I was monogamous once. Hated it. I was living with Tim, with whom I’d had killer sex at the beginning and to whom I’d issued the standard warning: I’m not monogamous. After the first year, things fell apart. I discovered that he had a fatal flaw, a weak personality. He discovered that I drank too much when I was unhappy. Sex became infrequent and then stopped altogether. We still liked each other and it was going to be a lot of work to break up. I had moved to be with Tim, and the thought of the drive back to California with my old, slow Volvo wagon packed with my household goods was an incentive to work it out. Though we weren’t having sex, he asked me not to sleep with anyone else, as that would make him feel inadequate.
I did not have any particular desire to sleep with anyone and no candidates, but all it took was for me to agree to this sacrifice for a hot opportunity to present itself in the form of a damn cute working class boy of Italian descent. Let your imagination work, you probably can’t make him hotter than he was. I refrained, and I went another year without sex before finally packing up the Volvo and driving home to California, where in my desperation I took up with a rude and messy cello player whose table manners were so primitive, my pet name for him was Troglodyte -- Trog for short. I’m still bitter about that year without sex and the missed opportunity with the Italian boy and the very idea that Tim somehow benefitted from my sexual frustration. I never again agreed to be monogamous with anyone. My husband and I will celebrate 23 mainly happy, non-monogamous years together in June.
Non-monogamy has been good for me, but it was rough in the beginning. The beginning was, as for most people, high school. I was a smart kid in San Francisco, and I was both astonishingly naive and naturally broad-minded about sex. My first boyfriend was a geek named John. On our first date, his mother drove us to see a comedy with Vanessa Redgrave, unexpectedly double billed with an X-rated Swedish movie about everybody fucking everybody else. We giggled a lot afterward. I suppose my first date was a kind of omen. John and I did the usual kid groping, nothing below the belt. Then one day, he asked me if I wanted to make out with his best friend. Looking back, I guess he was trying to impress his friend. I thought this was a great idea and happily complied. John’s feelings were hurt, and neither boy would talk to me afterward. I was confused. It hadn’t been my idea in the first place. This was my introduction to being blamed for what boys wanted.
That was upsetting but not world shaking. I began dating Nick, my best friend Tanya’s brother. Later I dated Nick’s cousin Nick, who was attractive and experienced enough to introduce me to some more advanced sexual activities short of intercourse. Then, at a party, I made out with this rat-faced bad boy friend of the Nicks whom I rather fancied, God knows why. To my surprise and bewilderment, I became the object of gossip. Tanya dropped me. The Nicks were over me. The rat-faced boy was cold. A sweet girl named Natalie did me the kindness of explaining that no one wanted to be my friend anymore because I was a slut, before she quit talking to me, too. I was a little indignant -- I was a virgin, for Christ’s sake. Even I knew enough about sex to know I wasn’t a real slut. Not yet.
But no matter. I may have lost all my friends in one weekend, but I moved on to a hipper crowd. It was the sixties, and my academic high school had a hippie clique that I became part of. I dove into the counter-culture. I cut school, took drugs and went down to the Haight. I was embarrassed that I had ever hung out with the uncool kids in Tanya’s crowd. Clearly, those bourgeois, unenlightened teenagers were dupes of an oppressive capitalist system that would collapse if we all made love and not war. Among my new friends, free love was a moral imperative. Selecting one mate and rejecting all others played into the hands of the military-industrial complex, not to mention the patriarchy. I’m pretty sure we didn’t know what we were talking about, and most of my high school hippie friends grew up to have conventional relationships as the counter culture in general retreated from its more experimental territories. But in my naive, wide-eyed way, I knew what was good for me. I embraced free love for life.
Over time, I’ve understood my preference to be largely personal, but also political. It is both a choice and a recognition of my own nature. I am capable of engaging in more than one relationship at a time. If I’m committed to one partner, the fact that I’m attracted to someone else doesn’t change my commitment. I don’t need to leave one person to be with another. Whatever I’m doing with a person -- marriage, relationship, dating, friendly fucking, one-night stand -- is defined with that person, unaffected by my feelings for any other lover.
All relationships have some rules, and these pretty much protect the relationship from interference by others. For instance, if I share finances with someone --my husband, for instance -- spending money on a lover is something we discuss. A relationship may require a certain amount of dependable contact, like how often he calls or how many nights he spends at home, or it may be pretty casual. The expectations are set with the partner. My relationships are ranked, because this is what works for my husband and me. That means I have a greater responsibility to my husband than to a boyfriend or casual lover. I’ve never had a lover who didn’t understand boundaries, perhaps because I don’t get confused about them myself.
I am, of course, perfectly happy to be with someone who is also non-monogamous. I’m not jealous or competitive. I need time alone. I’m self-possessed enough not to be threatened by other, possibly younger and cuter, women. I believe that whoever I’m with is with me because they want to be, not because they have no other choice. I do not believe my husband or a boyfriend will leave me because they meet someone who outclasses me. I don’t get involved with anyone that shallow. My relationships, like everyone’s, end when they no longer suit me or my partner, not because someone outside of the relationship caused them to fail.
Not only don’t I mind not being monogamous, I’m at a loss to understand what monogamy offers that I don’t have in my non-monogamous relationship. My marriage is a long-term relationship that along the way became legal. We’re still in love. My husband is romantic, sweet, supportive, loyal, a friend. He buys me gifts and loves to take me out. He participates in my family, generously helping take care of my elderly relatives. He reads poetry to me. He looks after me when I’ve had surgery, which is often. He’s taken over a lot of domestic responsibilities as I find them more difficult. He supports me financially now that I don’t work. He and I have great conversations. He’s a terrific lover. What exactly am I missing because he’s got a girlfriend? The satisfaction of knowing my man never has sex with anyone else? I place no value on that.
