Monogamy can be damaging?

[Torture]

Heard him on the radio this morning. I see what he's trying to say, and if you've talked about it with your partner and it works for you, that's great for you. I don't know that I agree though.

One of his comments was that what you look for in a relationship (safe, comfortable, etc) is the opposite of what you're aroused by (risk, something new, etc) so most couples set themselves up for failure. He figured if you each only cheat on the other 2-3 times over the course of your marriage you're doing pretty well.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but that doesn't really sit well with me. I see marriage as a lifetime commitment (for better or worse) and sleeping with whomever gets you excited and saying you "only did it 2-3 times....and hey, you did it too!" doesn't seem like much of a commitment or very respectful of the person you love.

[Muta]

Downtown Calgary is about un-monogamous as you can get. Take a peek and be fascinated by what you discover. It's a wild trip down the rabbit hole.

I am aware there is a pun to be had in here.

[troutman]

I very much agree with that FF. Some relationships are too broken, some right from the start. With more wisdom, maybe people are better at finding better partners.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Exactly. The premise of the article is that it's the boredom of long-term relationships that poses a challenge to monogamy. But how many people, early in a relationship, say to their partner "this is great and everything, but when we get sexually bored with each other in 5 or 10 years, should we be able to sleep with other people?" It's like prenuptial agreements - simply asking for one is likely to undermine trust.

I think if you have an open and honest line of communication to your spouse it doesn't have to get boring. That's on you and/or your partner getting lazy and not putting in the same effort.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by troutman

I very much agree with that FF. Some relationships are too broken, some right from the start. With more wisdom, maybe people are better at finding better partners.

Oh absolutely! Some people shouldn't have gotten married in the first place; I know a few couples that are ticking time bombs for that reason. People who get married because she got pregnant and it was the right thing to do.... isn't always the case! People who settle because they'd rather be unhappy than alone....

However the lady in the one article was married for 18 years before decided she wanted to spice up her life. I assume, even though you know what they say about that, that she knew going into the marriage that he didn't want kids and all of a sudden she's decided that she need to gain control of some feminine part of herself she's been missing out on because she didn't have kids? Sounds like a load of BS and an awful excuse to bang a few randoms.

Anyway, I'm quite pleased with myself that I banged my randoms in my youth and found someone I love to settle down with before getting married. I know that we both love and respect each other and that if either one of us was feeling unsatisfied, we would talk about it and make a plan of action instead of splitting up to 'rediscover ourselves'...

Some people aren't cut out for monogamy and that's fine but if that's the case, why are you married at all?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Torture

Heard him on the radio this morning. I see what he's trying to say, and if you've talked about it with your partner and it works for you, that's great for you. I don't know that I agree though.

One of his comments was that what you look for in a relationship (safe, comfortable, etc) is the opposite of what you're aroused by (risk, something new, etc) so most couples set themselves up for failure. He figured if you each only cheat on the other 2-3 times over the course of your marriage you're doing pretty well.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but that doesn't really sit well with me. I see marriage as a lifetime commitment (for better or worse) and sleeping with whomever gets you excited and saying you "only did it 2-3 times....and hey, you did it too!" doesn't seem like much of a commitment or very respectful of the person you love.

I refer to Joseph Campbell often:


“Marriage is not a love affair. A love affair is a totally different thing. A marriage is a commitment to that which you are. That person is literally your other half. And you and the other are one. A love affair isn't that. That is a relationship for pleasure, and when it gets to be unpleasurable, it's off. But a marriage is a life commitment, and a life commitment means the prime concern of your life. If marriage is not the prime concern, you're not married....The Puritans called marriage "the little church within the Church." In marriage, every day you love, and every day you forgive. It is an ongoing sacrament – love and forgiveness.... Like the yin/yang symbol....Here I am, and here she is, and here we are. Now when I have to make a sacrifice, I'm not sacrificing to her, I'm sacrificing to the relationship. Resentment against the other one is wrongly placed. Life in in the relationship, that's where your life now is. That's what a marriage is – whereas, in a love affair, you have two lives in a more or less successful relationship to each other for a certain length of time, as long as it seems agreeable.”
― Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

or don't.....

Nono! Please do! This is going to be great!

[DoubleF]

Depends on the couple. Why do we have to label everyone? Why do we all have to fit 99.9% into the same mold? Regardless of what I do, it's not like everyone else should do the same or risk being shunned or something.

Off topic, I keep reading the word 'Amish' in the OP.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Oh absolutely! Some people shouldn't have gotten married in the first place; I know a few couples that are ticking time bombs for that reason. People who get married because she got pregnant and it was the right thing to do.... isn't always the case! People who settle because they'd rather be unhappy than alone....

