policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,213
I think that these dynamic will definitely evolve, although precisely how is anybody's guess. I personally prefer to have a relationship with my lovers - I find it leads to a more consistently enjoyable sexual experience than one-nighters - but that comes with an obligation to ensure that there are limitations to those connections. To oversimplify they are a bit like my platonic friends in that we do have a unique connection that is other than and outside of what I have with my husband, but I would never allow them to intrude on the relationship I have with my husband. That involves a myriad of ways I manage those interactions, but most importantly an honest view of my own feelings and that of my lovers' and my husband.
One of the things that I find about the evolution of sexual relations is how that has gone in the past 100 years or so. If we go back 100 years men were generally "allowed" to have sexual relations outside of marriage. I put that in quotes because it wasn't explicitly permitted per se (by law, the church or society), but it was tacitly accepted for men only. Once women started to get more rights and it became clear that we were increasingly unwilling to accept the traditional double standard, rather than extending the same flexibility to women, society (driven by men) decided to withdraw it from men (at least in terms of how it is judged).
Now as society has continued to liberalize and women's roles have continued to evolve, we are increasingly of the view that we don't need society's permission to be non-monogamous in our relationships or not enter into relationships at all. Along with that has come a cohort of men who seek to stand on moral/ethical grounds to adopt "burn the bitch" style rhetoric. What is interesting to me is that I feel as though many of those men are the ones who, if they lived 100 years ago, would readily step outside their marriage without nearly the moral/ethical constraints that they now seek to impose upon women. Their strident stance on the morality or ethics of these matters is really just cover for their own insecurities and even an unconscious recognition that absent the double standard their position in gender relations is greatly weakened.
So, why did women back in the day accept a cheating husband? Are we that much less jealous or was it simply because we had no choice? it was dominantly the latter in my view. Society was unkind to and unsupportive of single women, especially those with children. For a cheated on wife the alternative to sucking it up and accepting that reality was something approaching destitution (the whole premise that women want monogamy because we want a man to provide for us has always been rooted in the fact that society denied us any other practical means of providing for ourselves).
Those days are gone. But we are still in the early stages of a new view on relationships, especially among women. Historically, the compelled pairing of men and women was substantially driven by what men wanted (one can't say it was all because women wanted a man to provide for us while ignoring the fact that men conspired to deny us the means to provide for ourselves). For some men it was/is their best chance of having a mate at all.
As of now men are still clinging to and trying to enforce a traditional model. But they are slowly losing the ability to impose the double standard because women can refuse to engage on that basis. Guys are still trying to use shaming as their primary tool to compel compliance, but it is becoming less effective all the time. And women are increasingly opting to be on our own rather than put up with a misogynist partner. Those men that could count on the compelled pairing to hopefully one day find a partner are increasingly finding themselves single. It may take a generation or more, but eventually both genders (but especially men I think) will move beyond compelled pairing (and other behaviours). In that environment both genders (but again especially men I think) will alter their expectations because they have no choice - different than it was for women 100 years ago, but potentially with a similar result.
More women using our increased sexual latitude to shut out men who exhibit misogynist behaviour will alter that behaviour. Many of us will still opt for monogamy. But many will opt otherwise and while men won't be obliged to go along with it many will see it as workable, both because they lack alternative and because they have learned to respect our sexual prerogative in a way that they don't today. Women 100 years ago were compelled to accept their husband's sexual activity with other women. They may not have liked it, but they were able to see it with a more open mind than men of that time did or our current time do. Much of that is because they had no choice. Men will be steered in this direction, not because we compel them under duress, but because we do so by withdrawing from a traditional model that no longer suits us.
