Cheating vs. Polyamory: Merged Threads, General Discussion

The biggest deterrent against killing people, is that killing people is illegal and you go to jail for it. You think you wouldn't have killed someone already if it were legal?

Let me say, the law and its consequences are not why I've refrained from homicide so far. I factored those in long ago and determined I could live with those -- or die with them, more likely.

But is the game worth the candle? The longer I live, the more I personally have to lose by pursuing my desire to kill a certain person; the consequences ripple farther. Does that vow override all promises made since? Or do present obligations outweigh past ones?

It's a matter of honor I struggle with.

Honor is also why I put a poly clause in my marital agreement, though I honestly never expected to exercise it. Had I pledged to monogamy with my husband, I would have felt obliged to keep to it, even if it caused personal pain. (and under present circumstances, that would be quite a lot).

Others... don't feel this sense of obligation to their vows, I know. A lot of people -- perhaps most -- find it easy to break promises. That is, of course, their choice. However, it is not something I will be involved in. It's why, when I was a young bi woman, I avoided couples -- and people in couples. Always that concern that both parties, perhaps, were not wholly knowledgeable and consenting, despite what one might be saying. There's no honor in encouraging someone else to break their vows. True, if they're going to, they will -- but why help? Why put oneself in a position to take an iota of responsibility for someone else's lack of honor? I much prefer to let people take their own paths to damnation, not be a tour guide.
 
Mischa, I'm really enjoying this topic. It's nice to see a conversation about such a touchy topic like the ethics of dating a cheater. I generally find the topic frustrating because it is so emotionally fueled, people have difficulty discussing it rationally.

That's not to say that I agree with your assessment necessarily, but I *do* get the desire to really take a look at it.

I think monogamous relationships so far in our society and culture are, in great measure, a farce, especially in regards to men. These are some numbers I've been gathering regarding adultery / infidelity today, to assess better:

A person will be more prone or less prone to extramarital relationships depending on the synthesis of particular hormones.

In my opinion you don't need to search for evidence to back up your opinion that closed relationships are not deserving of your respect.

It's possible that humans of either gender have a genetic tendency toward adultery and that the idea of monogamy for humans is not reasonable in a general sense. There has been quite a bit written on the topic and I think there are some strong arguments in favor of this assertion. However, having a genetic tendency toward a certain type of behavior is not required to determine that a behavior or practice is appropriate or one that should be respected/protected in the current day.

Proving whether or not monogamy is successfully practiced or that it is not in sync with our genetic tendencies isn't required to decide whether or not it is a practice repugnant to your personal worldview.

Personally I think it just distracts from the topic.

The biggest deterrent against killing people, is that killing people is illegal and you go to jail for it. You think you wouldn't have killed someone already if it were legal?

That seems way off topic.

central, ethics isn't just about avoiding harm to others, it's also about avoiding harm to yourself, which to a larger or smaller extent would include the harm caused from stopping yourself from flirting with someone you adore. If we are to be ethical in regards to harming or not harming, there's no reason to ignore harm caused to any party. Thus this moral dilemma.

I don't agree with this statement, in that ethics is philosophically about how to quantify fair treatment of each other.

What I think *is* relevant about this statement is in how you value ethical treatment of your fellows regarding their monogamous agreements versus how you value seeking your personal pleasures and flourishing. I see this as being a huge question which everyone needs to answer for themselves.

I fall somewhere in the middle on this spectrum.
 
I consider my position to be one in favor of "enlightened self-interest."
 
I consider my position to be one in favor of "enlightened self-interest."

Might I amend that to "enlightened long-term self-interest"?

I can see someone arguing that if monogamy is an institution not worthy of respect, then respecting agreements someone else has made in it is against your interests, insofar as that agreement conflicts with what you want. (I think this is in fact the point that mischa is arguing.)

But doing what you want in this case means you risk falling for someone who is willing to lie about things that are important to his or her friends and partners. And if you're likely to feel untenably betrayed if you are someday lied to by someone you adore, then getting involved with someone who has no qualms about lying is a bad long-term decision.
 
I can see someone arguing that if monogamy is an institution not worthy of respect, then respecting agreements someone else has made in it is against your interests, insofar as that agreement conflicts with what you want. (I think this is in fact the point that mischa is arguing.)

