You're responsible for all the foreseeable consequences of your actions. If you know that your action will lead to other people making bad choices, then it's your responsibility to consider that.
Really?
Yes. That's why I said it.
Gonna have to disagree with you. I'm responsible for my actions. Now you're trying to tell me that because I might buy gas on a given day, I have to consider all the possible ramifications of my actions, based on an unseen mass of people who may or may not fuck up based on my decision? For instance, if someone decides to get gas because they see me do it and they get killed in an armed robbery at the gas station, that's my responsibility and I should've considered it? What're you getting at with this line of reasoning?
I hadn't realized this would boil down to the ability to reasonably predict anything.
MrMister, all I wanted to make clear is that a person's commitment to another is none of my business. And it shouldn't be unless I'm part of that bond. I think this way - perhaps mistakenly - because I don't want interference of any kind with my own marriage. I know I sure as shit don't want anyone helping me stay with my wife if I want to leave, and I CERTAINLY don't want anyone to back off of my wife if she wants to go for it with someone else. SHE made a promise to ME; I made a promise to HER, and it is solely and entirely up to US to keep it or break it.
If she decided to have a roll in the hey with a co-worker, and this were against the terms of our relationship, it is HER who is accountable. The John in question never promised me anything, and as such, shouldn't have anything expected of him. He's not even a "he" at that point; if anything, he's a symptom of a problem, but not the problem itself. The problem itself is that the relationship had deteriorated to a point, and if it weren't this particular John, it would probably be someone else.
And while I agree that we should as a rule be aware of the possible reactions to our actions, I find your particular application of this to be kind of myopic. I have seen enough relationships end due to infidelity to know that half of the time it is a good thing. "Good" being defined as either party admitting to a higher standard of happiness and quality of life post-break up, than before. I've seen bouts of cheating cause disasters for entire families, and I've seen them provoke marriage-saving, bond-forging discussions.
People are so different, and so many, and they all have their little sense of right and wrong with many common elements and as many uncommon ones... I find it near impossible to say with even a 51% certainty that an affair would cause "bad" things more than it would cause "good" things to the parties involved.
And since I'm not in those relationships, I really am not inclined to care.
WorLord on
...privately black.
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited April 2007
Split out the ethics/ philosophy/ foresight discussion. Have at it.
Irond Will on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
Would you say that just because I haven't specifically promised not to spit on you, that I am totally justified in doing that? Or that I wouldn't owe you any sort of apology? (I don't believe spitting on someone is illegal, which is why that's the example I'm using.)
It's a complete lack of respect for another human's situation.
Would you say that just because I haven't specifically promised not to spit on you, that I am totally justified in doing that? Or that I wouldn't owe you any sort of apology? (I don't believe spitting on someone is illegal, which is why that's the example I'm using.)
I think it is illegal in some places. But that's beside the point, I get what you're trying to say. I don't think the situation is comparable, at all, though.
It's a complete lack of respect for another human's situation.
Really?
I think assuming I know what their situation IS is disrespectful, and I think placing someone NOT in an agreement as a de facto arbitrator FOR that agreement is disrespectful to that person.
I'd at least HOPE the private rules of a couple's relationship would be well beyond the sphere of my knowledge. I'd also hope that I could treat adults like adults, and trust that a person who has decided to sleep around on their partner knows what they are doing, and has a right to make that decision and go through with it free from any outsider judgments.
Even and especially if that outsider is a single person with no commitments to honor him/herself.
WorLord on
...privately black.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
By you not finding out the rules of the relationship, you are disrespecting the partner of the person you are sleeping with.
You are assuming a situation outside of the norm for the sake of getting some. If you don't give a fuck, then don't give a fuck. I can't make you care. What I can say, though, is that to knowingly cheat with someone does put some of the blame on you, whatever happens. You were involved, knowingly. You know of the ramifications of cheating, or at least the possible ones (and getting some knowledge of there relationship might be wise in this case).
The idea that people think they can fuck a married woman/man and be totally void of responsibility for what happens is really surprising and almost offensive to me. Does the mind/moral center really just shut off once sex is mentioned?
edit - I'm not looking at marriage as any sort of holy institution or anything, I just think relationships deserve some respect from the outside, most especially when they aren't getting all they need from within. She/He wants to fuck around on her/his SO because they aren't in love anymore, they can end the relationship before dragging another person into it.
