Monogamy

the said:
the bold part is what struck me. Do you think this is true?
Click to expand...

Who said the quote in the OP, exactly?

Whoever it was, they seem to think that lust is more important than love, which is depressingly common nowadays but at the same time one of the most painfully backwards things I can think of. If all you do together is have sex, then that's not really much of a relationship… there are plenty of other ways to make each other happy and if you're doing everything else right then the chemistry and the sex part take care of themselves.

It's also an extremely cold and cynical view of what people are like-- if you're not having sex then you should talk it out together, not go out and cheat and then blame it on your partner-- that's an extremely manipulative and nasty thing to do.

People like this are a big part of what turns me off of people in general.
 
If I remember correctly it was in response to someone whos sig-o would only have sex with them rarely and only when that other person was in the mood. This person was becoming frustrated at a lack of compromise in the relationship I think.
 
the said:
If I remember correctly it was in response to someone whos sig-o would only have sex with them rarely and only when that other person was in the mood. This person was becoming frustrated at a lack of compromise in the relationship I think.
Click to expand...

So, sounds like the issue is less about obligation than the lack of give and take in the relationship. If a partner is only interested in satisfying their own desires, then they're really not in a relationship where the emphasis should not be on "me" only but "us", the couple. So, in reality, selfishness is the problem, not the other partner believing they had a right to sex simply because they're in a relationship and had a right to expect it.
 
They should know what gets them in the mood pretty specifically if it happens that rarely.
So put them in the happy place. It's happy there...but just use some common sense as to when.
Make it nice...and enjoy it yourself, it's what makes them happy enough to have sex with you so it's a good thing to know.

Yeah, it used to be just being near you was enough but...desensitisation is a fact of life unless you keep things fresh.
Working towards a common goal in life as a whole is probably the best way...by no means through work. Work-work, anyway.

If you do that and can honestly say that you're still not happy it's probably because you lack the common goal.
Doing things only they like to get them in the mood is going to wear thin eventually too.

But if they pick up on what you're doing, and you communicate better with them about what you want you save them work and maybe you'll just manage to work it out.

But you've got to swallow pride like it's your favourite food and you've been starved for a week.
Egos do get in the way and they can be stubborn to change, even if change is really desired.

So really you've got to ask why you're going down the monogamy route in the first place.

It is the 21st Century.
 
Monogamy by definition means having one spouse at a time. Sex is only factored in if we're talking in terms of sexual monogamy. Yes, mono means "one", but that doesn't imply some sort of magical invisible agreement to be entitled to sex whenever.

Not 100% sure what the OP is trying to get at, but basically every relationship is unique, and different people view and value sex in different ways. Perhaps sex takes on the form of an emotionally fulfilling duty when two ISTJs are in a relationship lol.
 
the said:
If I remember correctly it was in response to someone whos sig-o would only have sex with them rarely and only when that other person was in the mood. This person was becoming frustrated at a lack of compromise in the relationship I think.
Click to expand...

That is frustrating... but that isn't really a question of monogamy, more like whether or not the two people involved are as compatible as they'd like to be. I suppose that open relationships are always a possibility in that event, but I can't see it working out so well, especially when the only reason it's happening is because someone is dissatisfied.
 
the said:
i guess what I mean is, does the definition of monogamy place a duty onto each partner to have sex with the other one ?
Click to expand...

You have a duty in the relationship to keep the relationship functional and to obey the boundaries (see: cheating). Keeping the relationship functional includes meeting sexual needs, but both partners can create dysfunction in a relationship not only by not attending to their partner's sexual needs but by not attending to their partner's sexual arousal issues, insufficient emotional intimacy, libido-sapping depression, etc, and treating it as a black-and-white business transaction.
 
No one should ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER, EVER, EVER

Be forced into having sex when they don't want to, regardless of "obligation", regardless of "monogamy".

If you're not a big enough person to get the fuck over sex in a relationship when your partner is not emotionally/physically available for it then you are not equipped for a proper adult relationship where mutual respect is vital to how things operate.

This is also a major reason why polyamory is often preferable over monogamy because it does not require that one person satisfy all of the sexual needs of one person.
 
slant said:
No one should ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER, EVER, EVER

Be forced into having sex when they don't want to, regardless of "obligation", regardless of "monogamy".

If you're not a big enough person to get the fuck over sex in a relationship when your partner is not emotionally/physically available for it then you are not equipped for a proper adult relationship where mutual respect is vital to how things operate.

This is also a major reason why polyamory is often preferable over monogamy because it does not require that one person satisfy all of the sexual needs of one person.
Click to expand...

