Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-29-2012, 02:26 PM
Diabolika's Avatar
Diabolika Diabolika is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8
Default This is interesting

http://blog.oup.com/2012/03/myth-monogamy-cheating/

I think he's slightly behind the rest of us in some ways, and he focuses on only one reason that monogamy is a "failed institution," but I think this is a good article for someone who has never thought of it before.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-29-2012, 02:30 PM
Diabolika's Avatar
Diabolika Diabolika is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8
Default

Also, I'm not sure if this belongs somewhere else. Feel free to move it, if so.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-29-2012, 09:27 PM
InfinitePossibility InfinitePossibility is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 367
Default

Some of my reaction to this may be down to my current grieving but I loathed that article.

Starts with the notion that positivity about sex and masturbation are something new - something that started with the internet? How odd - and I think misinformed. Anybody from about 35 onward grew up without the internet being a huge presence in their life. I reckon plenty of people from mid 30s on are positive about sex.

It goes on to blame sexual exclusivity for all the ills in relationships. Again, clearly not true. On this forum there are repeated stories of people in non-exclusive relationships who are finding things difficult or whos partner's are treating them less than well. That's without even going into all the ways that people can be dishonest and cheat that don't involve sex - gambling the house away, being a secret drinker or drug user, mugging old ladies, burgling houses, beating the dog up. People can lie to each other and cheat in all manner of ways that don't involve sex and I fail to understand how not being sexually exclusive will solve these things.

I don't know who told this author that people believe that any relationship works well just because of love. What bollocks. Relationships need time and effort spent on them. Just feeling love for another being will not be enough to create a lasting relationship - sexual or otherwise.

I dislike also the notion that sex necessarily declines after the first few months. Not in my experience. I reckon that mostly sex gets better as you get to know each other. It might need time and attention - but all relationships do and if sex is part of a relationship, it makes sense that it does too.

Few point out the obvious answer to the dilemma of monogamy and cheating ó sexually open relationships. Here, in an egalitarian manner, a couple reserves emotional fidelity, while structuring in rules for extra-dyadic, recreational sex.

The above quote from the article is especially offensive in my eyes. What a ridiculously controlling statement. Sharing sex with others is fine but sharing emotional closeness is something to be avoided? Yuck. Emotional fidelity is the one type I absolutely couldn't manage. I can quite happily go along reserving sex for myself and one other partner if it's appropriate.

I would feel very differently if being asked to avoid emotional closeness with anybody other than my partner.

I loathed that article and if I didn't know anything about polyamory, it would put me off completely.

IP

P.S. And I think it's sexist into the bargain.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-30-2012, 07:30 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,738
Default

The main weakness I saw was that the article selected one subset of non-monogamy as a solution to the problems of monogamy, and failed to address the wide range of non-monogamous models, especially polyamory (which is about more than a core couple plus recreational sex). It did rightly point out that a lot of monogamous people cheat on their partners, but it didn't offer much in the way of solutions to choose from.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:51 AM
Vinccenzo Vinccenzo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 337
Default

Barf.
The article suggests monogamy to be a strain only to men. Female sexuality? Whats to talk about? Women aren't sexual. It left me wondering if the author purposefully didn't explore the subject or if he doesn't realize his own blind spot. I smell a string of sexually dissatisfied ex girlfriends in his past.

No wonder the author fixates on recreational and emotionless sex. Isn't that too something only men want and enjoy?

Is Eric Anderson a pseudonym Darwin used?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-01-2013, 01:01 AM
Diabolika's Avatar
Diabolika Diabolika is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8
Default

I certainly didn't think the article was an argument for polyamory. It just seemed to be an article against monogamy, which I found to be interesting. If anything, this would be interesting to someone who had never thought of it before. A way to get their mind thinking outside what society teaches them.