I know the objections and stereotypes. “You must have low self-esteem.” No, I’ve always liked myself and expect to be treated well. “Sex isn’t as sweet when you know he has other women.” Yes, it is, and there’s a reason he gets the girls. “He will never quite trust you knowing that you might be with another man.” Yes, he will, because there is no jealousy and no lies. “You are not truly committed to your marriage because you allow others into your lives sexually.” We are very committed; our so-called “open” marriage is not really open to anyone else. We’ve had more than our share of challenges and would not be together today if our marriage didn’t matter a great deal to us. “You can’t avoid jealousy and its corrosive effects.” Yes, you can; it all depends on the interpretation you choose to put on your partner’s sexual autonomy. If you don’t believe you’ve been done wrong, you won’t feel hurt. If you don’t believe that other people are better than you, you won’t feel jealous or threatened. “That might work for you but not for most people.” Monogamy isn’t working for a lot of people, either. It might be time to change attitudes.
I believe monogamy is way oversold. First of all, very few people are truly monogamous. So-called serial monogamy is not monogamy, if monogamy means having one life partner, as it does for geese and wolves. I don’t know a single person who has mated for life. In fact, among primates, there is one true monogamous species and it’s not us, it’s the Borneo orangutan. Statistics -- divorce statistics and surveys of sexual behavior starting with Kinsey -- demonstrate that the vast majority of Americans have more than one sexual partner in their lives. Even accepting the convenient “one partner at a time” definition of monogamy, a large number of people are not monogamous, having sex outside of their marriages.
I do not want to accuse anyone of hypocrisy for claiming to be monogamous. There are some people who are by temperament monogamous and I would not deny them the satisfaction of their achievement. There are others who subscribe to monogamy but for whom monogamous behavior is unnatural. As there is scant support for openly rejecting monogamy, they may try and fail to be monogamous, causing themselves and their partners unnecessary pain.
The American myth of love and marriage is a recipe for emotional disaster. We still pay lip service to the notion that young people will fall in love and meet each other’s physical and emotional needs for the rest of their lives. That’s obviously ridiculous but we have no other model of a “good” relationship. When, as is common, one partner has sex with someone else, the marriage suffers an upheaval. There is a painful confrontation with reality. Most couples lack a cognitive framework to understand the behavior. Rather than understanding, there is shouting, crying, slamming doors, packing suitcases, calling lawyers. If the couple manages to “work it out,” the straying partner is required to express guilt and remorse for what is natural behavior and make promises they may not be able to keep. Rarely does anyone really get over the sense of betrayal. The marriage has a storm cloud over it for the remainder of its existence. This scenario is much more common than the happy, mated-for-life one.
The statistics on who’s having extramarital sex -- 60% of men, 40% of women -- lead to the inevitable conclusion that any married person is as likely as not to have sex with someone else during their marriage. Roughly half of all married people qualify as strayers, adulterers and faithless betrayers. Half of just about everybody is going to commit what is perceived as a dreadful sin against their marriage, yet the numbers are high enough that adultery is equally the norm with monogamy. Our beliefs about marriage are in permanent, unhealthy tension with reality, with around half of marital partners attempting to be monogamous against their nature, like gays in the past who tried to live straight.
We ought to update the discussion and apply modern knowledge about sex and marriage to it. Why is sex outside of marriage even called adultery, which is a religious concept, not a biological or social one? Long before half of all marriages ended in divorce, we gave up the idea that a divorced woman was a fallen woman. It’s been over 50 years since Kinsey told us masturbation was normal, and we’ve stopped calling it self-abuse. Yet we persist in referring to sex outside of marriage in purely negative terms. We don’t even have an accepted neutral term, other than the overly-specific or the fringe-sounding “polyamory,” “swinging” or “open marriage.” We don’t have the words to discuss this issue in spite of the vastness of the information, not only about the prevalence -- the near-inevitability -- of sex outside of marriage, but also about biology and evolution, which drive this behavior. Sex outside of marriage will happen. We need a benign way to discuss it.
Monogamy was never the biological default. While the situation may not be as simple as we thought in the 60s, there is some truth to the notion that monogamy became important only when inheritance became a societal concern. It’s also clear that monogamy was only for women until recently, men in traditional societies all over the world being allowed the privilege of extramarital sex. In modern America, rather than question the necessity for knowing genetic parentage that justifies monogamy, along with the other norms of traditional marriage, we have merely extended the unreasonable expectation of sexual exclusiveness to men. In a perverse achievement for feminism, we now get to condemn men as well as women for acting on their biological imperatives.
I have known people, mainly women since more of my friends are women, who were happy in a relationship until they discovered that their partner had made love with someone else. Though nothing changed and she was satisfied with the relationship, this bit of information fundamentally and retroactively altered how she felt about it. The whole marriage was now seen as one big lie. Why? It seems to me to be an question of attitude and not much else. Like someone who yearns for what they can’t have and despises what they do have, the injured spouse chooses to give up her partner, home, shared interests, financial security, mutual friends -- everything that makes up a relationship, which is, after all, more than sex -- because she can’t have the one thing that she chooses to place value on, sexual exclusiveness.
It makes no sense to me and never has. I’ve been careful never to commit to a sexually exclusive relationship. Other than that one lapse with Tim, I’ve never allowed anyone to dictate to me how I use my body, nor have I ever demanded that a partner renounce all other relationships. I do have high standards for relationships. I expect a partner to treat me with respect, to remain interested, to pay attention. I much prefer a partner to give me the right kind of attention in the amounts (reasonable) that I need it in spite of spending time with other women, than to be taken for granted or bored by someone who never looks at another woman. That seems obvious to me. Of course, it’s not impossible to be in a rich, happy, sexually monogamous relationship, but what surprises me is the high relative value that many people place on exclusivity compared to intensity. They’ll put up with boring as long as he doesn’t share the boredom with anyone else.
