Jealousy a Root of Monogamy?

[UnwittinglyPoly]

I need to preface my main point with a note about the discussion style I'm going to use on this subject. Otherwise, I will likely be seen as bullheaded and agrumentative :) This is one of those things where I have an idea in my head, I've rolled it around and around and need to fully vet it and see which parts of it hold water and which ones don't. During that process, I'll make an assertion, examine feedback, note what I think has merit and what I think doesn't and make more assertions. Sometimes it might seem as though I'm not listening, but what I'm really doing is running the idea through the meat grinder, many times with a devil's advocate approach, and seeing what makes it out the other side. I assure you I have no problem ultimately admitting I'm wrong, in part or fully. I just have to run it through all the logic in my head first, and I've found the only way I can do that is to open up my thoughts to being challenged and to challenge responses. I always do my best to do so respectfully and gracefully :)

It seems to me that an emotional need for monogamy is almost always rooted in some combination of jealousy, insecurity and fear. I think these things are unhealthy parts of the human psyche, and that people are ultimately better off without them, even if they think they aren't. The reason people think they aren't better off without them is because these things are self-perpetuating--our jealousies, insecurities and fears keep us from addressing our jealousies, insecurities and fears; they tell us, indirectly, that we are better off holding onto them.

In a short discussion with OldGuy, he noted that a relationship should be judged on whether it's healthy or not. I agree with this. But I maintain that a relationship where jealousy, insecurity and fear are generally never actualized is not as healthy as it appears. This is because, even though these things are never triggered, they still exist. The dynamic of the relationship is that each person is mindful not to trigger them, which can in fact be good. But it's kind of like the idea of the person who is deathly afraid to drive across bridges. What is the most healthy way to deal with it? One way is to examine what's behind the fear and try to overcome it. So an old story goes, a woman who had such a fear was driven across bridge after bridge after bridge by her counselor, to show that there is in fact no need to be fearful (in addition to helping her understand the physics behind bridge structure). Another way to deal with it is to avoid bridges. If you make sure the triggers are never fired, you have nothing to worry about right? I mainatain that the seemingly healthy relationship which never triggers jealousy is akin to avoiding bridges. The underlying unhealthy attitudes are still there. And just as the unhealthy response to a fear of bridges is to never drive across bridges, I think the less healthy response to jealousy, etc., is to ensure the triggers are never fired, rather than letting them fire and working through issues.

It may sound like I'm advocating purposefully finding things that trigger unhealthy responses in our relationships. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about allowing the triggers to be fired and not avoiding them at all costs. I think most "healthy" monogamous relationships do the latter, which is the less healthy response. I think this is part of why many poly people are seen as having a superiority complex towards mono--because mono is largely predicated on less healthy responses, and less healthy responses are in fact rigthly seen as inferior to more healthy ones.

Your turn :)

[Magdlyn]

I think the roots of monogamy come from the establishment of the patriarchy some 5000 years ago, which resulted in an idea that women are the possessions of men, and that the offspring needed to be biologically his, for inheritance purposes. Therefore it was imperative to control the woman's sexuality through laws (seen in the Torah), force and oppression.

Also acceptable under this template for society was polygyny. Polyandry (one woman, multiple husbands), and polyamory, where a woman has the power to choose for herself how many mates/sexual partners to have, were right out.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

I think the roots of monogamy come from the establishment of the patriarchy some 5000 years ago, which resulted in an idea that women are the possessions of men, and that the offspring needed to be biologically his, for inheritance purposes. Therefore it was imperative to control the woman's sexuality through laws (seen in the Torah), force and oppression.I actually agree with you, from an historical standpoint. I would argue that all of that is a mask for jealousy, fear and insecurity. As women came to be more equals, rather than demanding that they not be owned, they instead went down the path of "well, then I own you too." Again, based on those unhealthy things.

[AnnabelMore]

I think one potential issue with this theory is that it assumes that people in mutually-monogamous relationships would go into spasms of jealousy if one partner broached the idea of opening things up. For many people that may well be true, but I think that,especially in our Dan Savage inspired times, more than a few monogamous couples are actively discussing how they want to structure their relationship and deciding together that they both want to devote their attention, time, and love exclusively to each other. Maybe they're each just naturally inclined that way, or maybe they think it's the best way for them to build the strongest possible partnership.

Plenty of people who prefer monogamy for themselves are completely capable of overcoming jealousy to accept their partner having more than one partner (thus the mono/poly relationships out there). Like my mono boyfriend, he accepts my other relationship but has no interest himself in loving anyone romantically but me, it just doesn't come naturally to him to do so. If I felt that way too, we'd be monogamous, not out of jealousy but out of preference/orientation.

Other people who are monogamous and insist on monogamy from their partner may do so because that's how they believe they'll form the strongest bonds, not because of jealousy.

Are couples who are monogamous out of mutual preference and/or philosophy rather than because of jealousy the exception rather than the rule? Perhaps, but I think there's an epidemic out there of people not examining why they do the things they do, on every level of their lives, and that if more people were able to see monogamy as a choice rather than an unquestioned default, we'd have a lot more couples choosing monogamy for healthy, informed, positive and loving reasons.