I don't disagree with your assessment, but I think it's important to remember the context of the conversation.

While monogamy has been the focus of some of the discussion, I believe any "closed" or "exclusive" arrangement fall under the scrutiny.

The other thing to remember is that while there was a closed or exclusivity arrangement agreed upon, the cheating person (ex: the married chick who is "stepping out") has personally discarded their end of the agreement they made. In this context, the two people in the affair have both decided to value their gratification over a preexisting exclusivity agreement.

So, this topic isn't about being a wrecking ball in a happily exclusive relationship... currently we have only been talking about a relationship in which at least one of the people involved has made an agreement that they no longer want to function under.
 
I have to say that the idea that monogamy/closed relationships AS A WHOLE aren't deserving of respect is really offensive to people who choose to live monogamously and/or are happier living that way than they would be if they were in an open relationship or poly. Just because 15-25% of people (according to surveys done by institutions I know nothing about) cheat in closed relationships doesn't mean that those who don't cheat should be lumped in with them.

Monogamists may or may not deserve respect, depending on the kind of person he/she is. Open people may or may not deserve respect, depending. Cheaters, however, don't deserve respect until they've worked to overcome their mistakes.
 
I have to say that the idea that monogamy/closed relationships AS A WHOLE aren't deserving of respect is really offensive to people who choose to live monogamously and/or are happier living that way... Cheaters, however, don't deserve respect until they've worked to overcome their mistakes.

I personally don't find exclusivity to be worthy of my respect. That doesn't mean I tear down people who have this sort of agreement, or I bomb wedding ceremonies. I don't respect these agreements because I find them irrational, not to mention that it is repugnant to my personal view of how people related to each other in a healthy way.

People who don't find poly or open arrangements to be rational and find them to be repugnant to their personal views doesn't mean anything to me. What do I care? So long as they aren't trying to drag me down, take out their own issues on me, or trying to get me fired... they can do what they want. If I choose to be "offended" that's my own emotional response to deal with.

A cheater (in this context) is someone who has made a previous exclusivity agreement but has decided they aren't going to stick to it AND don't want to tell whoever they made the agreement with. You think that this person isn't deserving of respect... I think that's pretty cold blooded but it's your opinion. Who cares what you think? Who cares what I think?

This is a pretty theoretical intellectual discussion, if someone feels "lumped in" and offended because of what is being said here it is entirely possible that they lack the emotional maturity to handle this kind of conversation. No offense intended, but this emotional reaction is the reason it can be so difficult to have this type of adult discussion.
 
I personally don't find exclusivity to be worthy of my respect. That doesn't mean I tear down people who have this sort of agreement, or I bomb wedding ceremonies. I don't respect these agreements because I find them irrational, not to mention that it is repugnant to my personal view of how people related to each other in a healthy way.

People who don't find poly or open arrangements to be rational and find them to be repugnant to their personal views doesn't mean anything to me. What do I care? So long as they aren't trying to drag me down, take out their own issues on me, or trying to get me fired... they can do what they want. If I choose to be "offended" that's my own emotional response to deal with.

A cheater (in this context) is someone who has made a previous exclusivity agreement but has decided they aren't going to stick to it AND don't want to tell whoever they made the agreement with. You think that this person isn't deserving of respect... I think that's pretty cold blooded but it's your opinion. Who cares what you think? Who cares what I think?

This is a pretty theoretical intellectual discussion, if someone feels "lumped in" and offended because of what is being said here it is entirely possible that they lack the emotional maturity to handle this kind of conversation. No offense intended, but this emotional reaction is the reason it can be so difficult to have this type of adult discussion.

I'm not emotional about it at all. I just know that people I know who have chosen monogamy (I'm not even considering those who have accepted monogamy by default) would really dislike the fact that their relationship choice isn't "deserving of respect" regardless of the fact that it is, indeed, what is best for those involved. While I 100% agree that humanity as a whole isn't formatted for monogamy/monosexuality, I don't think any honest, thought out choice deserves judgement just because someone doesn't agree with it. Cheating is, by definition, dishonest so it doesn't deserve respect. People can, have, and will earn respect AFTER cheating, however, by becoming honest and rectifying the situation.
 