Quite a long time ago, my life became seriously stressful. My mother was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and required increasing intervention. She lived with the illness for fifteen years and her care was my responsibility. There were constant problems and I worried about my mother a lot. My sexual response became erratic; try thinking about your mother and getting turned on. A few years after my mother’s illness began, I became seriously ill myself. For a year and a half, I was felled by hepatitis. I recovered but have periodic episodes of fatigue, where it’s hard to think, much less move. For thirteen years, we were financially stressed by my mother’s illness, having to find the money to pay 24 hour care.
About eight years ago, I developed arthritis, which led to a hip replacement and a permanent bad back. I have degenerative disc disease, a condition where your spinal discs are destroyed by arthritis and the bones begin to slide out of line and collapse. It hurts sometimes. A few years ago, menopause knocked me flat. I was tired all the time. I went dry. My husband’s penis felt to me like it was covered with broken glass. I could still get sexual release by other methods, but the idea of approaching sex at all was discouraging.
Before I lost my job in tech, I saw the writing on the wall and applied to law school. My medical problems accelerated while I was getting my law degree, a grueling process in the best of times. I had three of my ten recent surgeries while in law school, as well as numerous diagnostic and palliative procedures, usually involving needles in my back, hips and knees. I began taking pain pills. My sex drive went missing. I mention all these factors because I want to be clear that my sexual withdrawal from my husband had nothing to do with him and was not a result of changed feelings on my part. It was physical and to some extent, social, in that the lack of a safety net focussed the stress of my mother’s long-term illness on me in very damaging way.
Around the time I started having health problems, my husband and I met Stephanie, a delightful young artist and stripper who worked on our magazine, Frighten the Horses. My husband and Stephanie dated for several years. She remained our friend after they stopped dating. She was always welcome in my house. I liked her because she was a hoot and she treated my husband well. The fact that she was 17 years younger than me and had a perfect body did not faze me; my husband was with me for reasons beyond looks or age, and the bond between us was not altered by this beautiful young woman. If anything, I was relieved that he had someone he loved and who was a refuge from our stresses.
Stephanie at 25 in 1994
A few years later, he began dating Yvonne, a graduate student whose dissertation merges linguistics and physics. She’s one of the few people I’ve met whom I consider smarter than me. She’s also much younger and they seem to have a very hot sexual relationship. I invite Yvonne over once in a while for dinner and we recently did a project together. These are just a couple of the lovely women my husband has dated since we’ve been together, and they are the ones whom I bless for making his life better when I couldn’t.
A year and a half after I graduated from law school, having resigned myself to a life of illness, stress, seizures and pain, I came out the other side of the turbulence. My mom had passed away. The doctors miraculously patched me up into reasonable shape. Though I’m no longer an athlete, I get around pretty well. I’m not tired anymore. My libido came roaring back to the level I enjoyed in my 30s. Menopause was defeated by life-affirming hormones, and sex no longer feels painful. In fact, it feels great, which is lovely for me and very nice for my husband.
Now that the horrible period is over, I have the satisfaction of knowing that my husband was not forced to pay for my illness with enforced celibacy. I was never tempted to ask him to share in my sexual limbo. He gave me more than most men would have given, but he did not give up -- nor did I try to take from him -- his identity as a sexual being. We are together because we love each other, have a life together, are emotionally attached. He was heroically faithful to me, taking care of me physically, financially and emotionally. He had lovers with my knowledge and approval. What kind of bitch would I be to begrudge him that R & R when I couldn’t even perform sexually? While I have guilt, perhaps unnecessary, for what I put him through, there is none over denying him sex. In 23 years, he and I have had absolutely no drama over sex. How many married couples can say that?
What’s sauce for the goose, etc. Recently, I began corresponding with an online friend and it turned into sex very quickly. Fooling around on the internet was completely new to me, but I’m a quick study. As many people who have love affairs have discovered, your married sex life improves, too. There has been no negative fallout from my online affair, which has in fact progressed to a couple of face to face meetings. My new lover and I are happy and energized by the affair. Neither of us has any desire to leave our spouses. Neither feels the need to blow up our lives, hurting those who have family and social connections to the couples we are in.
My husband is happy for me. He supports my love affair, while continuing to enjoy a relationship with Yvonne. We are reclaiming our own sex life. Neither of us tells any lies. Let that sink in. No lies, ever. How many married couples can say that?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
lila k. ashina
sagemerlin
dailyforeclosure
Aunt Mabel
Tbear47150
Robelle
Salon.com
Comments
denese
My problem Sirineta, is that I think that just about everybody's better than me. What are ya gonna do?
You've tackled a monster here. This is one of those topics few will attempt, let alone express with clarity. You've not only claimed it, you've famed it. Refreshingly candid. Rated.
"The American myth of love and marriage is a recipe for emotional disaster. We still pay lip service to the notion that young people will fall in love and meet each other’s physical and emotional needs for the rest of their lives. That’s obviously ridiculous but we have no other model of a “good” relationship."
is a shitty thing to read on your anniversary. i hope you're very happy in your relationships, but mine ain't obviously ridiculous. it will be a great day when we can just talk about the ways we construct our lives without assaulting those people who choose differently.
Persephone, it's not exhausting. Lying and cheating is exhausting. When you can talk about stuff, it's so much easier. I wish I understood jealousy better, I don't have advice about that.
Mr. Mustard, you are as kind as always. Thanks for considering my argument.
