

[Devinter]

[Content removed by moderator]

So in your mind, every action is ultimately justifiable in some way? No matter how deprived, evil, and hurtful it may be to others? And if I say "now wait a minute, that's not quite right" then surely I must be the scum of the earth? You do realize that we have laws and rules in society, right? That alone should prove that greater minds than you came to the conclusion that perhaps it's important to consider how one's actions affect others before you proceed onwards.

But since we're jumping to conclusions about one another wildly; I think you're just upset because you struggle with being faithful, and you feel personally attacked because I said cheating is objectively a negative behaviour. Whatever helps you sleep at night, eh?

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I've been polyamorous for 30 years, married for 20 of those. Even my parents have stopped calling it a phase...

Given all the other demands on our time, health issues, and other partners who don't live close by, life is pretty similar to that of a monogamous couple most of the time. Just the occasional sleepover. Which is a lot of fun, but the main benefits of non-monogamy to me is simply it removes that pressure, that your spouse *must* be your one and only fuck for the rest of your life, and if you are thinking about straying, then it's a Bad Sign.

Whereas to us, it's been a big relief to know that if one of us is incapacitated, the other can still get sexual satisfaction. And if I happen to lust after someone, that's normal conversation. Usually goes "You'd love to shag X? You're weird, you are. Sure, get them over for a games night, then do what you like. X! Really?" (it's an open question whether board gamers become poly because people are there, or if poly people get into gaming because they have the players...)

And I never have to worry about whether my partner is cheating on me, because there's no need. I suppose it could have been possible, if the spouse had slept with one of the few people I'd asked him not to, but it never came up.

There's been stressful times when I'd thought monogamy would have been easier, but I'd have had to dump at least two partners, so actually not.

In short - monogamy is fine, but knowing it's not a compulsory option may make it easier for a lot of people.

 

[Britva415]

monogamy is fine, but knowing it's not a compulsory option may make it easier for a lot of people.

I wouldn't describe myself as polyamorous, but nonmonogamy absolutely makes my life and my relationships much easier - for this exact reason.

I'm new to it, so, we'll see if my primary relationship survives it, but it wouldn't survive without it. So, we're ahead of the game. For now, at least.

 

[IrisAlthea]

So in your mind, every action is ultimately justifiable in some way? No matter how deprived, evil, and hurtful it may be to others?

No no no, you misunderstand!
Just every action except disagreeing with Escierto.
Then you are an asshole:

[Content removed by moderator]

To be more serious about it, cheating is cheating and differs distinctly from the other types of non-monogamy discussed in that both/all partners involved have given informed consent in the non-cheating varieties.
That is an important point for me, and the reason I prefer to stay away from cheating and partners who cheat.
Being human is what it is and shit does indeed happen at alarming rates, so I’m not overly big on judgement either.

Still ”ethical non-monogamy” makes sense to me, while ”ethical cheating” absolutely refuses to compute.

 

[AchtungNight]

I think only the Dastardly family of Hanna Barbera welcome cheating and their sports authorities have still gotten them in trouble for it many times.

 

[v_indigo]

If you don't understand how two people can create their own dynamic, and live their own lives in ways that hurt literally no one, then I never EVER want to hear you talking about 'freedom from government'.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

I can only speak for myself, but my favorite thing about monogomy is the security I feel. Finding sexual partners is work (at least it was for me). When my husband and I decided to be exclusive, I cannot express how relieved I felt over being able to exit the dating scene.

 

[AchtungNight]

I can only speak for myself, but my favorite thing about monogomy is the security I feel. Finding sexual partners is work (at least it was for me). When my husband and I decided to be exclusive, I cannot express how relieved I felt over being able to exit the dating scene.

I had that feeling too. Right up until the moment my former wife announced to me our marriage was over and left our home. Then later returned with another man ready to help her move her stuff out. Their relationship has since ended, but it still hurt me seeing it. What I once had with my wife has not resumed and I don’t think it ever will. Still, I can tell she still cares for me every time we communicate even if she’s no longer “in love”. I hope your relationship never sours in this way. If I ever do find someone again, I hope also for the same level of implicit permanence. But I still will acknowledge the hurts in my past and the possibility of things ending. Reality demands nothing less. Good luck.

 

[ericalauren]

Serial monogamy seems alright if that's what you want, I guess? However, serial monogamy and it's strict enforcement has always confused me. I have always been and will always be polyamorous.

 

[Helgamite]

my view is this.

If a man is able to provide for multiple women, WITHOUT government or charity help, as well as the initial woman agreeing to it, the man should be able to have multiple wives.

same goes for the woman, if she can handle multiple men and wants to be the dominant in the relationship, then she should be able to as well.

human heart is capable of loving multiple people.

for me, if i approach my wife and ask, we talk and she agrees first thing that will come out of my mouth is giving her the right to pick the woman, not me. she will have first date to get to know her potential sister-wife. then with her approval, i will begin my own dating. which would go to a 3-some date. where all 3 of us go on a date.