I'm not emotional about it at all. I just know that people I know who have chosen monogamy (I'm not even considering those who have accepted monogamy by default) would really dislike the fact that their relationship choice isn't "deserving of respect" regardless of the fact that it is, indeed, what is best for those involved.

I'm an atheist, polyamorist, anarchist... there are so many things that people can judge me for they just really need to reach into the basket and pull out their favorite. I don't feel that I'm entitled to everyone respecting my life choices or worldview... that's another decision I find irrational. CERTAINLY if the absolute worst part of their manner of showing it is calmly stating their opinion on a public discussion forum.

I don't see how discouraging a conversation (even if it *might* offend someone you know) has any chance of improving our world. Though I also don't find political correctness to be worthy of my respect.
 
I'm an atheist, polyamorist, anarchist... there are so many things that people can judge me for they just really need to reach into the basket and pull out their favorite. I don't feel that I'm entitled to everyone respecting my life choices or worldview... that's another decision I find irrational. CERTAINLY if the absolute worst part of their manner of showing it is calmly stating their opinion on a public discussion forum.

I don't see how discouraging a conversation (even if it *might* offend someone you know) has any chance of improving our world. Though I also don't find political correctness to be worthy of my respect.

Who's discouraging the conversation? I'm stating my views, you're stating yours, others are stating theirs... The conversation goes on. I'm a big fan of honest conversation.
 
Re (from Garriguette):
"Might I amend that to 'enlightened *long-term* self-interest?'"

That works. :D

Re (from Marcus):
"Currently we have only been talking about a relationship in which at least one of the people involved has made an agreement that they no longer want to function under."

Agreed, and good point.

In which case, what would my suggestion be? The persons in the closed relationship should sit down and have a sober discussion about it. Whoever wants the relationship to be opened should say so to the other person/s. If someone also feels they can't abide by a closed agreement anymore, then they should inform the other person/s of that too. At this point, a decision would need to be made: Do we open our relationship, or do we break up?

After that discussion is thoroughly done and over, then whoever wanted to open the relationship is free to accept mischa's propositions. That's not to say I can promise no mess and no drama, just that I see it as the ethical approach.

And as always, I'll iterate that I try to make room for exceptions, depending on the details of a particular real-life situation. But avoiding cheating is the general rule I'd recommend.

Hope that doesn't seem like an overly emotional reaction. :)
 
So I'm trying to think of a way to approach these scenarios, a way in which there will be no losing outcome for me, and consequently, for my partner.

All return, no risk? Them's some fantastic economics.

I won't take issue with your way of viewing exclusivity agreements as other people's pets of a species you don't like, that you personally wouldn't have under any circumstances, and that you don't want piddling on your shoes. I get that you leave it up to the exclusively coupled whether to care for and feed their pet promises to the third party. You aren't forcing anyone to break a vow. They are choosing. I get that.

Personally, I don't want to be with cheaters. I'm also not looking for relationships based mainly on sex and infatuation. I thrive on honesty, and the drama of jilted lovers is ugly poison.

It seems that merely proposing extramarital relations with half of a friend-couple could put your couple-friendship at risk. It's hard to imagine how adultery could be made risk-free. I mean, haven't people been trying to perfectly conceal it for centuries?

To my thinking, the best bet (though far from a sure thing) for maintaining friendships is to lay it all on the table with all parties. "I don't want to fuck up our awesome friendship. But if I had a chance of fucking Charlie, I'd be so up in that." If your friendship can survive that, then the discussions that follow might lead to non-cheating sexual connections. Which still carries risk of later alienation. Or it might lead to cheating sex. With associated social risk. It might lead to nothing but passing awkwardness. It might lead to decisions to break up without the adultery ever happening. You just don't know. But even if it doesn't solve the risk problem, it makes you less likely to be cast as the bad guy who torpedoed the apparently functional friendships and/or exclusive couplings.

You want good times? You take risks. Maybe honesty reduces some of the risks, and maybe it reduces the chance of cheaty payouts. That's all I got.
 