[AnnabelMore]

Oh, oh, and -- I think there are probably many couples who see monogamy as a religious dictate and are monogamous because they think that's what their god intended for them. While I don't adhere to those beliefs, I can see how it doesn't necessarily have any relation to jealousy.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

Thanks for responding AnnabelMore. Maybe I muddied the waters more than I should have--sorry, I'm trying to work through all of this in my head. I'm specifically talking about the emotional need for monogamy, and your points, even the religion angle, speak to other-than-emotional needs for monogamy. Granted, I did kind of lump all needs together somewhat in my initial post. That's because, I do believe for the overwhelming majority of monogamous people, even if they point to non-emotional factors such as religion, underlying emotional needs for it do still factor in quite heavily. It's been said there usually two reasons people do what they do: the reason they tell you and the real reason :). I think you are highlighting the exceptions--which is good to point out--but I think they are just that...exceptions, quite rare ones.

And as Magdlyn pointed out, I do believe even the religion angle is historically rooted in these things. In fact, I tend to think they were huge factors in the invention and propogation of religion: "The big bad man in the sky says you are my property, so you better do as I say or else!"

[ray]

I dislike your premise because it seems to be making the assumption that polyamory is inherently more 'evolved' than monogamy. I think that poly can encourage personal growth and often does but so does monogamy and any healthy human relationship. Humans do have emotional needs and monogamy can be very rewarding. It's completely possible to confront jealousy and other emotional issues as an adult in any situation. Not everyone wants to be polyamorous. I think that those who feel like it enriches their life should go for it but that doesn't mean that everyone else is emotionally stunted and jealousy riddled. Saying that jealousy is a root of monogamy frames it as being almost pathological. To me, that's like saying promiscuity or unfaithfulness is the root of polyamory. Both are valid approaches to relationships.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

I dislike your premise because it seems to be making the assumption that polyamory is inherently more 'evolved' than monogamy. I think that poly can encourage personal growth and often does but so does monogamy and any healthy human relationship. Humans do have emotional needs and monogamy can be very rewarding. It's completely possible to confront jealousy and other emotional issues as an adult in any situation. Not everyone wants to be polyamorous. I think that those who feel like it enriches their life should go for it but that doesn't mean that everyone else is emotionally stunted and jealousy riddled. Saying that jealousy is a root of monogamy frames it as being almost pathological. To me, that's like saying promiscuity or unfaithfulness is the root of polyamory. Both are valid approaches to relationships.Liking or disliking a premise has nothing to do with whether it's logically sound, nor does a premise's implications (pathology in this case). Were it not for the fact that mono is almost exclusively reserved for a specific type of relationship (intimate), I wouldn't see it as something on the pathological end of the spectrum (though I wouldn't personally call it actually pathological). In almost every other type of personal relationship, it would be seen as ridiculous and arbitrary to limit them to a single person: friendship, children, etc. In the context of how humans relate to one another, the mono limit on intimate relationships is rather arbitrary, and it IS emotionally stunting, as it would be to arbitrarily limit friendships or children for other than practical reasons (limited time and resources). Largely, the driving factor behind limiting intimate relationships isn't a practical one, but rather an emotional one.

And certainly, it could be argued that polyamory is due to something on the pathological end of the spectrum, and it sometimes is. But in general it takes a lot of self-examination and moving beyond unhealthy things (if they are there) in order to come to a point where true polyamory is a viable option. And I would argue self-examination and moving beyond unhealty things ARE preferrable, not just for me but for most human beings. Of course, many monogamous people do self-examine and move past unhealthy things. But I don't think most do in the area that relates to why they are monogamous.

As promiscuity is hard-wired into our evolutionary nature, I would say the tendency to fight against it would be seen as more toward pathological, and the thoughtful, responsible embracing of it would be less so. Unfaithfulness doesn't really play into the idea of poly as much, because faithfulness is only invoked when an expectation of exclusivity is part of the equation--poly, by definition doesn't have an expectation of exclusivity, so having more than one intimate interest doesn't invoke unfaithfulness.

[nycindie]

This discussion is very familiar. Every so often someone comes along and starts a thread like this one, which will get tiresome very quickly, I believe. There are numerous discussions here on the merits of polyamory as compared to the evils of monogamy (as is usually posed by the OPs). They always wind up in a boring argument. Just do a search and I'm sure you'll find numerous posts that support your position as well as many that challenge it. Maybe all these anti-monogamy threads should be combined into a master "monogamy sucks" discussion.

*sigh*

[gleegirl1203]

Up until about 6 months ago, I would have identified myself as mono. I've been with my fiance for almost three years and before that I was in completely mono relationships. Not out of jealousy or the idea that it was the relationship structure that I was supposed to adhere to. It just felt right to me. I was happy loving one person. The idea that I could have the capacity to love more than one person at a time never occurred to me because the opportunity never presented itself. But in my mono relationships, jealousy wasn't something that was really an issue. Maybe because I chose to date people who weren't emotionally stunted? I don't know really. I've never had a problem discussing things like jealousy or other emotional things with my partners. Jealousy rarely came in to play. Perhaps because we were able to always discuss things so openly.