Harp, there may be others like me out there, but it's hard to come out of the closet about this. There was a brief moment when it was a cool thing to do, and I just stayed there.
Thank you, denese. It can be done when you're both on the same page.
JK, you nailed it. Jealousy is learned. It's an attitude thing. Growing up, I learned to love and protect my siblings, to share, not compete with them. I guess it's a foundation. It's liberating not to think about yourself and whether you are getting your due all the time.
Kerry, thank you so much for coming by and commenting, and for your support of this piece.
John, nobody's better than you for the right person. Nearly all my husband's women have been better looking than me, but we're right for each other. There is no one better than you for the person or people who you click with.
Scupper, thank you so much and I'm so glad to see you. Yeah, I procrastinated about a month before finally doing this piece because it was intimidating to challenge such a basic idea in our society.
Very interesting and well written post.
Ablonde, thanks for your kind words and you're absolutely right. Stressful relationships are between people of different temperaments.
Lisa, thank you so much.
Cartouche, I was thinking that I could not stand to be married if I didn't have a man who gave me so much freedom. I need my own space, my own interests, my own friends, to travel alone once in a while. We have so much in common but our marriage is not about togetherness with a gun to your head.
Verbal, thanks so much for your powerful words. I'm glad I was able to part the clouds, as it were.
And Yet, thank you so much.
As I've grown older, I've come to believe as you do in a theoretical way. However, I have yet to see any of the polyamorous couples of my acquaintance be as successful as you describe your relationship to be. It is rare in human nature for jealousy to be in abeyance and mutual love and respect to be so enduring. Congratulations on your success.
Rated.
You are one hell of a writer, and I know you did really well in law school.
I admire your honesty and forthright storytelling.
Rated and will digg-nify.
Rated.
Hi blue, thank you for reading. I respect other people's choices and their recognition of their own needs. We're not all the same. As long as you're happy.
bstrangely, I'm sorry you felt that my point was directed at you on your anniversary. Most people have several partners in their lives and half of all American marriages end in divorce. Obviously, most people do not meet that one person who fulfills all their needs early in life. Perhaps I should have said it's ridiculous it assume this will happen for everybody, as is the myth.
Juliet, thank you for your wonderful comment!
fireeyes, thank you, that is a large part of my point. It's far more damaging to make promises you can't keep than to just lay it out there in the first place. You, I'm sure, had and will continue to have lots of opportunities, and aren't opportunities great ;-)
However, in all the multiple partner relationships I've witnessed personally there has always been a lot of drama, pain, denial, and manipulation. It's something that to me sounds great in theory but never quite translated into reality, atleast, not based upon what I've seen. In short, I've seen the same drama and issues go on in a multiple partnership relationship that go on in monogamous ones, they just have been denied for the most part and there is always a veneer of pretending to be "great" and "more advanced" than people who are monogamous while the same dynamics are going on in the background of the psyches, simply expressed in a different form.
I understand why this denial goes on, especially due to the stigma around sexuality and polyamory from the general public but the same issues are there. There are also issues of sexual addiction, avoidance of intimacy using sex, (ironically) people running over their own feelings of monogamy to be with someone who's not, etc.
I guess in summation, I don't think it's any better or worse than monogamy is. I don't think all polyamorist types are slutty and I don't think all monogamists are insecure. I think it's up to the perspective of the people involved and the different issues in their subconscious that draw them to either one.
This shall be bookmarked. And who could argue?
Like I said I have both the monogamy and the open relationships, I have the fuck buddies, flings, yet I haven't had a one night stand yet. Shucks I heard they are fun. LOL!
Basically if the grounds for the relationship are laid out in the beginning and everyone is in mutual understanding everything will work out. But on the latter if it isn't all laid out in and the mutual understanding isn't there then all hell breaks out. For the most part when a relationship is started most of us just assume that everything is in the clear and what is expected. Most people don't normally discuss the grounds of the relationship until it is too late and the relationship has ended badly. Which is why so many relationship end badly...more like road flares after a huge crash of lust and passion. But then again I no expert on relationships at all... LOL Great post and very nicely written,..loved it.
It's great that you get to live your life the way you see fit. It's also great that others who hold similar views on the matter, but who may have been suppressed, get to hear a fresh perspective. But that doesn't mean we all feel that way. Monogamy is for me and my partner - not because of guilt, shame, fear or societal rejection, but because we are biologically programmed that way. It's what we crave.
Rated.
To me, its like that new drug all the kids are trying. It looks like fun. Lot’s of people are into it. Doing it once won’t get me hooked. Who knows, I may even like it.
My answer is still the same. You do your thing and I’ll do mine. We can still be friends, and there’ll be a lot more for you if I don’t participate.
I was going to say--I know a very few people for whom this sort of thing works. Then I realized that those very few people are actually friends of Sirenita and Mark's, which would seem to bear out the 'VERY few' aspect of it. My views on polyamory as a lifestyle are thus influenced by being a not-always-consenting adult on the fringes of such.
So for the record--please be careful when propositioning single women, as a couple. Not all of us are flattered by the assumption that we will be content to be the third wheel in someone else's relationship.
Ditto with designating 'primary, secondary, and tertiary' relationships. I once had a boyfriend ask me to "commit to being at least seconds." Hello? What does that even MEAN? For him it meant the safety of a 'commitment' without the attendant responsibilities, while for me it meant giving up any sort of reasonable control over my circumstances.
In fact, the reason that polyamory is problematic is less about 'jealousy' (often merely a convenient excuse for shaming someone who is already dealing with having his or her life upended) than about pragmatism. Yes, it's 'pragmatic' to get one's needs met by different people at different times. But it is also difficult to shuffle commitments and responsibilities among an ever-shifting group of people without someone getting landed with WAY more than his or her share of the burdens, particularly when there are children involved. Often, one person's freedom is drastically curtailed, even destroyed, in the name of the 'freedom' of the partner.