I agree that people shouldn't be coerced into sex but i also think that people shouldn't be coerced out of sex either ie if a partner doesn't want sex then they must also respect the wish of the other partner to then seek sex elsewhere

Is polyamory the only solution to that? Would polyamory result in a flow of women towards the wealthiest men in society who might be able to offer things to women that less well off men can't

I'm not implying that all women are motivated by money but rather pointing out that money can buy security, an interesting life and more leisure time and that such an appeal would certainly stand wealthy men at an advantage

The wealthiest men in our society seem to often be psychopaths and seeing as psychopathy can be passed on genetically...wouldn't there be a risk for our species if the wealthiest men procreated the most? (thereby creating more generations of psychopaths)
 
Last edited:
muir said:
I agree that people shouldn't be coerced into sex but i also think that people shouldn't be coerced out of sex either ie if a partner doesn't want sex then they must also respect the wish of the other partner to then seek sex elsewhere

Is polyamory the only solution to that? Would polyamory result in a flow of women towards the wealthiest men in society who might be able to offer things to women that less well off men can't

I'm not implying that all women are motivated by money but rather pointing out that money can buy security, an interesting life and more leisure time and that such an appeal would certainly stand wealthy men at an advantage

The wealthiest men in our society seem to often be psychopaths and seeing as psychopathy can be passed on genetically...wouldn't there be a risk for our species if the wealthiest men procreated the most? (thereby creating more generations of psychopaths)
Click to expand...

Interesting idea but the wealthy must protect thier wealth lines. Ive been interested in this line of thought for awhile and if i wasnt on a cell phone id talk more in length but, impregnating thier secretaries and whores is a much cheaper racket.
 
the said:
Interesting idea but the wealthy must protect thier wealth lines. Ive been interested in this line of thought for awhile and if i wasnt on a cell phone id talk more in length but, impregnating thier secretaries and whores is a much cheaper racket.
Click to expand...

Would there be enough secretaries and whores for everyone to have meaningful relations with?

I'm not saying polyamory can't work....it depends on the people

I was just saying that if it is made into an institution by society as a replacement for the usual form of marriage then would it just lead to a new form of monopoly by the rich who have a tendency by their nature to monopolise things (think 'indecent proposal'!)

Its a tricky subject....whats the best way to meet everyones needs? (by 'everyone' i mean as many people as possible)...i don't claim to have any perfect solutions...just ideas
 
muir said:
I agree that people shouldn't be coerced into sex but i also think that people shouldn't be coerced out of sex either ie if a partner doesn't want sex then they must also respect the wish of the other partner to then seek sex elsewhere

Is polyamory the only solution to that? Would polyamory result in a flow of women towards the wealthiest men in society who might be able to offer things to women that less well off men can't

I'm not implying that all women are motivated by money but rather pointing out that money can buy security, an interesting life and more leisure time and that such an appeal would certainly stand wealthy men at an advantage

The wealthiest men in our society seem to often be psychopaths and seeing as psychopathy can be passed on genetically...wouldn't there be a risk for our species if the wealthiest men procreated the most? (thereby creating more generations of psychopaths)
Click to expand...

I think that's a really heteronormative, cisgendered, patriarchal way of looking at things. Whose to say that polyamorous relationships even involve heterosexual couplings, or that just because you're in a polyamorous relationship with someone that you somehow benefit from their wealth?? Or further, that you would necessarily reproduce with all of your polyamorous partners??
 
Sex should be fun and something that both people want with each other if they are going to be in a monogamous relationship. Of course, two people are not going to want it all the time at exactly the same time so compromise is sometimes needed. Or at least this is my perception. Nobody should enter a monogamous relationship if they are not sexually compatible. That is just like prison. If you are not sexually compatible, there shouldn't be a relationship or it should be an open relationship.
 
jimtaylor said:
Sex should be fun and something that both people want with each other if they are going to be in a monogamous relationship. Of course, two people are not going to want it all the time at exactly the same time so compromise is sometimes needed. Or at least this is my perception. Nobody should enter a monogamous relationship if they are not sexually compatible. That is just like prison. If you are not sexually compatible, there shouldn't be a relationship or it should be an open relationship.
Click to expand...
Or maybe just a friendship?
 
slant said:
I think that's a really heteronormative, cisgendered, patriarchal way of looking at things. Whose to say that polyamorous relationships even involve heterosexual couplings,
Click to expand...

I think you've missunderstood me

I'm not trying to lay down any sort of law here, but when i'm musing about these sort of issues i tend to look at it from a macro angle ie i tend to try to imagine what would work on a societal level

So of course relationships can take whatever form people desire to form them to...but generally speaking they will usually form along male/female lines (as a generalisation)

Also when i was thinking about what you were saying i was thinking of polygamy and what the down sides to that might be

I have no problem with the concept of polyamourous relationships (of any type)

slant said:
or that just because you're in a polyamorous relationship with someone that you somehow benefit from their wealth??
Click to expand...

Wealth was never a factor in deciding my own partners in life

The reason i brought up the wealth issue is because i remember once reading about a culture where polygamy was the institutionalised norm. generally only the men who could afford to keep a number of wives had multiple wives. These sort of cultures often had dowrys as well.