However the lady in the one article was married for 18 years before decided she wanted to spice up her life. I assume, even though you know what they say about that, that she knew going into the marriage that he didn't want kids and all of a sudden she's decided that she need to gain control of some feminine part of herself she's been missing out on because she didn't have kids? Sounds like a load of BS and an awful excuse to bang a few randoms.

Anyway, I'm quite pleased with myself that I banged my randoms in my youth and found someone I love to settle down with before getting married. I know that we both love and respect each other and that if either one of us was feeling unsatisfied, we would talk about it and make a plan of action instead of splitting up to 'rediscover ourselves'...

Some people aren't cut out for monogamy and that's fine but if that's the case, why are you married at all?

Also there is a difference between getting divorce because you are in a broken relationship whereby the emotional/friendship part of your marriage is over. But to me not being monogamous boils down to wanting to bang different people, not emotional intimacy. Let's call a spade a spade. It's wanting to stick your penis/vagina in a new hole...and that's lazy.


Edit: I also want to point out that if both parties get into the relationship knowing, or decide later to not be monogamous, that's totally different, I'm referring mostly to people cheating on spouses and using the "see I was sexually bored" excuse.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Edit: I also want to point out that if both parties get into the relationship knowing, or decide later to not be monogamous, that's totally different, I'm referring mostly to people cheating on spouses and using the "see I was sexually bored" excuse.

I don't know. I think Savage brings up a good point. Some people just lose interest in sex and there's not really a whole lot to be done about it. So what do you do in situations like that? Try to masturbate your way out of the inevitable resentment? It seems kind of ludicrous to split up a marriage if everything else about the relationship is still the same but there's just no sexual desire left on the part of one person.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't know. I think Savage brings up a good point. Some people just lose interest in sex and there's not really a whole lot to be done about it. So what do you do in situations like that? Try to masturbate your way out of the inevitable resentment? It seems kind of ludicrous to split up a marriage if everything else about the relationship is still the same but there's just no sexual desire left on the part of one person.

It's a peculiar feature of human nature that a person's sexual desire can decline without a commensurate decline in sexual jealousy.

[1stLand]

Originally Posted by Muta

Downtown Calgary is about un-monogamous as you can get. Take a peek and be fascinated by what you discover. It's a wild trip down the rabbit hole.

I am aware there is a pun to be had in here.

Are you talking about the downtown Homeless people or the Downtown 9-5 Crowd?

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Torture

Heard him on the radio this morning. I see what he's trying to say, and if you've talked about it with your partner and it works for you, that's great for you. I don't know that I agree though.

One of his comments was that what you look for in a relationship (safe, comfortable, etc) is the opposite of what you're aroused by (risk, something new, etc) so most couples set themselves up for failure. He figured if you each only cheat on the other 2-3 times over the course of your marriage you're doing pretty well.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but that doesn't really sit well with me. I see marriage as a lifetime commitment (for better or worse) and sleeping with whomever gets you excited and saying you "only did it 2-3 times....and hey, you did it too!" doesn't seem like much of a commitment or very respectful of the person you love.

Your username is appropriate

[Tinordi]

Just because his name is Savage doesn't mean he's barbaric.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Your username is appropriate

[#-3]

I don't really have experience outside of monogamy. But that Wild Oats story seems like a terrible example for a healthy relationship expanded beyond monogamy. Basically they weren't happy or enjoying each other so they split up and spent 2.5 year pretending they hadn't split up.

I think you find yourself in a situation that everyone is enjoying there is nothing wrong with following it, but you have to be able to communicate well enough to know when someone is no longer enjoying it.

But its already hard enough to find two people who are compatible enough to last, I can only imagine when you start adding 3rd or 4th or 5th.........parties

[Muta]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

Are you talking about the downtown Homeless people or the Downtown 9-5 Crowd?

9-5 crowd. I don't follow the homeless quite as closely, although I'm sure they have some wild and riveting stories.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by troutman

Triple-Double.

Poisoning the well.

Appeal to emotion.

Judgmental language.

where's the appeal to emotion?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by AcGold

where's the appeal to emotion?

Could just substitute in ad hominem if you're concerned.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by peter12

Dan Savage is an absolutely barbaric person.

Oh come on, you can't leave it at that. I'd never even heard of the guy but, based on your comment alone, I googled him, and he sounds like your run of the mill quasi-celebrity.

What has done/what does he do that qualifies him as "absolutely barbaric"?