It would be the same with the 3rd woman, my two women would be working together to add another if they so desire or if agreed to by everyone.

they would ALL need to be able to provide for the significant others and the children.

 

[jehoram]

my view is this.

If a man is able to provide for multiple women, WITHOUT government or charity help, as well as the initial woman agreeing to it, the man should be able to have multiple wives.

same goes for the woman, if she can handle multiple men and wants to be the dominant in the relationship, then she should be able to as well.

human heart is capable of loving multiple people.

for me, if i approach my wife and ask, we talk and she agrees first thing that will come out of my mouth is giving her the right to pick the woman, not me. she will have first date to get to know her potential sister-wife. then with her approval, i will begin my own dating. which would go to a 3-some date. where all 3 of us go on a date.

It would be the same with the 3rd woman, my two women would be working together to add another if they so desire or if agreed to by everyone.

they would ALL need to be able to provide for the significant others and the children.

Your post seems to apply to people who want to be stable polyamorous units, and I think it's the right way to go. But it doesn't cover people who want one-night stands with other people, or those who want to have consensual separate relationships, like a person who might have one lover in Spokane and the other in Tampa, who never interact. As long as a guy could say to his wife, "Honey, I'd really like to fuck Mildred, and she's down with it," and the wife says, "Go ahead, sweetie. Have fun!" then there's no harm, no foul.

The writer Gene Fowler was a notorious for his promiscuity. When someone asked his wife whether she was bothered by it, she replied. "Not at all. I know that when he strays, he always comes home to me."

 

[Yesok1]

I would love to have a completely monogamous relationship.

I think of it as being romantic, secure and 100% love. To know I have committed to that one person, takes a lot. And knowing I will never sleep with or give my heart to another makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

But, the grass is always greener. I find myself straying. I think its because I self sabotage every good thing I have, as deep down I do not feel that I am worthy of the one thing I truly desire, and that is love of a single person.

Monogamy for me is really important, and that is my thoughts, on my own relationships. I feel if people want to have multiple relationships because that is what makes them feel good and happy, then the best of luck to them. The more love we have in the world the better.

 

[jehoram]

I would love to have a completely monogamous relationship.

I think of it as being romantic, secure and 100% love. To know I have committed to that one person, takes a lot. And knowing I will never sleep with or give my heart to another makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

That's the line you draw. For others, they can still sleep with others but still give their heart to a single person. It's the difference between love and lust. I think that Gene Fowler fell into that category.

Our society equates the two. You can't have true love without monogamy.

Monogamy for me is really important, and that is my thoughts, on my own relationships. I feel if people want to have multiple relationships because that is what makes them feel good and happy, then the best of luck to them. The more love we have in the world the better.

I agree. And when we realize that we can have a galaxy of gradations between infatuation and committed love, just as we have gradations between male and female, the world would truly be a better place.

 

[hrdmngd2find]

We have been exclusive for 50 years and counting, coming together in high school. Between November and March almost 51 years ago. The guys -- Paul and George -- had to spend 3 months in basic training and 13 months in Vietnam. We told them to do ANYTHING they needed to do get back to us. The five of us gals -- Kristin, Eva, Lisa, Jamie, and Lillian -- played with each other in their absence and prayed for their safe return. We are polyamorous but not open.

We extended an invitation to two others when they returned from his military service in Germany but, they had already formed a monogamous pairing, and stated a concern that our group dynamics worked against longevity. Their concerns were not necessary but they have done alright for themselves. Their pairing has lasted 49 years and counting.

Lisa's father, Gabe, was in high school when the Germans started bombing London. Judith, who eleven years later would give birth to her third son -- Paul, the future father of Lisa's sons -- met a young pilot, David, who was attending college in San Antonio. Back then Air Corp pilots had a quaint custom -- a sort of "really whole-life coverage," they shared mates and promised to ALWAYS care for the mate of a fallen comrade --.

Judith was invited to one of their swingers' parties on Lackland Field. She was hesitant. David said Gabe could come along so that Judith would "feel safe," the three of them joined and were part of a group that varied in size. Judith was exclusive with David for a time after he got orders for England in February 1941.

Gabe got drafted and received orders for Massachusetts, having to report literally within a week of graduating from high school. Judith and Gabe spent three weeks together as lovers Then Gabe spent four years walking across North Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, and Germany to finally arrive in Austria. David slept in a tent in England before and after being shot at in the daylight over Germany.

Of their group, David had left first and he returned before the others, he and Judith got married and settled down near Gabe's parent's house. Gabe came back and married the 18-year-old sister of one of their group, Lisa's mom Katherine. The group in San Antonio had been young pilots except for Gabe -- who got drafted into the infantry before he ever had the chance to go to flight school --. Before the war there were a couple more guys than gals in the group -- but several of those young men never made it back to Texas.