I'd at least HOPE the private rules of a couple's relationship would be well beyond the sphere of my knowledge. I'd also hope that I could treat adults like adults, and trust that a person who has decided to sleep around on their partner knows what they are doing, and has a right to make that decision and go through with it free from any outsider judgments.
Even and especially if that outsider is a single person with no commitments to honor him/herself.
Except that things don't work that way. Human beings are exceedingly well-equipped to make mistakes. If you enable a person to make a mistake, you are responsible for helping. The person who actually made the mistake is absolutely responsible for his actions, and so are you. Responsibility is not a zero-sum game.
I generally feel a great swell of pity towards any relationship fragile enough to be made or broken based solely on something as superficial as the use (or lack thereof) of one's wobbly bits.
One of the most important measures of a human being is the value of his word. People should uphold their commitments, period.
If a particular couple's arrangement doesn't require exclusivity, then that's a whole different story. But if you're in a monogamous relationship, then there is no excuse for infidelity. If your decision is to sleep with someone else, then do what you have to do, but at that point you cannot sustain a pretense of monogamy.
HiredGun on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
I'd at least HOPE the private rules of a couple's relationship would be well beyond the sphere of my knowledge. I'd also hope that I could treat adults like adults, and trust that a person who has decided to sleep around on their partner knows what they are doing, and has a right to make that decision and go through with it free from any outsider judgments.
Even and especially if that outsider is a single person with no commitments to honor him/herself.
Except that things don't work that way. Human beings are exceedingly well-equipped to make mistakes. If you enable a person to make a mistake, you are responsible for helping. The person who actually made the mistake is absolutely responsible for his actions, and so are you. Responsibility is not a zero-sum game.
I'd at least HOPE the private rules of a couple's relationship would be well beyond the sphere of my knowledge. I'd also hope that I could treat adults like adults, and trust that a person who has decided to sleep around on their partner knows what they are doing, and has a right to make that decision and go through with it free from any outsider judgments.
Even and especially if that outsider is a single person with no commitments to honor him/herself.
Except that things don't work that way. Human beings are exceedingly well-equipped to make mistakes. If you enable a person to make a mistake, you are responsible for helping. The person who actually made the mistake is absolutely responsible for his actions, and so are you. Responsibility is not a zero-sum game.
Doesn't this have some sort of limit though? There's a very mixed message about this, especially when something tragic happens. We always say, don't worry Timmy, your brother killed himself. It was his decision. This is when Timmy is upset because he was an ass, and said some things which really hurt his brother, perhaps pushing him over the edge - maybe even meaning to.
It just seems this rationalization goes both ways, when trying to extract a learning experience we say 'hey, you're a part of the world around you, and your decisions have consequences you should be responsible for, even when the results themselves are by proxy.' But when we are trying to distance ourselves from a situation, we say 'hey, in the end we make our own decisions and commit to our own course of action, each person's actions and those results are their own.'
Is the latter just a little white lie we tell to make things feel better, or are both views true depending on circumstance?
I think, ultimately, and this is what I was saying before: if someone wants to be in a relationship, they will be in the relationship. And if they don't, they won't. People can kid themselves and remain in relationships that they don't want to stay in for stupid reasons. I don't know. I don't think that's smart or wise or honest. The older folks and the media love to joke about how broken the conservative concept of family is and how relationship/marriage longevity is on a decline. Well, maybe that's just people waking up. Maybe that's just being being smart and honest for a change. Maybe that's progress.
I'm gonna go with the white lie option. It's not a bad thing to say because obviously Timmy is upset and if we run the "you are a terrible person" line, then he might just off himself, which makes a bad situation worse. But the fact of the matter is that Timmy should not have been such a vicious bastard.
I'm gonna go with the white lie option. It's not a bad thing to say because obviously Timmy is upset and if we run the "you are a terrible person" line, then he might just off himself, which makes a bad situation worse. But the fact of the matter is that Timmy should not have been such a vicious bastard.
Yeah, it's one thing to have an ethical discussion with other adults in an emotionally neutral context. It's a different thing entirely when talking to children or other vulnerable people in the midst of a crisis.