I realize that this is a gross over-generalization, based on my own past experiences. I also realize that more traditional relationships are also subject to the same critique. But I do think that polyamory is more than commonly subject to abuse. Most people can scarcely handle ONE major commitment, let alone several.
Neon_Artemis, thank you for your comment and I totally agree with you. You've added something valuable to the discussion.
deepcleav, amen.
APC2008, I'm not sure I agree about the hardwiring. According to statistics and biology, a lot of people, probably most, are not hardwired for monogamy. There's a certain amount of cultural training and personal decision-making that affects your behavior. If you look at primate studies, there is competition and jealousy, but the chimps, for example, are clearly not hardwired for monogamy. Maybe all relationship stuff, like anything biology-based, is messy.
I've always said the ideal situation would be a compound, with one big house for communal meals and the like, and a couple three guest houses - one for me, one for the presumed spouse, maybe another for genuine guests. I value my privacy and self-actualization Too Much. The last two husbands always started with the, "Don't you think it's time to go to bed now?" And I hate sleep. Resent the hell out of it. [Next is the, "Are you going to have anOther?!" referring to beer or scotch or wine]
But here's a clue for you all. Whenever somebody says this: "Neither of us tells any lies", you know you've heard the biggest lie of all. An honest person admits his lies, a dishonest one says he does not lie. Seems everyone's a freaking politician nowadays, always trying to sell their bullshit.
But for myself, I find that my needs have changed. I partied hardy and enjoyed it, but I've met someone who I'm excited to "settle down" with and marry. We are monogomous and it's a non-issue.
I'm just very impressed that you realized at such an early age that it is YOU who makes the rules in your life. Many people live an entire life without realizing this.
Good luck and thanks for sharing.
Owl, thank you, and I can't argue with that. It's all about being true to yourself.
"road flares after a huge crash of lust and passion" -- damn, that's good, fireeyes! I too love all the varieties of sexual encounter, although I'm a bit light on the one-night stands myself.
tregibbs, thanks for reading. Actually, I think it's scientifically accurate that monogamy is not the biological default for humans. If you look at species that are truly monogamous, such as wolves, there is no question of going outside of the relationship for sex. That's what it means to be biologically monogamous, as opposed to monogamous by choice, which is also perfectly valid. My point is that monogamous behavior is not automatic in humans.
Thank you, OES!
Spin, I agree with you. It's about doing your own thing and not judging others. The great thing about non-monogamy is, there's lots for everyone, you never run out. ;-)
Petty Lady, excuse me? I don't know you, and Mark and I have certainly never propositioned you or anyone else as a couple. We are not swingers, though I have nothing against those who swing. As it happens, both Mark and I are more propositioned than propositioning, me because I'm a woman and him because he's got a following as an erotic writer. You seem to assume we're sexual predators, always on the hunt. That is not the case. As for making commitments and taking care of his lovers, no one does that better than Mark. Your marriage can take precedence over other relationships without your being an asshole to other lovers. I'm cool with being second string to someone in a committed relationship. It's more important to me not to damage anyone's life than to demand my share of attention from a lover.
I'm happy that alternative lifestyles and alternative families are getting more and more accepted as time goes on.
I am definitely one that can happily report that having an affair improves your married sex life. (My wife and I often brought a pretty girl or cute boy to bed with us both as well. I found "sharing" another person we both found hot with my wife to be incredibly sexy.)
My wife and I have been together for about a a decade now, and over that time, I've had female and male lovers both. She's had female and male lovers both. We've both just been... well, turned on and happy for each other. We have also gone years without having sex with anyone else, when we felt like that and when we wanted to focus on each other.
Rated.
It's been my observation that the majority of people can't manage sex without a transferal of loyalties. The problem most folks with open marriages whom I have known has encountered is that the new young lover becomes the new spouse. The old spouse gets shafted.
Your marriage has endured a lot and obviously works; I question whether it would continue to work so well if one of your husband's lovers got accidentally pregnant and had his child, for example. Or if one of them turned out to be not-so-mellow about playing second fiddle and demanded he leave you. There are just so many things that could go wrong.
LeMichel, thank you so much. I treasure this comment, as I so believe I am and have always been some kind of radical.
Connie, I'm with ya there and I could not be married unless I had the kind of autonomy I have with my husband. He lets me stay up late with very little protest ;-)
Harry, I expected to push some buttons, but that was harsh and personal, and I don't even know what point you're making. Do you think I'm selling something or running for something? In fact, my husband and I do not tell lies about sex, because we don't need to. If something isn't forbidden, you don't need to lie about it. Simple. You think you know me because you, and no other poster, has been around the block? Who's selling what?
I don't have any issue with anyone's preferences or behavior (it's none of my damn business and FWIW, I agree with your arguments about the hypocrisy and problems in many so-called monogamous relationships). What always bothers me is judgments towards another person's choices or preferences. I get that you've probably encountered a lot of judgment towards yours, but I also hear judgment from you towards monogamy. Perhaps because you say you don't understand it and never will. I think we're doomed to judge what we don't try to understand.
But contrary to what you suggest here, monogamous relationships can also have all the integrity, commitment, sexual passion and depth you describe. So please do not group all monogamous people together, just as you would not wish to be grouped in any way yourself, but (I assume) wish to be seen as an individual.
That's all.
incandescent, thank you. It's a myth that non-monogamous or bi people are always on the prowl. Sex is a lovely, life-giving thing, and it ebbs and flows like everything else in life.
aim, it's mutual!