As far as promiscuity is concerned, I've never been overly promiscuous. I'm not saying that's true for everyone, I'm just speaking from personal experience in my relationships. Even when I wasn't in mono relationships, I never had the urge to "sleep around". I also don't equate promiscuity with polyamory. Polyamory, to me, is about more than just sex. Just because I happen to love more than one person doesn't mean I'm promiscuous.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

This discussion is very familiar. Every so often someone comes along and starts a thread like this one, which will get tiresome very quickly, I believe. There are numerous discussions here on the merits of polyamory as compared to the evils of monogamy (as is usually posed by the OPs). They always wind up in a boring argument. Just do a search and I'm sure you'll find numerous posts that support your position as well as many that challenge it. Maybe all these anti-monogamy threads should be combined into a master "monogamy sucks" discussion.

*sigh*Interesting. This is exactly the same type of response I got time and time again on religious forums, as I was going through the process of trying to determine whether my life-long faith actually had merit or was ill-placed. If I'm in the wrong place to be having a discussion where the first few responses don't answer the complexities of the subject, then by all means, I won't have these types of discussions here. As with my religious experience, I may have to go to something like an automobile forum in order to find people who are willing to plumb the depths of a subject like this, rather than a forum one would think would be full of people willing to do so without being so quickly bored. Oh, and to clarify--yeah, my track record shows that I'm willing to do a complete 180 on my thinking if the logic warrants it. Going from a life-long right-wing fundagelical extremist to an atheist bears that out. But such changes in thinking don't occur in places where people bore of such discussions. So maybe rather than trying to stifle such discussions, it might be helpful to meaningfully engage them beyond the pat answers that come from both sides.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

Up until about 6 months ago, I would have identified myself as mono. I've been with my fiance for almost three years and before that I was in completely mono relationships. Not out of jealousy or the idea that it was the relationship structure that I was supposed to adhere to. It just felt right to me. I was happy loving one person. The idea that I could have the capacity to love more than one person at a time never occurred to me because the opportunity never presented itself. But in my mono relationships, jealousy wasn't something that was really an issue. Maybe because I chose to date people who weren't emotionally stunted? I don't know really. I've never had a problem discussing things like jealousy or other emotional things with my partners. Jealousy rarely came in to play. Perhaps because we were able to always discuss things so openly.

As far as promiscuity is concerned, I've never been overly promiscuous. I'm not saying that's true for everyone, I'm just speaking from personal experience in my relationships. Even when I wasn't in mono relationships, I never had the urge to "sleep around". I also don't equate promiscuity with polyamory. Polyamory, to me, is about more than just sex. Just because I happen to love more than one person doesn't mean I'm promiscuous.Would you say you think you are the rule in monogamous relationships? The fact that you seem to no longer consider yourself monogamous, and are on a polyamory forum tend to indicate that you may not be.

And I completely agree with everything you said about promiscuity. I absolutely understand polyamory doesn't equal promiscuity, and that it's as much, if not more about non-sexual aspects of relationships than otherwise.

[gleegirl1203]

Would you say you think you are the rule in monogamous relationships? The fact that you seem to no longer consider yourself monogamous, and are on a polyamory forum tend to indicate that you may not be.

Perhaps I'm the exception to the "rule" of monogamy. I know that people aren't always capable of expressing their feelings (including jealousy) openly and honestly in relationships. I guess I've just been blessed to be able to discuss those issues with my partners, past and present.

[SourGirl]

So maybe rather than trying to stifle such discussions, it might be helpful to meaningfully engage them beyond the pat answers that come from both sides.

Or maybe, you could use the 'search' and 'tag' feature. It`s free. No fees.


To be honest, I tuned out after the 'Me-me-me I communicate this way, me-me-me' stuff.
I don`t think it`ll tire out though, people love to talk about themselves far to much. :D

[ray]

Liking or disliking a premise has nothing to do with whether it's logically sound, nor does a premise's implications (pathology in this case). Were it not for the fact that mono is almost exclusively reserved for a specific type of relationship (intimate), I wouldn't see it as something on the pathological end of the spectrum (though I wouldn't personally call it actually pathological). In almost every other type of personal relationship, it would be seen as ridiculous and arbitrary to limit them to a single person: friendship, children, etc. In the context of how humans relate to one another, the mono limit on intimate relationships is rather arbitrary, and it IS emotionally stunting, as it would be to arbitrarily limit friendships or children for other than practical reasons (limited time and resources). Largely, the driving factor behind limiting intimate relationships isn't a practical one, but rather an emotional one.

And certainly, it could be argued that polyamory is due to something on the pathological end of the spectrum, and it sometimes is. But in general it takes a lot of self-examination and moving beyond unhealthy things (if they are there) in order to come to a point where true polyamory is a viable option. And I would argue self-examination and moving beyond unhealty things ARE preferrable, not just for me but for most human beings. Of course, many monogamous people do self-examine and move past unhealthy things. But I don't think most do in the area that relates to why they are monogamous.