You see issues like this a lot when dealing with abuse situations. Abuse victims often have developed habits that are designed to invite abuse. They sometimes feel like they deserve abuse, that abuse is a normal element of the human condition, so when upset or jealous they'll sometimes deliberately push their partner's buttons, insult them, yell in their faces, call them names, take their masculinity/femininity into question, etc., until their partner finally snaps and slaps them. It unfortunately plays into a lot of old misogynist myths, but it's still a common element of abuse situations with abusers and victims of both genders.
If you're talking to a battered wife who just barely escaped her abusive husband, you don't say to her, "What did you do to make him hit you?" That's just fucked up, because in that particular moment it's more important to be concerned for the victim's physical and emotional well-being, including her undoubtedly fragile sense of self-worth. Wait for her to get into a stable living arrangement away from her abusive spouse and get a few months of therapy and then address her own poor behavior (if you address it at all).
edit: wait, isn't this more "foresight and ethics" than "fidelity?" Ugh.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I generally feel a great swell of pity towards any relationship fragile enough to be made or broken based solely on something as superficial as the use (or lack thereof) of one's wobbly bits.
This of course assumes everyone views sex as roughly equivalent to a handshake like you guys, though.
I generally feel a great swell of pity towards any relationship fragile enough to be made or broken based solely on something as superficial as the use (or lack thereof) of one's wobbly bits.
Speak for yourself. There is noting "superficial" about when I use my "bits".
And I dont mean "I'm such a man ololz" - I mean that the fact you feel sex is superficial is cause for remorse.
Fidelity is totally awesome if it is what you and your partner(s) have decided on.
Sleeping around (so long as you are careful of everyone's health) is also awesome under the same condition.
I really don't give two shits about what people do, so long as they aren't being assholes about it.
As long as you aren't having children, I say full steam ahead.
Though I don't think that polygamy will build a particularly healthy relationship: I have seen far too many of my female friends that have been in "open-relationships" and got hurt b/c deep down they really wanted it to be monogamous but didn't want to lose the guy. I don't care if you have that lifestyle, I just know it isn't for me and suspect that it really isn't all that great for all parties involved. Also, you guys are making way too much of a supposed "social stigma", especially if you are males.
Controversy Cow on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
Also, you guys are making way too much of a supposed "social stigma", especially if you are males.
How can my being male be remotely relevant to comments on the social stigma attached to being in a poly-style relationship when I have no interest in or intention of ever participating in one regardless? Also in your example the girl is pretending to be okay with something she's not and somehow that's supposed to be unique to and expected from polygamous/polyamorous/open relationships? That doesn't make any sense, when one party in a relationship is pretending to be okay with things that they're not actually okay with there is a problem regardless of whether the relationship consists of two, three or fifteen people.
Also, you guys are making way too much of a supposed "social stigma", especially if you are males.
How can my being male be remotely relevant to comments on the social stigma attached to being in a poly-style relationship when I have no interest in or intention of ever participating in one regardless? Also in your example the girl is pretending to be okay with something she's not and somehow that's supposed to be unique to and expected from polygamous/polyamorous/open relationships? That doesn't make any sense, when one party in a relationship is pretending to be okay with things that they're not actually okay with there is a problem regardless of whether the relationship consists of two, three or fifteen people.
As for the second part, I guess that I agree with you. It is just that in my experience people that I have known in polygamous relationships weren't okay with it, but went along with it anyhow b/c they loved the other party. I think that they would have preferred to close it, though. I suppose that I should just say that I have seen relationships like this, and have never seen it work out well for those involved. I will grant you that such a relationship could work, I just haven't seen it.
edit- actually you should probably just ignore the men/women thing, I was referring to men not having the same stigma about being promiscuous. But that is off topic. Looking back, someone said that the reason people have monogamous relationships is b/c of social stigmas. Basically, I disagree with that.
You are assuming a situation outside of the norm for the sake of getting some.
Actually, I'm pointing out that there is no norm, and it is foolish to assume that there is.
And though I like the way you're trying to paint this to be nothing more than a shiny veneer covering some selfish act (ignoring "morality" simply for the sake of "getting some"), I really don't think it applies here.
I mean that the fact you feel sex is superficial is cause for remorse.
Except that's not how I feel.
I think that sex can be both extremely superficial and extremely meaningful. I feel sorry for anyone who has never experienced both the revelation that is meaningful sex AND the hoot+holler that is a good no-strings-attached fuck.