I appreciate we don't have dowries anymore and that women have their own independent means but what we do have in our society is a massive inequality in wealth (largely held by men). Its also my belief that this shift of wealth that has occured in my lifetime has been done fraudulently and that the wealth is not an indicator of those peoples intelligence, compassion or any other positive trait but rather a measure of their mendacity and guile...which are not really traits we should reward as a society...imo

So if we as a society adopted polygamy in an institutionalised way instead of say the current marriage set up then what i'm saying is that just as the global investors are now buying up all the assets of various western nations in state run 'firesales' they would also inevitably hoard women (the oligarchs are mostly men)

In the economic climate that is now materialising where life is going to get harder for larger and larger numbers of people, it is quite conceivable that many women might be attracted (rightly or wrongly) by the draw of a better quality of life living in a harem of the oligarchs (who have taken all the wealth eg in banking scandals)

slant said:
Or further, that you would necessarily reproduce with all of your polyamorous partners??
Click to expand...

Or even reproduce at all....i agree....people should do what works for them

Honestly Slant i believe that people should do whatever works for them as long as they aren't hurting anyone else....i assure you i am very open minded regarding these sorts of things

I have chosen myself to not marry because i don't agree with the institution of marriage (which was conceived out of property rights...which is to say that the man gained ownership of the woman). I also don't beleive that either the church or the government should have any sort of stake in my relationship so i will neither sanctify my relationship in a church nor sign a government contract to enshrine it in law
 
Last edited:
Speaking of polygamy, is a relationship that consists of 3 adults called a triple? instead of a couple?

I'm asking this because I know a 'triple' (married couple + 1) who live together and all sleep in the same bed. They are 2 men and 1 woman. The one couple is married and the additional male is the wife's boyfriend. From what I have been told the two men aren't into have sex with each other but the husband is into watching his wife having sex with her boyfriend. They sleep together in one big bed, her in the middle. The husband is the main breadwinner and he supports his wife and boyfriend's business together. Apparently both men are absolutly in love with her and her husband writes her love letters.

I am not judging them, but they do have two teenage daughters living in the same house so I do wonder about how that might be confusing or embarassing for them. We were camping with them once and I asked one of the daughters where her parents were. She told me that her dad was doing the dishes and her mom was having a shower with her boyfriend. I was little taken aback by her matter of fact way of saying that. I think she was about 14 at the time.

I think 'whatever floats your boat', but really, I don't get it...sorry but she doesn't seem like anything special and she has two men doing everything she asks of them (yes, I am jealous...I can't get one man to do anything I want...)

I understand why she does it, and why the boyfriend does it, I just don't understand why the husband does it.

On a side note, the wife is really into MBTI, and I know that the husband is an INFP and she is an ENFP (I don't know what the boyfriend is), because the husband is the only person I know for sure is an INFP it has given me the impression that they must real pushovers.

This living arrangement has been going on for years but I have heard recently that the husband went out of town for work for a number of months and when he came back the wife wasn't interest in having sex with him anymore, so I'm not sure it is still working for them. If I were her I'd keep him happy since she seemed to have a pretty good deal going.
 
La Sagna said:
Speaking of polygamy, is a relationship that consists of 3 adults called a triple? instead of a couple?

I'm asking this because I know a 'triple' (married couple + 1) who live together and all sleep in the same bed. They are 2 men and 1 woman. The one couple is married and the additional male is the wife's boyfriend. From what I have been told the two men aren't into have sex with each other but the husband is into watching his wife having sex with her boyfriend. They sleep together in one big bed, her in the middle. The husband is the main breadwinner and he supports his wife and boyfriend's business together. Apparently both men are absolutly in love with her and her husband writes her love letters.

I am not judging them, but they do have two teenage daughters living in the same house so I do wonder about how that might be confusing or embarassing for them. We were camping with them once and I asked one of the daughters where her parents were. She told me that her dad was doing the dishes and her mom was having a shower with her boyfriend. I was little taken aback by her matter of fact way of saying that. I think she was about 14 at the time.

I think 'whatever floats your boat', but really, I don't get it...sorry but she doesn't seem like anything special and she has two men doing everything she asks of them (yes, I am jealous...I can't get one man to do anything I want...)

I understand why she does it, and why the boyfriend does it, I just don't understand why the husband does it.

On a side note, the wife is really into MBTI, and I know that the husband is an INFP and she is an ENFP (I don't know what the boyfriend is), because the husband is the only person I know for sure is an INFP it has given me the impression that they must real pushovers.

This living arrangement has been going on for years but I have heard recently that the husband went out of town for work for a number of months and when he came back the wife wasn't interest in having sex with him anymore, so I'm not sure it is still working for them. If I were her I'd keep him happy since she seemed to have a pretty good deal going.
Click to expand...

Humans are funny animals...full of quirks and kinks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top