As promiscuity is hard-wired into our evolutionary nature, I would say the tendency to fight against it would be seen as more toward pathological, and the thoughtful, responsible embracing of it would be less so. Unfaithfulness doesn't really play into the idea of poly as much, because faithfulness is only invoked when an expectation of exclusivity is part of the equation--poly, by definition doesn't have an expectation of exclusivity, so having more than one intimate interest doesn't invoke unfaithfulness.


I dislike your premise because I find it to be illogical and I think implications in wording are important. I bet a lot of people on here don't consider themselves promiscuous just because they're poly. In the same way, a lot of monogamous folk aren't overly jealous people just because they're mono. I don't think poly or monogamy is pathological but the way you frame it makes it sounds like you think monogamy is less than or inferior to poly. Monogamy is not emotionally stunting. Some people may feel confined in it and maybe that's been your experience but who are you to speak for all humanity? Not everyone feels the need to have more romantic relationships. Some people are very happy with having one romantic relationship at a time. All relationships provide opportunities for growth both friendships and romantic ones. Do you think monogamy is inferior? Or am I reading into this? I think that both are VALID approaches and I find it odd that anyone would argue otherwise. It's like saying that's it's better to be gay or right handed.

[opalescent]

I need to preface my main point with a note about the discussion style I'm going to use on this subject. Otherwise, I will likely be seen as bullheaded and agrumentative :) This is one of those things where I have an idea in my head, I've rolled it around and around and need to fully vet it and see which parts of it hold water and which ones don't. During that process, I'll make an assertion, examine feedback, note what I think has merit and what I think doesn't and make more assertions. Sometimes it might seem as though I'm not listening, but what I'm really doing is running the idea through the meat grinder, many times with a devil's advocate approach, and seeing what makes it out the other side. I assure you I have no problem ultimately admitting I'm wrong, in part or fully. I just have to run it through all the logic in my head first, and I've found the only way I can do that is to open up my thoughts to being challenged and to challenge responses. I always do my best to do so respectfully and gracefully :)

I dislike your premise because it seems to be making the assumption that polyamory is inherently more 'evolved' than monogamy. I think that poly can encourage personal growth and often does but so does monogamy and any healthy human relationship. Humans do have emotional needs and monogamy can be very rewarding. It's completely possible to confront jealousy and other emotional issues as an adult in any situation. Not everyone wants to be polyamorous. I think that those who feel like it enriches their life should go for it but that doesn't mean that everyone else is emotionally stunted and jealousy riddled. Saying that jealousy is a root of monogamy frames it as being almost pathological. To me, that's like saying promiscuity or unfaithfulness is the root of polyamory. Both are valid approaches to relationships.

Liking or disliking a premise has nothing to do with whether it's logically sound, nor does a premise's implications (pathology in this case).

Interesting. This is exactly the same type of response I got time and time again on religious forums, as I was going through the process of trying to determine whether my life-long faith actually had merit or was ill-placed. If I'm in the wrong place to be having a discussion where the first few responses don't answer the complexities of the subject, then by all means, I won't have these types of discussions here. As with my religious experience, I may have to go to something like an automobile forum in order to find people who are willing to plumb the depths of a subject like this, rather than a forum one would think would be full of people willing to do so without being so quickly bored. Oh, and to clarify--yeah, my track record shows that I'm willing to do a complete 180 on my thinking if the logic warrants it. Going from a life-long right-wing fundagelical extremist to an atheist bears that out. But such changes in thinking don't occur in places where people bore of such discussions. So maybe rather than trying to stifle such discussions, it might be helpful to meaningfully engage them beyond the pat answers that come from both sides.

UP, first some of my concerns. I will address your ideas in another post.

People here are more than happy to wrestle with diffucult, complex issues. But they generally aren't willing to always revisit the same argument over and over. Did you eyeball the threads that deal with monogamy vs. poly? Many of the ideas you posed come up in those threads - not framed exactly as you did, but still there. This doesn't mean you shouldn't pose it but be prepared for folks to point you to threads where similar ideas were discussed.

This is not an academic forum where such exercises are common. Not that people here don't have the brainpower or background to weigh in on an academic discussion but that simply isn't this forum's focus.

Also, you pooched your reply to Ray's response. "Dislike" meant she disagreed with your hypothesis; she then proceeded to offer logical arguments why. You certainly are not required to agree with her but it is polite to recognize when someone answers in the manner which you set up in your original post.

Finally, I submit to you that your underlying methodology is flawed - if one wants to get academic. The questions with which you are wrestling - religion, relationships, sexuality - are precisely the ones particularly resistant to logic and the scientific method. They attempt to address in various ways what it means to be human, and what it means to be a moral human. Does that mean that science and logic have no place in these discussions? Of course not. I find the arguments presented in "Sex at Dawn" to be compelling. But they are not conclusive and will likely never be definitively proven given that the answers are in so far in the past. Science can certainly inform these discussions. But science and logic cannot answer questions like these because they edge into morality, ethics and philosophy - what is it to be human, and to be a moral human?