Thanks for your pity, but it doesn't fit. Can I exchange it for something useful at Target? :P
I have seen far too many of my female friends that have been in "open-relationships" and got hurt b/c deep down they really wanted it to be monogamous but didn't want to lose the guy.
Yeah, that's a shitty situation, and I've seen it with both genders. As VC pointed out above, somebody compromising their principles because they are afraid of losing their partner isn't a phenomenon isolated to poly relationships.
On the other hand, around a third of marriages end in divorce, and various surveys have estimated the number of people who cheat on their spouses to be anywhere from 10% to 40%. And I'd say that the human capacity for self-denial is strong enough that many of those who stay faithful don't really want to. So I could easily make the argument that monogamous relationships frequently fail, too.
I'm not saying that either lifestyle is superior to the other. What I am saying is that the likelihood a relationship will fail has less to do than the lifestyle or any other particular ruleset the relationship complies with, and more to do with the honesty (including self-honesty), communication, and maturity of the people involved.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I'm not saying that either lifestyle is superior to the other. What I am saying is that the likelihood a relationship will fail has less to do than the lifestyle or any other particular ruleset the relationship complies with, and more to do with the honesty (including self-honesty), communication, and maturity of the people involved.
I have always wondered why our usage of the term "monogamy" assumes sexual exclusivity, and why people aren't fine with simply being socially monogamous.
Is it because we as humans place too much importance on sex?
I have always wondered why our usage of the term "monogamy" assumes sexual exclusivity, and why people aren't fine with simply being socially monogamous.
Is it because we as humans place too much importance on sex?
How does one go about being socially monogamous? Lock yourself in a freezer with only one other person for the rest of your life?
I have always wondered why our usage of the term "monogamy" assumes sexual exclusivity, and why people aren't fine with simply being socially monogamous.
Is it because we as humans place too much importance on sex?
How does one go about being socially monogamous? Lock yourself in a freezer with only one other person for the rest of your life?
Social monogamy is basically being exclusive to that person socially but not sexually. You do have sex with them, but you also have sex with other people.
In the words of wikipedia, "social monogamy refers to a male and female's social living arrangement (e.g., shared use of a territory, behaviour indicative of a social pair, and/or proximity between a male and female) without inferring any sexual interactions or reproductive patterns."
A related biological term: extra-pair copulations.
I have always wondered why our usage of the term "monogamy" assumes sexual exclusivity, and why people aren't fine with simply being socially monogamous.
Is it because we as humans place too much importance on sex?
How does one go about being socially monogamous? Lock yourself in a freezer with only one other person for the rest of your life?
Add me to the list of people more than a bit put off by the idea that not automatically leaning towards monogamy means I "can't appreciate emotional sex", or some such nonsense.
I could easily see myself going from a stretch of time where I have sex with multiple partners to, after a time of getting to know one better, I decide "Let's try something more serious here." I fully admit, I have not been one to have many long relationships, but that's mostly been by personal choice and discretion, not due to any high number of breakups or what have you.
Even if I didn't, however, and I just continued seeing multiple partners casually, it's not as if that would suddenly turn off my emotions and turn me into some hollow shell, just because I'm doing the act with more than one person. I can safely say that every woman I've (soberly) gone to bed with, I've felt an attachment for, enough that I am willing to be intimate and close to them, be it for an evening for for months at a time. However, that doesn't mean I'm in love with one or more of them; being emotionally attached in some way doesn't neccessitate love being the emotion doing the attaching.
It's a matter of degree, and it's also a matter of what YOU are personally comfortable with: not every person is capable of enjoying sex if there's not a mutual love between the two partners, but other people are fine with having sex with people they simply "like". Again, to me, that's fine: the sex I have with the person I like will just likely end up different from the sex I'll have with the person I love. I don't know, maybe the person I like will become the person I love, given time spent together. Point is, I feel I can differentiate, and appreciate each on a different level.