Ok, so I've reached a conclusion on what I want to do. I generally take longer to reach conclusions in moral dilemmas of general interest (abortion, smoking, censorship, etc.), but I really needed a quick brainstorm of ideas for this and to get going, because I'm currently in the situation I described and I need to make a choice and test it out (I'm being goal oriented).

So summing up, main reasons why I would date an adulterer so far is because:
1- I want to, and I think it's the choice of the adulterer to decline or accept, not the choice of their partner.
2- I hold monogamous relationships in low esteem. I think they're disrespectful and fake, so naturally I don't respect them myself if it's against my own self-interest.

I'm reconsidering my approach because it's affecting me in a negative way due to backlash.


First thing I've learned is that monogamous relationships are not as fake as I thought. Some people do like to stay monogamous, even knowing polyamory and open relationships exist. AlwaysGrowing says "Just because 15-25% of people (according to surveys done by institutions I know nothing about) cheat in closed relationships doesn't mean that those who don't cheat should be lumped in with them." I'm not dismissing the surveys because I've checked several from different institutions that give similar results, and they're properly done and analyzed (as far as I've seen just from searching around on the net for an hour or two). "The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) is one of the largest independent social research organizations in the United States, established in 1941. Its corporate headquarters is located on the University of Chicago campus." If the results were akin to 50% (taking into account other survey factors), they would deserve very little to no respect from me. If the truthfulness of a relationship can be estimated by the flip of a coin, then you know we're dealing with a mass delusion here. But 1 out of 5 cheating is not altogether large enough to systematically disrespected monogamous relationships: 4 out of 5 deserve, at least, credibility (most of them).

Next thing I've observed in this topic is that most people here are against adultery, and yet some agree with it to some extent. This is NOT at all relevant data because it's a very small and selected sample of population, but I didn't expect it. I wasn't expecting any response in particular, just listening. But I've gotten a not large but present minority here who agree to some extent with infidelity, which curiously coincides with the previous survey, and points me one more step towards the view that some non-negligible amounts of people in society consider adultery / infidelity a proper viable option. We are partially the product of our current culture, and views on adultery are not set on stone, they can be different in different periods or societies. Again, I'm not assuming what is happening here is any kind of proof, but it's something curious to observe.


I work in the healh sector. You can assume then that I have a clear policy against sexually transmitted infections, if anyone is wondering. I asked a psychologist friend what does psychology say about adultery / infidelity. He said not much, but he's personally against it, and of course there's therapy to overcome it if needed. I asked why is it so prevalent though, and he said I should ask an anthropologist about it. I agree. I know no anthropologist, I have no anthropology books, maybe I can find something at the library or, if any of you work or study at a campus, you can get a straight answer from some professor; or maybe it's also effective to just search for this info on the internet. I'm just not too interested in researching much further into the subject for now. I checked the DSM-5 / DSM-IV-TR, nothing comes up regarding adultery / infidelity of course, I just checked because I have it handy as I've had to check stuff on it before, having had my fair share of fetishist practices.


So adultery from an anthropological point of view. I don't know why it particularly happens, but I know why deceit happens. Deceit is an adaptive trait gained through evolution to increase chances of success. It is however one of those "parasitic" traits that can't be practiced in all situations, or frequently, or by everyone, because then it's seriously destructive to oneself. I'm reminded of the ethical deontological view that "what you do, should only be done if, were it to be done by everyone in any case, it would be both possible and something you will". I don't agree with this maxim, but it exists.

Deceit is a useful tool, and sometimes it works great, as long as you're not caught. Deceit is like credit you spend from your pool of trust, and something they say about trust is, "It is much harder to gain trust, than it is to lose it." When you get caught, it's a pain in the ass you gotta deal with. It gives me a headache just to think about it. So there's a risk in deceit, and you gotta consider if it's worth the risk. (I'm just glad I don't have to think about this in my main relationship.) And sometimes it is worth the risk for adulterers, and sometimes it isn't but they overestimate their chances of keeping extramarital relationships a secret. That's something that's happened to me before, people think they're more competent than they really are in withholding or masking information (on the internet, it happens en masse). I can't really trust an adulterer will keep our relationship a secret. I haven't so far, as I said earlier, "I just don't give a shit", but, it would be nice if they not only wanted to, but could, keep it secret.