Families were bigger back then, especially in the country. People were busy, transportation more difficult than it is today, it was easy to have relatives you didn't know well or at all. Growing up Lisa was often babysat by her Aunt Anne or Aunt Carol. Half of the time it was one of them watching her, Paul, and their combined four siblings at Paul's house while his parents were at her house. The other half of the time they were at Lisa's house and all the parents were at Paul's.

When she was ****, and dating Paul, Judith took Lisa aside and told her the story we just related adding that Anne and Carol were not actually Lisa's aunts -- which we knew -- but rather her lovers -- and Gabe's, Katharine's, and Steve's lovers -- from San Antonio. Anne and Carol were originally brought into the group by two fine young men who died flying B-17s over Germany.

Lisa and Jamie -- Jamie had moved in when they were thirteen -- already knew that Katherine and Gabe were great parents, they were suddenly very cool parents as well.

I know this was posted 4 years ago, but what a fascinating story! I might need a diagram to follow it all, however. I have a lot of Christian childhood imprinting about what marriages and families should look like, and that shit is unfortunately deeply imprinted. I believe people when they say alternative arrangements are working for them. Anyway, I was partway through reading this thread and felt I had to exclaim some amazement. I love history too, so I appreciate the little details.

 

[HottieOlwen]

This seems to be a viable topic that I've seen mentioned in passing on a few threads. I wanted to open a discussion and see what opinions you all may have.

I have come to believe it is something that came about through necessity. Given the divorce rate is now above 75%, is the idea of having one mate for life still the ideal goal?

It depends (at least it does for me) on your definition of the word 'mate'. I have been married for 31 years. I love Richard with the intensity that is usually reserved for Mills & Boon novels or romantic films. I know that this passion is reciprocated. Here's the thing: Richard is barely 3" fully hard and he suffers from prem. ej. He suggested that I make him a cuckold. Eventually, I did. I suppose over the course of nearly 30 years (we were vanilla and monogamous for the first 2 years of our marriage) I have been fucked thousands of times by men (and some women!) other than my husband. It is a mutually consensual arrangement. He used to reclaim me, but these days he is permanently cock locked (milked once a week) and he has been denied p in v sex for over 25 years. We both love our chosen lifestyle, and wouldn't change it for the world.

 

[Hipshot1554]

It depends (at least it does for me) on your definition of the word 'mate'. I have been married for 31 years. I love Richard with the intensity that is usually reserved for Mills & Boon novels or romantic films. I know that this passion is reciprocated. Here's the thing: Richard is barely 3" fully hard and he suffers from prem. ej. He suggested that I make him a cuckold. Eventually, I did. I suppose over the course of nearly 30 years (we were vanilla and monogamous for the first 2 years of our marriage) I have been fucked thousands of times by men (and some women!) other than my husband. It is a mutually consensual arrangement. He used to reclaim me, but these days he is permanently cock locked (milked once a week) and he has been denied p in v sex for over 25 years. We both love our chosen lifestyle, and wouldn't change it for the world.

Thank you. I make no judgements. This was just a topic I was curious about. I firmly believe that when couples are open and honest about their feelings, desires, and needs they are much happier.

 

[inka2222]

It depends (at least it does for me) on your definition of the word 'mate'. I have been married for 31 years. I love Richard with the intensity that is usually reserved for Mills & Boon novels or romantic films. I know that this passion is reciprocated. Here's the thing: Richard is barely 3" fully hard and he suffers from prem. ej. He suggested that I make him a cuckold. Eventually, I did. I suppose over the course of nearly 30 years (we were vanilla and monogamous for the first 2 years of our marriage) I have been fucked thousands of times by men (and some women!) other than my husband. It is a mutually consensual arrangement. He used to reclaim me, but these days he is permanently cock locked (milked once a week) and he has been denied p in v sex for over 25 years. We both love our chosen lifestyle, and wouldn't change it for the world.

Could you explain how your "intense love" actually exabits? Loving someone means wanting what is good for them and willingness to sacrifice your own wishes for that. What you described is him sacrificing HIS happiness and well being for you, with zero reciprocation (and thus zero actual love) from you. You love being married to him clearly. Can you elaborate how someone outside your brain can observe any evidence that you love HIM, as a person, not just enjoy having him around as a convenient provider who allows you to fuck random people, with literally zero benefit to himself?

This is like a Roman patrician saying they "love" their slave. Sure, you love HAVING one, because slave does all the work, can be horrendously abused for your entertainment, and doesn't need to be provided much except some shit food so they don't literally starve. Nobody normal would claim that this slave is actually loved by the owner, in any meaning of the word, or is the owner's "mate".

 

[summer_reine]

I like some old traditions of renewing a marriage after a set period of time or letting it end. I think this might reduce/prevent the betrayal of cheating, knowing that after a short period of time (5 years in my mind since that seems to be about as long as the average marriage lasts before stuff starts getting messy) you can simply walk away. This of course makes children and martial assets more complicated.