Strangely enough, what got my mind wondering were questions on a dating site. The questions were obviously designed to test your commitment to monogamy, but they took my mind a different direction entirely. I see all the flaws that were pointed out and agree whole-heartedly. I still found it interesting. If only because it seems that perhaps this could be the next hurdle our society accepts. The small-minded are becoming aware.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-01-2013, 04:32 AM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,383
Default

Seems to be saying it's a male-only problem, and it's only about sex. So while it's talking about non-monogamy, it seems to be doing so in a pretty restricted manner, and I think it's a shame, because it takes credibility away from the arguments.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-07-2013, 11:58 AM
BreatheDeeply's Avatar
BreatheDeeply BreatheDeeply is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: NewSouthWales&California
Posts: 62
Default

The article is a well-worded attack on monogamy, mainly focusing on men's perspectives and the lie, rammed down men's throats from birth to death and from every corner of society, that mutual exclusion is the only relationship form available. I found the article relevent, maybe because being a guy it was good to see an article geared towards men. But additionally the article spoke to my dilemma - trying to be a 'good' male in a culture gone awry. For men (and women), cheating seems to be the only vehicle to satisfying a need, apart from the life-long frustration at attempting to force a crooked piece into a square hole by shutting down an entire part of ones persona. Is it wrong to cheat. Of course. Extremely hurtful to a loved one? A betrayal? Yes and yes. The article doesn't exonerate infidelity. But it does offer a way out - challenge monogamy in a culture-wide attack. And that seems to be what is happening, thanks largely to the Internet.

Anyone who has teenage children who are in relationships will tell you that they are much more exposed to the varieties of sexual communion then earlier generations. And young men and women are more aware that sex doesn't have to be a taboo subject at all, if they don't want it to be. Interestingly it has also freed women in equal proportion - hookup culture requires as many females as males to be such a widespread phenomenon. And where are these stories and experiences shared? On social sites mainly, with private messages and interesting links shared among friends.

The article states that cheating and monogamy need to be scrutinised. The former has always been drawn to the light, you can pickup any newsstand tabloid to see the latest transgressions of a Hollywood actor, but monogamy - somehow that little dogma keeps ducking the rightful condemnation that it deserves.
__________________
Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way. - C. Hitchens


Me: Male, bi, 48, flexible
Husbanding Aquarius
Dating MsX
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-13-2013, 10:03 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,738
Default

Well-stated, BreatheDeeply.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-13-2013, 11:50 PM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Like others, I don't agree with the male-centric reasons why monogamy doesn't work.

Actually, I also don't agree with the thesis that monogamy flat-out doesn't work. It works quite well for many. Nothing works for everyone, and blanket statements like that are prejudiced. There are lots of marriages that have been very happy and satisfying and faithful. And monogamous.

I've met lots of people on here who have given nonmonogamy a very serious consideration, usually at the urging of their nonmonogamous partner, and come to the conclusion that they really are interested in being with just that one person, regardless of the other opportunities offered to them. Furthermore, there are some who even resent the urging to try nonmonogamy. They don't want it, thank you very much, and they want you to quit shoving it down their throats.

The problem isn't that monogamy doesn't work. What doesn't work is the assumption that everyone is monogamous and the corollary that every relationship should therefore be monogamous.

Suppose for the sake of argument that 50% of people are non-monogamous. That means roughly 75% of relationships have at least one non-monogamous person in them, assuming a random distribution of polys and monos into relationships. What a coincidence: that matches the divorce rate.

There are better introductions to nonmonogamy, ones that don't focus on one specific solution. Of course, I can't find any, but I know they're out there. But in my searching, I came across this piece of barf. I stopped reading at "Itís a book that takes you step-by-step on how to take any woman you care about and create an open relationship with her that lasts a long time." Oh, by the way, this book is written for men. So right off the bat, it's heteronormative. But she calls herself "Blackdragon" which I guess is supposed to sound all hip and progressive. Excuse me while I empty my stomach contents all over your thesis.
__________________
Gralson: my husband (works out of town).
Auto: my girlfriend (lives with her husband Zoffee).

The most dangerous phrase in the English language is "we've always done it this way."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 AM.