Now like any good academic, I want to add a caveat. Obviously this method works for you personally to wrestle with the big questions. You mentioned using it to resolve some religious identity questions. Yet, for many people, maybe most, logic and scientific method are ultimately not useful to resolve these type of questions.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

Or maybe, you could use the 'search' and 'tag' feature. It`s free. No fees.


To be honest, I tuned out after the 'Me-me-me I communicate this way, me-me-me' stuff.
I don`t think it`ll tire out though, people love to talk about themselves far to much. :DWow, I didn't think a preemptive explanation--which I'm pretty sure I would have had to give at some point, based on every sincere, in-depth discussion I've ever had on every forum on which I've been--would be seen as me-me-me. I was under the mistaken impression that letting people know where I'm coming from and how I process things would be a good thing. I'm sorry I made you read through two pages of a post to which you obviously indeed tuned out after the first paragraph. Can I ask if you always tune out to posts where people are talking about themselves, or is it only when related to certain subject matter?

[ray]

UnwittinglyPoly obviously has a bias against monogamy and feels that any monogamous relationship is fear-based and unhealthy. Gah!

Look, any relationship is as healthy as the people in it. Neither polyamory nor monogamy is superior to the other - it's all about the people involved and how well they can relate to, nurture, support, and care about each other within whatever boundaries or structure for their relationships they so choose.

Nothing to do with how I operate in relationships has anything to do with whether my relationships are poly or mono. I am still me in all my relationships.

Well, there we go... I'm bored already. Have a fun discussion. :)

[UnwittinglyPoly]

opalescent, thank you for your reply. I did eyeball a few threads (there are few with the mono vs. poly tag). And the fact that they aren't framed exactly as I framed it is why I started a new thread. If everyone would like, I will gladly move the discussion to an already-existing thread.

While I understand the focus of this forum isn't academic, I would say that it doesn't need to be. As mentioned earlier, the most effective, in-depth, informative discussions I've had regarding religion were on an automobile forum, of all places. Arguably less academic and certainly less philosophical than here, and orders of magnitude less pertinent to that subject matter than this forum is to the subject at hand.

I think I did at least rudimentarily address Ray's arguments by my discussion of how what she was saying is equally evolved may not be (but rather, based on arbitrary conditions).

And I don't think the use of logic is flawed, even in matters of religion and philosophy, especially since logic is fundamentally a discipline of philosophy. I do understand that some things are matters of the heart and aren't necessarily fully apprehended most effectively through logic. However, even in those matters, there are major parts surrounding them that are. For instance, in religion there are things such as whether a global flood has actually occurred, whether a certain holy book is accurate, whether a god who is described as X but is said to do Y makes any sense, etc. And the same goes with this discussion. If in fact a majority of monogamous people don't hold to monogamy out of some level of insecurity, that should be pretty easy to point out. The problem in these types of philosophical discussions is that most times people tap out using the "it's a matter of the heart/faith/human existence" card much sooner than is warranted, giving up on the logic well before it's run its course. In my experience of past discussions, this almost always occurs because people run out of arguments to support their position. I find it exceedingly strange that forums dealing specifically with a certain topic have been the least effective in finding people who won't tap out early regarding the subjects those forums are about. This one is appearing to be no exception. I've found that logic can in fact resolve much more than a lot of people will allow it to. And the fact that people are putting forth logical arguments in this thread indicates that logical arguments are in fact warranted. But apparently some are only willing to go so far as their notions aren't challenged. But that's what my purpose here is--to open up my ideas and have them directly challenged to the fullest degree possible. And it looks like I'm in the wrong place for that, because after less than a day, people are already playing the intellectual equivalent of the religious "you just have to have faith" card. Regardless of the fact that the forum isn't dedicated to academic ventures per se, I find it quite odd.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

I dislike your premise because I find it to be illogical and I think implications in wording are important. I bet a lot of people on here don't consider themselves promiscuous just because they're poly. In the same way, a lot of monogamous folk aren't overly jealous people just because they're mono. I don't think poly or monogamy is pathological but the way you frame it makes it sounds like you think monogamy is less than or inferior to poly. Monogamy is not emotionally stunting. Some people may feel confined in it and maybe that's been your experience but who are you to speak for all humanity? Not everyone feels the need to have more romantic relationships. Some people are very happy with having one romantic relationship at a time. All relationships provide opportunities for growth both friendships and romantic ones. Do you think monogamy is inferior? Or am I reading into this? I think that both are VALID approaches and I find it odd that anyone would argue otherwise. It's like saying that's it's better to be gay or right handed.ray, I'm not arguing that some number of monogamous people aren't overly jealous. I also don't think monogamy is an invalid choice. I DO think that attitudes based on things such as jealousy, insecurity and fear ARE inferior to attitudes based on those things not existing--by definition, because jealousy, insecurity and fear are largely unhealthy.

As to a lot of monogamous people not being overly jealous--if you picked 100 people randomly off the street and asked them, "If your significant other had strong romantic feelings for another person, how would you feel?", the overwhelming majority of responses would be something between "hurt" and "devastated". Do you disagree with this? If so, on what basis? If you do agree that would likely be the case, on what would the hurt/devastation be based if not jealousy, insecurity, etc?