So then there's this hurt husband / wife / partner who hates me, and spreads bad words about me, and I don't really care that much what people think about me, but, you know, being social is a necessity and there is the need to get along with people or else life sucks.

If there's one thing human beings aren't good at, so far, is long term planning. We're not that smart or technologically advanced yet. I don't have a clue what I will be doing in 10 years, or 20 years. I can make a guess, wish something, but I don't really know. We've evolved far enough though to be good at short term planning and reasonably good at middle term planning. We're certainly a lot better at that than the rest of animals. It's a shame, because, "long term", is a whole lot more years than "short term", and if any decision is to be taken considering short, middle and long term effects, the long term effects would weight in a lot more. It's just a lot harder to predict far away in time. Herein lies Garriguette's reasoning of "enlightened long-term self-interest". Maybe I don't particularly care if being a liar the adulterer lies to me, depending on the relationship we have (to give a clear example, if it's John Lee's ludus, i.e. a recreational relationship, I certainly don't care), but it's a thing to consider. But what I'm thinking, is the long term effects of having angry spouses against me, or being a good model for open relationships, or something in between.

kdt26417 says: "Cheating helps undermine the faulty meme of closed relationships ... perhaps. It's just that it also helps establish a precedent of dishonesty, or at least of breaking promises to a partner without negotiating with that partner. If we're going to try to establish (the idea/meme of) non-monogamy in our world, shouldn't we try to establish honest/honorable non-monogamy?" And I agree, we should. This is a decision I believe any polyamorous or open couple should consider, simply because there aren't enough couples like this yet. If we're attempting to make open / polyamorous couples a norm (just like homosexual couples are a norm where I live now), people will look at existing open / polyamorous couples and judge whether it's a good thing or bad thing depending on how those behave. I am not saying open couples must choose to not get involved with closed couples. I'm saying they should consider the implications of doing it in regards to the meme of open relationships, the cultural understanding of open relationships that's being propagated.

I'm seeing now the available market of interpersonal love / sex relationships using concepts of economics. I want to be able to love / have sex with whoever I want and reciprocates, and that means sometimes I step into the monogamous market. I'm offering myself as a product to the consumer of a different product, and if you want your customer to remain faithful to you, you better be good baby. Because I don't believe you are; I am better, and I'm willing to compete. But, I wouldn't like to be forever bound to having to irrupt into a different market. I'd like to have a large enough market to myself where I can comfortably stay in without fiercely fighting for customers. That's what I'd like the future to be like.

It's easy for some to say, "Just forget about monogamous couples and look for singles / polyamorous people". But it happens to be that there are so many fucking monogamous couples out there it's not even funny. And I've lost several lovers or fuckfriends because they got into a closed relationship... It's a constant slight fear I have that makes me uneasy. I'd like this to change.

(10000 characters limit)
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to stop feeling many purported monogamous people lie to themselves, and I disagree with them. But something that history, and my life, has shown me so far is that, almost the only remaining legitimate way to truly reform people, is to be genuinely, honestly, transparently "good": to do things in the most agreeable and respectful way possible.

Sociological studies show that setting an example is a whole lot more effective than just talking. If I have sex with adulterers, it's gonna affect how people view me a lot more than whatever I say, and I'm not going to be able to convince them that closed relationships many times are not truthful. That there is a different viable way to have a relationship. If approaching closed couples in an honest way is effective in properly propagating polyamoury (and I'm just assuming it is), I can increase the market of "customers" willing to have open / polyamorous relationships. In turns this would help the first cause I mentioned why I sometimes fuck with adulterers: because I like fucking with whoever I'm interested in. And I'm reasonably assuming being honest will make it easier, more possible, in the long run.
 
The way I see your dilemma is this: if certain of your behaviors bring you results you don't want or cause you pain and create unwanted drama, then the logical thing to do would be to alter your behaviors.

Whether that means having an open dialogue with partners of potential fuck buddies, not fucking anyone in a committed monogamous relationship who would be lying and cheating to be with you, or simply developing the will power to refrain from fucking any monogamous-but-willing-to-cheat friends of yours, is up to you. Maybe there are other solutions but, basically, if things aren't working the way you would like -- given that you are the common denominator in these scenarios -- then I would think something has to change with the way you are going about things.
 