Allie, you bring up some good points. I think it's critically important to have rules (ethics, moral, whatever you want to call them) especially when going outside the norm. True anarchy is taking responsibility for your behavior, not, as the term is often used, just running riot. The exact same problems can come up in a monogamous relationship except that the blowback is much worse. In our case, we simply committed to our marriage and stuck to it.
Kathy, thank you!
As for always being on the prowl - that has nothing to do with being either bisexual or non-monogamous. Some of the most predatory people I know are single, heterosexual men and women who hang out at bars. ;) They practice monogamy - serial monogamy. :D
Feed the Cat, thank you so much!
I appreciate all the comments here and thank everyone who took the time to comment. I need to take a bit of a break but I'll be back and read every single comment. Thanks again.
rated for truth and beauty of writing.
For the record, I don't lie either.
Oh yeah, and Online, I'm Don Juan, offline, I'm uh, what is that word on the cue card? OH yeah, I'm Tink. Crap!! ;)
Great article.
I have encouraged my husband to see other women but he is too shy or old-fashioned to actually venture out. I am very insecure because of my looks and it would actually make me feel better if I knew that he had a beautiful woman in his life. We are intellectual equals and have similar interests, however, sometimes I feel that I need someone else in my life but because of his reluctance, I hesitate.
I feel better just knowing there is someone who might understand. Thank you.
One would think that the more "cultured" a human is, that the more UN-jealous they should be. But this isn't the case. So to me, this is a natural biological instinct, there for a reason.
But I didn't agree with your opinion on how the "the notion that young people will fall in love and meet each other’s physical and emotional needs for the rest of their lives. That’s obviously ridiculous"
It's not that I don't agree with it because I'm a romantic, or wearing naive glasses...it's because it can and has happened. But I would agree in saying, which actually might be more to your point and I just missed it, that it's most certainly not across the board. How can any of us know anything pro or con concerning the "rest of any couples lives"
Well done SirenitaLake...glad a woman wrote this...Sadly, I think the comment section might have carried a different tone if this subject was tackled by an equally eloquent man.
And of course...
Rrrrrrrrrated!
Im inspired so this will be a longish reply. attached like a barnacle to your own. it really should be in my blog, but Im not ready to come out of the closet like you yet :p ... when I do write it, I will maybe use this as a rough draft!!
maybe I will entitle it "frighten the horses"!!! brilliant title for your mag!! you should include that full quote there & its origin/history!! maybe in another blog!!
Ive been deviously sprinkling comments on (non)monogamy and polyamory all over the place here on OS since I joined, and recently wrote, "I wish I knew of a post where someone talked about it working". so your post is synchronicity & a sort of cyber godsend. thanks for coming out of the closet in such an "open" way. gives me some courage to do the same. but not yet anyway. its just too personal .... instead I will continue to splatter comments about my true feelings everywhere .... nobody can reconstruct the whole picture that way :)
at least you've dipped your toes in the water, and from the supportive comments, the waters mostly fine...
as for "wiring", I have studied a lot of evolutionary psychology (much of what your article is about without you mentioning it.. it seems you have studied it deeply too) & have a blog post on that.. but even as though I am sympathetic to polyamory, I think something like SEXUAL JEALOUSY is an emotion that is VERY DEEPLY/STRONGLY HARDWIRED into the human brain, and also other animal brains.
I believe it is one of the HARDEST internal human instincts to overcome, and this difficulty is encoded as/reflected in massive cultural resistance. [side note: scientifically, probably, also, homosexuality and heterosexuality are usually genetically encoded & hardwired into the developing brain]
you provide a model for what it might "look like" to overcome sexual jealosy.
in your essay, you do not confront that much what it means to "others" that you date. it is a polyamorist-central perspective. and therefore, polyamory can creep into narcissism. I think it is fair if you are open with them, but... I think some ppl would agree to date you against their own monogamous natures. that is very tricky. hence, imho, polyamorists almost have to be much more highly sensitive..
in polyamory, you have to mindread people and actually extract their inner feelings that may be contradictory to what they confess. they may profess they are ok with polyamory only to be close to you, but then create emotional histrionics related to the lack of monogamy. hence something sort of like "gaydar" but perhaps even more finely attuned.
Ive argued that polyamorists suffer more persecution and intolerance than any of the following groups: gays, lesbians, bisexuals. because they are often targeted for criticism by all of those groups.
the pool is very limited!! in some ways you can only successfully hook up with other polyamorists, because all the [serial] monogamists are really looking for LTRs, long term relationships, or, as in the Matrix, The [Chosen] One.
people talk about polyamory as "exhausting". what really is exhausting is a polyamorist trying to hook up with a monogamist. what is exhausting is trying to have a relationship with anyone who is unclear about their own desires, preferences, boundaries, dark side, shadows. who think love is about immature games eg of possession or ownership.
and heck, even polyamorists suffer unrequited love!! there is no solution for that in 3D!! imagine that you had a strong crush on a monogamist!! even though polyamorists are sort of like "love contortionists", sometimes, love in 3d feels like a rubiks cube. so maybe the real tyranny is that of CATEGORIES.
the combination of fanaticism, hypocrisy, and other-type-intolerance that some have for monogamy seems quite similar to religious fundamentalism/extremism to me. actually, a lot of religious dogma is centered around monogamy. why is that? like I say, probably, human instincts, culturally manifested/enforced. deep in both human genetic/mimetic code.
you are very lucky to find a polyamorous partner. apparently you made it a dealbreaker for your "primary". I searched for many, many years and asked many of my gfs about the possibility. they all generally rejected it outright. therefore, I gave up, feeling I was "pushing the river" and searching for a unicorn.
for me, bottom line: there is a pussycats doll song. I love their lyrics, interpreted polyamorous. "be careful what you wish for because you just might get it." "maybe next lifetime, possibly".
look at how monogamy is encoded in deep, cultural memes. like the centuries old story of cinderella & other fairy tales-- recycled into modern "chick flick" forms. but, it seems that marrying for love is a fairly new cultural phenomenon, historically speaking. seems to me, culture is moving in the direction of more love. which makes me think polyamory will be more culturally acceptable in the long term future.