If I was saying poly is superior to mono, then the gay/right hand scenario would come into play. That's not what I'm saying. I am saying I think the drivers generally behind mono are in many ways less healthy than the drivers generally behind poly. To put it in terms of your argument, I'm not saying that being right-handed is superior to being left handed, I'm saying being right-handed is superior to using your left hand because you have an arbitrary, fear-based aversion to using your right hand (that analogy probably breaks down faster than I'd like, but hopefully you get the idea).

[UnwittinglyPoly]

Well, there we go... I'm bored already. Have a fun discussion. :)Dang, and just after you were starting to make it interesting.

[nycindie]

. . . I think the drivers generally behind mono are in many ways less healthy than the drivers generally behind poly.A great many people get into polyamorous relationships because they think it would be cool to fuck a lot of people and not have to ask permission. Most people get into monogamous relationships because they want to commit long-term to a loving partnership and raise a family together and see no reason to have more than two people involved in order to do that. Which is "healthier?"

[UnwittinglyPoly]

A great many people get into polyamorous relationships because they think it would be cool to fuck a lot of people and not have to ask permission. Most people get into monogamous relationships because they want to commit long-term to a loving partnership and raise a family together and see no reason to have more than two people involved in order to do that. Which is "healthier?"A great many people get into monogamous relationships because they have an insecurity-based need to be someone's "one and only", and any other scenario sets them sideways. Most people get into poly relationships because they want to commit long-term to loving partnerships (and many times live their lives together and raise a family) and see no reason to arbitrarily limit it one person. Which is "healthier"?

Actually, if the truth be told, I think the majority of people who get into monogamous relationships do so because 1) That's the social expectation, and 2) They can't stand the thought of their significant other loving someone other than them. That's not why they get into a relationship with the person--they do so because of the reasons you mentioned. But the reason it's a *monogamous* relationship is largely because of my points above. In their minds, there is no other option because of those things.

[zylya]

The problem is, you're trying to create a logical discussion based on your own EMOTIONAL response to something. Your assumption is that the large majority of people get into monogamous relationships because of your reasons 1 & 2 is simply baseless. If this is a truly logical argument, where are your facts and figures? Your opinions are meaningless in a logical argument if they're not backed up.

People aren't disagreeing with you based on your argument that jealousy is less healthy than non-jealousy, they're disagreeing with your assumption that MONOGAMY = JEALOUSY. You throw around words like "majority" "great many people" "most people" yet provide no statistical data to back that up.

You see, just because you've decided to call yourself polyamorous, it doesn't mean that jealousy just disappears. I still get jealous just as much in my poly arrangements as I ever did in my mono arrangements of the past. The problem is that we've been conditioned to believe that relationship = ownership. The thing is, there are people out there who have got over the relationship = ownership issue, and are STILL monogamous. Some people honestly PREFER being with just one person, and it's nothing to do with jealousy. Just like I prefer being with lots of different people - different strokes for different folks. The idea that anyone who's got over the feeling of jealousy would naturally be polyamorous is just faulty - jealousy is an emotion that affects both poly and mono people.

Also to nycindie, I don't see anything wrong with wanting to fuck a lot of people and not have to ask permission, I don't believe that either of the two options you present are unhealthy as long as you're honest about your desires.

[nycindie]

Also to nycindie, I don't see anything wrong with wanting to fuck a lot of people and not have to ask permission, I don't believe that either of the two options you present are unhealthy as long as you're honest about your desires.

That was my point and why I put quotes around the word healthy. I wasn't actually saying one was more healthy than the other but asking how we can judge the health of a relationship based on outside appearances. It's the people involved that make it healthy, not necessarily the parameters that do so.

[redpepper]

I don't know what has been written on this thread but I wanted to reply to your original thoughts before going back and reading. Excuse me if there are repeats.

I think that the idea of people avoiding crossing the bridge is valid, but it think its for different reasons than one might think. Having talked a lot about monogamy and polyamory with both types of people I have come to realize that mostly people who are monogamous think the idea of poly as a theory but in practice they just don't have the time, interest or inclination to pursue it. They prefer other "hobbies" over their relationship dynamics.

It seems for some self work is not that important and other things in life are. So why bother going down roads that have known bridges if you can take the over pass quite happily. I don't think its much to do with jealousy until one partner wants to try out a poly lifestyle for whatever reason.

By doing a tag search for "mono/poly" you will find additions to this discussion. It could shed more light on what mono people think.

[nycindie]

It seems for some; self work is not that important and other things in life are. So why bother going down roads that have known bridges if you can take the over pass quite happily.

RP, I am about to scold you! I hope I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying mono people choose the easy way out because they're uninterested in doing "self work," which I'm assuming you mean to be looking inward, examining old beliefs, working on getting to know themselves better, improving communication, all that.

WELL!