Last edited:
If there's one thing human beings aren't good at, so far, is long term planning. We're not that smart or technologically advanced yet. I don't have a clue what I will be doing in 10 years, or 20 years. I can make a guess, wish something, but I don't really know. We've evolved far enough though to be good at short term planning and reasonably good at middle term planning. We're certainly a lot better at that than the rest of animals. It's a shame, because, "long term", is a whole lot more years than "short term", and if any decision is to be taken considering short, middle and long term effects, the long term effects would weight in a lot more. It's just a lot harder to predict far away in time. Herein lies Garriguette's reasoning of "enlightened long-term self-interest". Maybe I don't particularly care if being a liar the adulterer lies to me, depending on the relationship we have (to give a clear example, if it's John Lee's ludus, i.e. a recreational relationship, I certainly don't care), but it's a thing to consider. But what I'm thinking, is the long term effects of having angry spouses against me, or being a good model for open relationships, or something in between.

Humans are also not very good at risk-assessment. As you've pointed out, in the case of someone in an adulterous relationship, that might mean seriously underestimating the likelihood of getting caught. In my case, it typically means not taking risks that a lot of people would consider reasonable.

Risk-aversion isn't the only reason I don't cheat on Xicot: I also viscerally dislike deceit, as my statement that "someone who lies to be with you will eventually lie to you" might suggest, and discourage it in myself and near me. (This involves a lot of rewarding people for telling me things I don't want to hear, natch.) And-- probably the biggest factor: my seeking drive shuts off when I'm partnered. This doesn't mean I cease to notice other people; it just means I lose any desire to do something about that noticing.
 
Social change tends to happen slowly, like in the course of many generations. Fast change tends to reverse and burn out, leaving bad side effects behind. So alas, I don't know if there's a way to "weaken the monogamous market" quickly and effectively. It does help a little in your personal life if the people you know feel that they can trust you. That's a small benefit for practicing constant honesty, while getting caught in a lie can have big consequences that have a long half-life.

And even if you can lie without getting caught, there's still your own conscience that you have to live with. Whether your conscience will be bothered depends, I suppose, on the details of whatever specific situation you're considering.

But as the old saying goes, "Honesty is the best policy."
 
Behavioural scientists might say that the reason people cheat (or at least start cheating) on their partners is because the minds of animals (including humans) find it hard to do anything other than deal with the situation in hand. For negative consequences to effect behaviour, they need to happen immediately and they need to happen every time the problem behaviour happens.

This is why tickets for speeding don't work to stop people speeding. They turn up weeks or months later and they don't happen every time people speed. So they are good as an additional tax on motorists and bad at modifying speeding behaviour.

Similarly with dire warnings on cigarette packaging. It doesn't stop people smoking even though smoking undoubtedly causes a ton of health harms. In the moment of choosing, she short term pleasure of smoking will almost always win out over the threat of longer term consequences. This is partly why it's so hard to stop.

Sex feels wonderful and is something that most folks want so to have the opportunity for sex is something that lots of people will take - especially if they aren't actually the one cheating. Somebody cheating, getting caught quite quickly and suffering horrible consequences is less likely to do it again than somebody who has cheated repeatedly, hasn't always been caught and for whom the consequences aren't so serious.

Habit must come into play too. Our brains are pattern seeking and habit forming entities. It helps us to deal with the world if we don't have to think every tiny decision through. That's why people who drive the same route regularly report getting to their destination often with no memory of the journey at all. The habits that are formed are unthinking and so hard to get out of. They also make us feel safer so again - hard to get out of. Negative consequences here can often have almost no bearing. Eating chocolate has an almost entirely negative effect on me. It often makes me feel tired and down. It for sure makes putting on weight much more likely. For me, eating chocolate has been paired for years with comfort and security and so I eat it often and the negative consequences on me have no bearing.

Anybody cheating regularly on partners or being an enabler of cheating is going to find it harder to stop regardless of how they may feel about cheating.