As for responsibility, I don't know: on the one hand, I am sort of of the mind that, if a couple's relationship does not involve me in any way (i.e. I am not already friends with either of the parties involved, etc.), then I don't feel a great burden to make sure that a guy's girlfriend (I'm 22, not dealing much with married couples yet) stays faithful to him at all costs. That said, yes, if I do knowingly work to get a guy's girlfriend into bed with me and succeed, well, there's responsibility there. I guess the question is how much of it is responsibility, and how much of it is culpability. Again, honestly, I don't feel the burden to ensure another couple's fidelity (again, if I don't have a prior relationship with either the man or the woman), but it's not like I'm out there thinking "I can't wait to go out and pick up some taken girls!".
But the keys to everything, as already stated, are communication and honesty. If you like your sex life a certain way, be open with your partner about it, see how they feel and what they believe, and see if you have to or are willing to compromise. If so, great, you feel the relationship with this person is more important, so be true to that. If not, then it's not a bad thing to say "Maybe this just won't work out."
Posts
Gonna have to disagree with you. I'm responsible for my actions. Now you're trying to tell me that because I might buy gas on a given day, I have to consider all the possible ramifications of my actions, based on an unseen mass of people who may or may not fuck up based on my decision? For instance, if someone decides to get gas because they see me do it and they get killed in an armed robbery at the gas station, that's my responsibility and I should've considered it? What're you getting at with this line of reasoning?
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Sleeping around (so long as you are careful of everyone's health) is also awesome under the same condition.
I really don't give two shits about what people do, so long as they aren't being assholes about it.
MrMister, all I wanted to make clear is that a person's commitment to another is none of my business. And it shouldn't be unless I'm part of that bond. I think this way - perhaps mistakenly - because I don't want interference of any kind with my own marriage. I know I sure as shit don't want anyone helping me stay with my wife if I want to leave, and I CERTAINLY don't want anyone to back off of my wife if she wants to go for it with someone else. SHE made a promise to ME; I made a promise to HER, and it is solely and entirely up to US to keep it or break it.
If she decided to have a roll in the hey with a co-worker, and this were against the terms of our relationship, it is HER who is accountable. The John in question never promised me anything, and as such, shouldn't have anything expected of him. He's not even a "he" at that point; if anything, he's a symptom of a problem, but not the problem itself. The problem itself is that the relationship had deteriorated to a point, and if it weren't this particular John, it would probably be someone else.
And while I agree that we should as a rule be aware of the possible reactions to our actions, I find your particular application of this to be kind of myopic. I have seen enough relationships end due to infidelity to know that half of the time it is a good thing. "Good" being defined as either party admitting to a higher standard of happiness and quality of life post-break up, than before. I've seen bouts of cheating cause disasters for entire families, and I've seen them provoke marriage-saving, bond-forging discussions.
People are so different, and so many, and they all have their little sense of right and wrong with many common elements and as many uncommon ones... I find it near impossible to say with even a 51% certainty that an affair would cause "bad" things more than it would cause "good" things to the parties involved.
And since I'm not in those relationships, I really am not inclined to care.
It's a complete lack of respect for another human's situation.
I think it is illegal in some places. But that's beside the point, I get what you're trying to say. I don't think the situation is comparable, at all, though.
Really?
I think assuming I know what their situation IS is disrespectful, and I think placing someone NOT in an agreement as a de facto arbitrator FOR that agreement is disrespectful to that person.
I'd at least HOPE the private rules of a couple's relationship would be well beyond the sphere of my knowledge. I'd also hope that I could treat adults like adults, and trust that a person who has decided to sleep around on their partner knows what they are doing, and has a right to make that decision and go through with it free from any outsider judgments.
Even and especially if that outsider is a single person with no commitments to honor him/herself.
You are assuming a situation outside of the norm for the sake of getting some. If you don't give a fuck, then don't give a fuck. I can't make you care. What I can say, though, is that to knowingly cheat with someone does put some of the blame on you, whatever happens. You were involved, knowingly. You know of the ramifications of cheating, or at least the possible ones (and getting some knowledge of there relationship might be wise in this case).
The idea that people think they can fuck a married woman/man and be totally void of responsibility for what happens is really surprising and almost offensive to me. Does the mind/moral center really just shut off once sex is mentioned?
edit - I'm not looking at marriage as any sort of holy institution or anything, I just think relationships deserve some respect from the outside, most especially when they aren't getting all they need from within. She/He wants to fuck around on her/his SO because they aren't in love anymore, they can end the relationship before dragging another person into it.