I am really surprised you would say that. The self-help industry is huge and didn't get built upon poly peeps alone. I know I've said it before, but I've been doing self-work since the early 80s. I've tried a number of different therapies and self-awareness modalities, and attended numerous workshops and courses in all the above and then some. I've even given workshops myself. Only met two poly people in all those years. Of course, some may have been in the closet, but my point is that monogamous people are just as interested in challenging old beliefs and doing "self-work" as polys are. Just because someone chooses monogamy doesn't mean they are unenlightened or narrow-minded. Some of the most progressive and radical thinkers I've ever met were in monogamous relationships with equally progressive and radical partners.

So I hope I've misunderstood you.

[redpepper]

RP, I am about to scold you! I hope I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying mono people choose the easy way out because they're uninterested in doing "self work," which I'm assuming you mean to be looking inward, examining old beliefs, working on getting to know themselves better, improving communication, all that.

WELL!

I am really surprised you would say that. The self-help industry is huge and didn't get built upon poly peeps alone. I know I've said it before, but I've been doing self-work since the early 80s. I've tried a number of different therapies and self-awareness modalities, and attended numerous workshops and courses in all the above and then some. I've even given workshops myself. Only met two poly people in all those years. Of course, some may have been in the closet, but my point is that monogamous people are just as interested in challenging old beliefs and doing "self-work" as polys are. Just because someone chooses monogamy doesn't mean they are unenlightened or narrow-minded. Some of the most progressive and radical thinkers I've ever met were in monogamous relationships with equally progressive and radical partners.

So I hope I've misunderstood you.sorry. I wrote too fast and didn't edit. I meant to say the self work that is required when addressing a partner who wants to try out a poly relationship dynamic. Of course mono people do self work and care about that for themselves. A lot of it over laps even, just that some care more (not exclusive to monogamy either) about their careers, their hobbies or their kids etc. than dealing with the self crap that comes up around poly relationships. Does that make more sense?

The kind of self work mono people do as a result of a poly partner is often not chosen work either I might add. At least not initially.

[AnnabelMore]

Hey UP, I've done some thinking about this subject and I think I've got my ideas in order. I get the distinction you're making about individual relationships versus underlying emotional drivers. And I think I understand why people here don't seem inclined to engage in the logical way you want... it's just way too personal for us. Many of us have mono family, friends, or partners who've accused us, implicitly or explicitly, of looking down on them and considering them dysfunctional because we've chosen a different model of loving. We know from experience that they *don't* deserve to be looked down on and are in no way of necessity dysfunctional, so we've been hurt by those accusations and are offended on behalf of our mono allies when someone else presents with those beliefs.

On to the question at hand! I'm going to start at the most basic level -- is jealousy, in. and of itself, unhealthy? I think it's not. Rather, I think it can be a useful part of one's emotional ecosystem. The way I'm thinking about it is not unlike how a century ago we thought wolves were bad because they killed game animals and we liked game animals, but in time we came to understand and value the role of the wolf. Something that seems bad and scary can actually have its place.

To continue the analogy, obviously we don't want uncontrolled wolves roaming our streets and eating our babies, we want to keep them in their proper place, in the wild, and will trap and re-release them if they wander too far. Similarly, we don't want jealousy -- or any of our feelings, really, but especially not a dangerous one like jealousy -- to be uncontrolled.

We need to manage our feelings and work with them, but in and of themselves they are neither bad nor good, they are merely neutral -- it's how much prominence we give them, how much intensity, how we let them affect us and manifest in our actions that matters. Does that make sense?

So, what useful role could jealousy possibly play? I think it can actually play a very useful role in letting us know when we may be being mistreated, when our emotional needs are not being met, and when we may be losing a relationship, or an aspect thereof, that we would be better off keeping.

How does this model of jealousy translate to healthy or unhealthy relationships? Let's say you're monogamous (since that's the model most people start with). You may have uncontrolled jealousy. That's a problem. You could become poly without ever resolving that problem and, sadly, some people do just that, to disastrous results. Alternately, you could examine it, deconstruct it, and control and manage it. At that point your relationship will be healthier whether you stay mono or move on to become poly. If you do the latter you'll likely have *much* more success with your ventures into poly than a person who has uncontrolled jealousy, but nothing says you have to go poly.

You may have managed, healthy jealousy and yet still feel like monogamy is an emotional need for you. Why? Maybe it just hurts too much to think of your partner loving someone else romantically. But wait, wouldn't that mean you have uncontrolled jealousy? No, you may be analyzing your reactions, correctly assessing your limits and place of greatest fulfillment, and responding calmly and appropriately. But you may realize that this desire for a monogamous partner, and the pain when you don't have that, is *still* a fundamental, natural, even integral part of the way you love. That doesn't make you bad! That doesn't make you wrong! That doesn't make you unevolved or unhealthy or anything like that. Not everyone can do poly and stay true to themselves. What matters, and makes you healthy or unhealthy, is how you recognize, explore, accept, and live by who and what you are and the natural shapes and limits of your feelings.

To assume that anyone who feels jealousy strongly enough that they're not suited to poly is automatically unhealthy, or hasn't examined and worked on their darker issues, is a bias, pure and simple.