There is also the physiological aspect of sex. It releases lots of chemicals in our bodies that are associated with falling in love and so not surprisingly if people cheat, there are going to be lots of instances of them falling in love, making it harder to stop regardless of consequences.

Lots of behavioural and physiological reasons for cheating to happen that have nothing to do with relationship structure.

The problem with it is that the person being cheated on will in all probability experience it as a horrible event in their life. It will be incredibly aversive for them from the second they know about it. They won't have the good experiences that the cheater has had, they will just have a massive horrible experience.

I think that the reason lots of people don't cheat is behavioural too. Humans are a social species. We need each other to get along in the world. One of the most horrible things that can be done to a person is to keep them in solitary confinement. In order to get along, it is important that we don't have expectations that hurting each other badly is a likely outcome of any social relationship. We have a very strong biological imperative to get along in groups and so if it is part of the culture of a group to form monogamous bonds then most people will obey those rules simply because they are humans.

Changing social norms is hard work and in my experience of being involved in a movement to do that regarding dog training, those who seek change have to be able to show that their way is better (or at least as good as) the norm. Thankfully in the work I do, there are many many people doing great work who can be pointed to as good examples. These people can be met, watched, learned from. This is why it has proved relatively easy for that community in the UK to change and retrain any celebrity trainers we have had on our TVs who have come along still attached to the normal and old fashioned approach to dog training.

I think that if part of the intention with non-monogamy is to open the minds of the monogamous to other possibilities then the non-monogamous practitioners have to be doing things well. They have to do it better than the monogamous folks. I think it's incredibly unfair that that is the case but I think it is so. Sadly, enabling cheating is likely to just get the non-monogamous folk a bad reputation as marriage breakers which is not likely to further the cause of promoting non-monogamy if that is part of anybody's intention in living that way.

I've been quite sad to find that in seeking practitioners of non-monogamy who do it well has been not very successful. People I know in real life are either lots younger than me and non-monogamous or were non-monogamous and are now monogamous. The only shining exception is a single friend who very deliberately keeps herself single and negotiates her FWB type relationships with great skill and compassion. On-line I find that there is a large amount of negativity and very few positive stories.

This is in stark contrast to my experiences of seeking alternative dog training possibilities. When I was doing that, I found a great many practitioners who were doing what I wanted to be able to do very well and many who had been doing so for years and years. On-line communities do have large numbers of negative stories and help for people struggling. They have far more positive stories, life affirmations and people just generally celebrating the relationships they have with their dogs.

So - my stance has been that for all the drawbacks, monogamy seems like the better option for having a life with less drama in it if I want to be in relationships. The best life for being free and having little drama for me is to be single but sometimes I do want to be in relationships and having found so little evidence of non-monogamy working well in practice, I've decided that monogamy is the way to go.

I stick around here because I like the discussions, because I like many of the people and because I have a romantic notion that non-monogamy is a better way to go and I keep seeking evidence for that (so far without success).

IP
 
Things I learned in kindergarten: don't lie, don't cheat.

OP, while you've got some philosophical people here with time on their hands to take up your debate, this is a site for polyamory. ETHICAL non-monogamy. Ethics imply honor, trust, openness, dignity respect for oneself and others.

Running around with lying liars and cheating cheaters? Not gonna be real popular here. There are websites for cheaters. You might try those to confirm your code of (non) ethics.
 
OP, while you've got some philosophical people here with time on their hands to take up your debate, this is a site for polyamory. ETHICAL non-monogamy. Ethics imply honor, trust, openness, dignity respect for oneself and others.

Running around with lying liars and cheating cheaters? Not gonna be real popular here. There are websites for cheaters. You might try those to confirm your code of (non) ethics.

Ethics happen to be a favourite subject of mine, both ethics and meta-ethics, and they often also include maxims relating to other concepts: liberty / freedom, justice, virtue & vice, suffering & well-being or pain & pleasure, universality, and most commonly free will, good / bad and right / wrong. I am not here to practice the apologetics of my ethics. I am here to reconsider them if needed, seeing that they aren't working as I expected, willing to and capable of analyzing them with a cold mind. If you can't balance the pros and cons of enabling cheating without a visceral clouding aversion, you would feel better if you did not take part in the discussion. There really is no need.
 
Back
Top