If a particular couple's arrangement doesn't require exclusivity, then that's a whole different story. But if you're in a monogamous relationship, then there is no excuse for infidelity. If your decision is to sleep with someone else, then do what you have to do, but at that point you cannot sustain a pretense of monogamy.
Doesn't this have some sort of limit though? There's a very mixed message about this, especially when something tragic happens. We always say, don't worry Timmy, your brother killed himself. It was his decision. This is when Timmy is upset because he was an ass, and said some things which really hurt his brother, perhaps pushing him over the edge - maybe even meaning to.
It just seems this rationalization goes both ways, when trying to extract a learning experience we say 'hey, you're a part of the world around you, and your decisions have consequences you should be responsible for, even when the results themselves are by proxy.' But when we are trying to distance ourselves from a situation, we say 'hey, in the end we make our own decisions and commit to our own course of action, each person's actions and those results are their own.'
Is the latter just a little white lie we tell to make things feel better, or are both views true depending on circumstance?
Yeah, it's one thing to have an ethical discussion with other adults in an emotionally neutral context. It's a different thing entirely when talking to children or other vulnerable people in the midst of a crisis.
You see issues like this a lot when dealing with abuse situations. Abuse victims often have developed habits that are designed to invite abuse. They sometimes feel like they deserve abuse, that abuse is a normal element of the human condition, so when upset or jealous they'll sometimes deliberately push their partner's buttons, insult them, yell in their faces, call them names, take their masculinity/femininity into question, etc., until their partner finally snaps and slaps them. It unfortunately plays into a lot of old misogynist myths, but it's still a common element of abuse situations with abusers and victims of both genders.
If you're talking to a battered wife who just barely escaped her abusive husband, you don't say to her, "What did you do to make him hit you?" That's just fucked up, because in that particular moment it's more important to be concerned for the victim's physical and emotional well-being, including her undoubtedly fragile sense of self-worth. Wait for her to get into a stable living arrangement away from her abusive spouse and get a few months of therapy and then address her own poor behavior (if you address it at all).
edit: wait, isn't this more "foresight and ethics" than "fidelity?" Ugh.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
This of course assumes everyone views sex as roughly equivalent to a handshake like you guys, though.
Speak for yourself. There is noting "superficial" about when I use my "bits".
And I dont mean "I'm such a man ololz" - I mean that the fact you feel sex is superficial is cause for remorse.
You have my pity. Truly.
As long as you aren't having children, I say full steam ahead.
Though I don't think that polygamy will build a particularly healthy relationship: I have seen far too many of my female friends that have been in "open-relationships" and got hurt b/c deep down they really wanted it to be monogamous but didn't want to lose the guy. I don't care if you have that lifestyle, I just know it isn't for me and suspect that it really isn't all that great for all parties involved. Also, you guys are making way too much of a supposed "social stigma", especially if you are males.
Stop pitying each other, you twits.
I pity the fool that doesn't pity other fools.
No more pitying? Not even fools?
How can my being male be remotely relevant to comments on the social stigma attached to being in a poly-style relationship when I have no interest in or intention of ever participating in one regardless? Also in your example the girl is pretending to be okay with something she's not and somehow that's supposed to be unique to and expected from polygamous/polyamorous/open relationships? That doesn't make any sense, when one party in a relationship is pretending to be okay with things that they're not actually okay with there is a problem regardless of whether the relationship consists of two, three or fifteen people.
As for the second part, I guess that I agree with you. It is just that in my experience people that I have known in polygamous relationships weren't okay with it, but went along with it anyhow b/c they loved the other party. I think that they would have preferred to close it, though. I suppose that I should just say that I have seen relationships like this, and have never seen it work out well for those involved. I will grant you that such a relationship could work, I just haven't seen it.
edit- actually you should probably just ignore the men/women thing, I was referring to men not having the same stigma about being promiscuous. But that is off topic. Looking back, someone said that the reason people have monogamous relationships is b/c of social stigmas. Basically, I disagree with that.
That only works if I agree to be part of that relationship, which wouldn't be my intent in this situation.
Actually, I'm pointing out that there is no norm, and it is foolish to assume that there is.
And though I like the way you're trying to paint this to be nothing more than a shiny veneer covering some selfish act (ignoring "morality" simply for the sake of "getting some"), I really don't think it applies here.