I think, its not a coincidence that you live in SF!!!!
you say "polyamory" and other terms do not do justice to your lifestyle, that there is no good term. even "polyamorists" seem to be constantly "on the prowl" as you write. how about a brand new term?? lets invent one on OS... maybe.. Sex Positive?? Flexible?? Multidimensional?? Tolerant?? Negotiable?? Accepting?? Empathetic?? What Feels Good?? Uncategorizable?? N/A-- for Not Applicable? None of the Above??
anyway, my philosophy, lets all try to discover new categories in the world, respect them, and then defy them. thanks for expanding the human horizons.
true Love transcends all boundaries/categories....
So, "to each his own" as my mother in law would say.
For us, part of the marriage is being with each other during the hard times.
d
What beauty! What style! What grace! Oh what a writer you are!
I soooo unerstand where you are coming from. The old cliche, "Been there - Done that" is entirely accurate in this case.... starting waaay back in 1966.
My last, and most beloved, wife was fully bi and just not built for monogamy. I was most fortunate to have been previously married to someone who was also non-monogamous. I learned much from her.
You are absolutely right when you say that this life-styleis a valid and legitimate one. Not for everyone; just as homosexuality or bisexuality are not for everyone, but for those who find it comfortable and natural.
I have no idea whether or not we are "hard-wired" for monogamy or whether it is "learned" behaviour. It matters little since however itcomes about - it comes about.
The most important point you make here has nothing whatsoever to do with sexuality. It has to do with building and having a solid, enduring, and fulfilling relationship with your life-partner. One built on openness, honesty, and a desire for your partner to find happiness, joy, pleasure and contentment in life.
Kudos to you and all with whom you share that happiness.
It seemed likely that the generation born after 1980 would simply start devising new relationships and contracts. Open marriages, plural marriages, anything.
Yeah, and marijuana decriminalization would surely come by 1985, too.
It all just didn't happen. It's just a change the culture resists, strongly. I agree, from what I know, there's zero anthropological backing for monogamy being inherent in the species, but something can embed itself very deeply in a culture. That period, "since inheritance", that Ms. Lake mentions, is thousands of years(!).
Since Tom Wolfe's "Hooking Up" book, accounts of casual sex at universities, around 2002, I've had a weather eye out for depictions in fiction of non-monogamous relationships in a positive light.
Basically, nope. I just saw "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" the other night, as of-the-moment a movie as they get - recent pop-culture references throughout, daring full-frontal male nudity, cutting edge humour. (I loved it and recommend it.)
The protagonist is turned to a depressive wreck by the revelation his girlfriend has been cheating for a year. To not do a spoiler, I can only say that a major plot turn hinges on the "obvious" utter unacceptability of cheating to the extent of not forcing away an aggressive offer of oral sex before pulling back from it after 15 seconds.
I can't think of any movie, TV series, or bestseller book offhand that does anything but equate exclusivity with "serious relationship". The whole meaning of "You know it's serious" is depicted as actually losing all sexual desire for other mates. (That much, *may* be a natural and inherent phenomenon in the early months or year of a relationship. Something about "oxytocin"?)
It's true that adultery is common; but it's true, too, that not that many adulterers, learning that their spouse has also been cheating, say, "Oh, yay, she thinks the way I do, we can have an open marriage". They are wounded to the core. I suspect that adultery rates haven't changed much in the thousands of years we've had monogamy - but that hasn't eliminated monogamy.
I can see things changing, but nobody hold your breath.
Congrats for the writing, for the EP, and for being so true to yourself.
Kisses!
Marcela
I don't understand why having sex with people who aren't your primary partner makes either of you immune to lying. I really honestly believe that I'm in a happily monogamous marriage, but I recognize that the definition of betrayal requires one party to believe something that is not true. Everyone lies, often for no good reason. Faith in a non-monogamous partner is trust that can be broken. Even if you don't have the particular risk of being lied to about monogamy, your open, honest communication is no less difficult to fake than in a monogamous relationship.
http://theulcer.wordpress.com/
BUT...we can't all (or most) just keep remarrying every four years. We have to find a way to make peace with our biological and psychological realities.
I would strongly recommend "The Future Of Love" by Daphne Rose Kingma. She doesn't have any easy answers but does address the complexity of these issues intelligently, from a psychological and spiriitual perspective.
Great essay.
aphrabehn, I'm so sorry, that sounds like a very difficult and frustrating situation. Sounds like you and your partner are very different in this respect. I hope you can talk it out.
Julie, thanks for sharing this with Karen and I'm glad she liked it. At least you guys can discuss things, that's what matters the most.
Phaedo, you're absolutely right. Self-knowledge is essential.
Ensign, you really express how I feel when you say "our commitment goes much deeper than any sexual encounter ever could." When you feel this, the importance of being the only sexual partner starts to fade.
Leslie, thank you and I'm glad you don't lie, either. I wish nobody felt they had to lie. Isn't is liberating to know that you don't have explosive secrets? I couldn't live with that.
Tink, isn't there a rule against dating yourself? I hope you never find out what you've been doing, or there will be hell to pay ;-)
lifehalflived, I relate to your insecurity. I'm not as young as I was when I was sexually active; there's more fear of rejection when you're older. We should talk.
jimmymac1025, you were one of my first readers. You really encouraged me with your matter of fact comment on my addiction piece, made me willing to take greater risks. Thank you for all your great comments.
cinamingrl, excellent point. I think there are variations in capacity for jealousy as there are in any other personal traits. It may have been adaptive at one time, but so was having sex with a lot of partners. Both things exist in the mess of human behavior.