Does all of that make sense? Do people agree? Am I missing something?

[nycindie]

sorry. I wrote too fast and didn't edit. I meant to say the self work that is required when addressing a partner who wants to try out a poly relationship dynamic. Of course mono people do self work and care about that for themselves. A lot of it over laps even, just that some care more (not exclusive to monogamy either) about their careers, their hobbies or their kids etc. than dealing with the self crap that comes up around poly relationships. Does that make more sense?

The kind of self work mono people do as a result of a poly partner is often not chosen work either I might add. At least not initially.

LOL self crap!

Okay, I gotcha. Because I know before last year when I chose to embrace poly, most of my "self crap" was centered on all the skills that polys need. Time management, intimacy, communication, sexuality, inhibitions, self-esteem, assertiveness, blablabla. There areas are crucial for a well-rounded human being, no matter what type of relationship they're in. But I was not an anomaly, everyone I knew (monos) struggled with most of the same issues that poly peeps struggle with and sought more self-awareness, in whatever form or path that took for their own way of living. Obviously, polys have unique situations that demand more juggling and ... diplomacy, in a way. But we're all the same bunch of fucked-up human beings trying to heal and find our way in the world.

[AnnabelMore]

To follow up on my earlier post -- since monogamy is the norm, poly takes a certain ability to break away from norms. If people are willing to examine the way they love, they are more likely to also examine the way they think and react. Also, the ability to manage your jealousy is invaluable in poly, whereas it's more possible to skate by with uncontrolled jealousy in monogamy.

For both of those reasons, I think you're more likely to find poly people who have examined their darker feelings, especially jealousy, and worked on managing them. That causes a false perception that requiring monogamy means you haven't examined yourself and aren't managing your jealousy.

But the way I see it, the enemy is the all-too-common tendency of people not to examine their modes of living and their thought patterns. The enemy is not any particular feeling or mode of loving. So to say that the need for monogamy is driven by unhealthy (to me, unexamined and unmanaged) jealousy is to mistake correlation for causation.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

AnnabelMore, thank you so much for your thoughtful comments--EXACTLY the type of dialogue I was looking for. It may take me a little bit to digest everything you (and others) have said, process it and come up with a reply that does justice to your words. Add the fact that I'm in a bit of a relational management mode today, and my response will be further delayed. But I absolutely will come back to this, as I'm VERY interested in fleshing it all out in my head. Again, thank you very much.

[MonoVCPHG]

I can't speak about anyone else but the root of my monogamy is my natural inclination to focus all romantic loving energy into one person.
When I think of monogamous relationships, such as the ones I have had, the desire to have that singular focus returned to me had nothing to do with jealousy or insecurity - it was rooted in wanting to have love communicated to me in the same manner as I was communicating it to them. Sharing their heart or body with another simply wasn't a part of that.

The concept of insecurity and jealousy being at the base of monogamy totally makes sense to me in a poly atmosphere however. It vilifies the behavior that prevents a non-monogamous partner from achieving the freedom they want. Inversely, a monogamous partner who vilifies the poly desires of their partner as promiscuous or non-committal also makes sense in a monogamous atmosphere.

Not all people will feel negative about the different approaches to love their partner has. There is no blanket that covers people as a group - this issue is individual based.

The concept of jealousy and insecurity for monogamy has as much validity as the concept of being over sexed and non-committal forming the base of polyamory......Neither are wrong 100% of the time but both can be very right.

[vanille]

I'm going to play devil's advocate. For no reason other than I can.

I have been in a mono relationship for ten years. We are extremely happy and healthy in our relationship. We embark on polyamory for no other reason than to give it a try and shake things up a bit.

Ten years and we can actually still conceive a future of monogomy because we love each other that much.

My point is this though: we were not always so great. We have surpassed many obstacles. We met as teenagers and thus became adults together. We tackled every problem thrown at us (jealousy included) and with EXTREME dedication and hard work, got through it all.

Now, if we chose polyamory five years ago when we faced those problems, it could be conceived that we actually put in less effort to our relationship and took the easy way out (found someone else who could satisfy us). This could actually be unhealthy.

Instead, we took a look at what we needed from eachother. And we have spent the last ten years perfecting that. We love eachother that much.

So, all I am saying (and this post may in fact not be pertinent at all) is that at least in our case, polyamory would have been more unhealthy than monogomy had we chosen to do so back then.

I really hope this makes sense. Cause it is late and I might be rambling.

(also, not sure if it matters, but we are both atheists so we have no religious binds)

[gleegirl1203]

But we're all the same bunch of fucked-up human beings trying to heal and find our way in the world.

nycindie- I love this.

I really have nothing else useful to add to this thread.

[UnwittinglyPoly]

It's been a while since I've visited this topic. While I do have more to say, I haven't the time to give it the attention it needs. I do feel that some of my perspective does have merit, and I would like to continue the discussion, but since I can't right now, I'll cede my point as being in error. If I come to a point where I can give the topic the attention it deserves, I'll re-engage the discussion. Thank you to everyone who posted--you've all given me much to think about.