And I say that's only viable if everyone in the world is somehow part of your wedding vows. What a honeymoon night that must be.
Why? Why should I care at all about who promises their privates to whom?
No, but it IS contractually based in the case of marriage. And that contract is between two people, not two people and the rest of the world.
Except that's not how I feel.
I think that sex can be both extremely superficial and extremely meaningful. I feel sorry for anyone who has never experienced both the revelation that is meaningful sex AND the hoot+holler that is a good no-strings-attached fuck.
Thanks for your pity, but it doesn't fit. Can I exchange it for something useful at Target? :P
Depends on the people involved.
The number of people who can pull it off are in the minority, but I think this minority has been growing.
Yeah, that's a shitty situation, and I've seen it with both genders. As VC pointed out above, somebody compromising their principles because they are afraid of losing their partner isn't a phenomenon isolated to poly relationships.
On the other hand, around a third of marriages end in divorce, and various surveys have estimated the number of people who cheat on their spouses to be anywhere from 10% to 40%. And I'd say that the human capacity for self-denial is strong enough that many of those who stay faithful don't really want to. So I could easily make the argument that monogamous relationships frequently fail, too.
I'm not saying that either lifestyle is superior to the other. What I am saying is that the likelihood a relationship will fail has less to do than the lifestyle or any other particular ruleset the relationship complies with, and more to do with the honesty (including self-honesty), communication, and maturity of the people involved.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Is it because we as humans place too much importance on sex?
How does one go about being socially monogamous? Lock yourself in a freezer with only one other person for the rest of your life?
Social monogamy is basically being exclusive to that person socially but not sexually. You do have sex with them, but you also have sex with other people.
In the words of wikipedia, "social monogamy refers to a male and female's social living arrangement (e.g., shared use of a territory, behaviour indicative of a social pair, and/or proximity between a male and female) without inferring any sexual interactions or reproductive patterns."
A related biological term: extra-pair copulations.
Don't give him any ideas!
Wii Code: 5700 4466 3616 6981 (PM if y'all add me)
I could easily see myself going from a stretch of time where I have sex with multiple partners to, after a time of getting to know one better, I decide "Let's try something more serious here." I fully admit, I have not been one to have many long relationships, but that's mostly been by personal choice and discretion, not due to any high number of breakups or what have you.
Even if I didn't, however, and I just continued seeing multiple partners casually, it's not as if that would suddenly turn off my emotions and turn me into some hollow shell, just because I'm doing the act with more than one person. I can safely say that every woman I've (soberly) gone to bed with, I've felt an attachment for, enough that I am willing to be intimate and close to them, be it for an evening for for months at a time. However, that doesn't mean I'm in love with one or more of them; being emotionally attached in some way doesn't neccessitate love being the emotion doing the attaching.
It's a matter of degree, and it's also a matter of what YOU are personally comfortable with: not every person is capable of enjoying sex if there's not a mutual love between the two partners, but other people are fine with having sex with people they simply "like". Again, to me, that's fine: the sex I have with the person I like will just likely end up different from the sex I'll have with the person I love. I don't know, maybe the person I like will become the person I love, given time spent together. Point is, I feel I can differentiate, and appreciate each on a different level.
As for responsibility, I don't know: on the one hand, I am sort of of the mind that, if a couple's relationship does not involve me in any way (i.e. I am not already friends with either of the parties involved, etc.), then I don't feel a great burden to make sure that a guy's girlfriend (I'm 22, not dealing much with married couples yet) stays faithful to him at all costs. That said, yes, if I do knowingly work to get a guy's girlfriend into bed with me and succeed, well, there's responsibility there. I guess the question is how much of it is responsibility, and how much of it is culpability. Again, honestly, I don't feel the burden to ensure another couple's fidelity (again, if I don't have a prior relationship with either the man or the woman), but it's not like I'm out there thinking "I can't wait to go out and pick up some taken girls!".
But the keys to everything, as already stated, are communication and honesty. If you like your sex life a certain way, be open with your partner about it, see how they feel and what they believe, and see if you have to or are willing to compromise. If so, great, you feel the relationship with this person is more important, so be true to that. If not, then it's not a bad thing to say "Maybe this just won't work out."
Wii Code: 5700 4466 3616 6981 (PM if y'all add me)