So, as you ask others to take a more open look at your open marriage, you really need to take a more open look at the possibilities of the more traditional arrangement.
Raving, I hope it works out with that boy. At least you know what you're getting. I think that I was unusual in appreciating this type of arrangement when I was young, at least, it was unusual in my generation. As women get older, they come appreciate freedom more, especially as my generation was not led to expect it. I'd be interested to see how this works for younger people.
Bees Tone, that's praise indeed. If I make my choices comprehenisble, the piece succeeded.
Mesmersi, thank you for reading without judgments. Looking at relationships really is fascinating.
Michael, thanks for stopping by on the way to bed! Sweet dreams.
I hope you do write your own post about this, because you have a lot of valuable ideas. I'll just address one, about the pool of people to date. I think you are correct that you have to mind-read a little when starting a relationship with someone who thinks they're ok with your lifestyle, but who really isn't. My college boyfriend was like that, and he never told me he minded my other lovers until years later. He's a naturally and effortlessly monogamous person but I think he felt pressure to be hip and not demand a monogamous relationship. Of course, I didn't know how he felt or I would not have allowed that to happen.
That said, there is a lot to learn about having relationships. You don't get it right the first few times. That's why older people tend to form longer-lasting relationships -- they've tried and broken a few before getting the hang of it.
Thanks so much for your interesting comment.
You wrote:
"Well done SirenitaLake...glad a woman wrote this...Sadly, I think the comment section might have carried a different tone if this subject was tackled by an equally eloquent man."
Actually, I don't think I was anywhere near this eloquent - I wrote a similar post about polyamory just over a month ago, on April 24th. It was highly rated (no, it wasn't this good at all) and it generated quite a few comments - over 70 of them, as I recall.
The response was mostly overwhelmingly positive, from men and women. But I am glad a woman wrote a post about this as well, because there was *one* comment on my blog from a woman that stated it would really be remarkable to hear about this from a woman's point of view, and that it would be more interesting if my wife had a boyfriend. (She apparently missed the part where I stated my wife had male lovers as well as female lovers in the past.)
Now here is a blog post about a woman with a similarly positive experience with a poly lifestyle/open marriage - that's awesome, I think.
But no, the post "written by a man" (me) wasn't treated much differently. I'll defend the good women of OS here on that.
Larry, thanks for your eloquent comment. I'm glad you had such a wonderful wife. I only mention the hardwiring aspect because it's assumed that monogamy is "natural." When a behavior is natural, the critter does it naturally, not like we humans do monogamy, with a lot of outside rules. But it is a choice as well, like being bi is natural *and* a choice for some folks, like your wife and me.
Roy, your comment is brilliant and I hope everyone reads it. I agree that there are few sympathetic depictions of non-monogamy in popular culture. I would hope that with a cognitive framework for positive non-monogamy, people would not have the absurd reaction of being angry at their mate for doing what they themselves are doing.
Wow, Marcela, that's a great compliment. It would be nice to be from the future.
Sara, perhaps that "no lies" sentence could have been clearer. I meant we don't have to lie about sex with other people in order to preserve our marriage and spare each other's feelings. Perhaps we're as likely to lie about where the money went or how the car got dented as anyone else; a lie about a fender bender would not be a time bomb in a marriage in the same way a lie about an affair would be. My concern is not for moral purity, it's for the damage to relationships and the social stability they bring.
Annette, thank you.
lowridershoe, *that's* the rebuttal? What a waste of time. Some fool fantasizing that I have cosmetic surgery and dye my hair? The picture in the piece is of Stephanie, who was about 25 at the time it was taken. The avatar is me. I'm sure anything you could have said would have been more interesting than this trollish bullshit.
Sandra, thank you so much! I really appreciate your comment. Thanks for considering my ideas.
Coconut, I bet your next try is more successful. We get better with practice in relationships. I met my husband when I was 34.
Brie, thank you! We try to keep it simple, which we manage to do fairly well because we are both allergic to drama and drama queens.
Tony, that's really beautiful. I'm not attempting to represent all of monogamy and I said, in fact, that there are people who are by nature monogamous and I respect their achievement. My concern is people who are not monogamous by inclination but are trying unsuccessfully to be. Monogamy doesn't need me for a cheerleader. Your comment is a great illustration of successful monogamy.
Patricia, that was a really sweet comment and I thank you.
Shivaun, I'm so glad this is working for you. It's about being true to yourself and being lucky enough to find someone to share that with.
Incandescent, I think I remember that comment. It took me a long time to get up the nerve to write this. I think OS does good things for me in the getting up the nerve department.
Natalie, I totally agree, it's the deceit that toxic. Thank you for coming by.
Elena, thank you so much. There doesn't seem to be a necessity anymore for having just one relationship option, does there?
I'd be happy for some gamy, let alone mono or poly.
"Okay, honey--it's your date night! I'm going to sleep out in the family room where Mike and his friends are up drinking beer and playing video games!"
"All right sugar! See you in the morning! Tell the kids to save enough milk and eggs so I can bring Bambi breakfast in bed!"
"Breakfast in bed! No fair! I want breakfast in bed!"
"It's king size, and Bambi takes up a lot less room than you do, no offense, honey, love you, okay, fair enough? So you can join us if you want."
"But if I join you, you know the dog will want to come in. And you know she's been peeing all over the beds and couches lately."
"Oh damn. And Bambi is allergic to dogs."
"I've got an idea. Why don't you both treat yourselves to a night at the Red Roof Inn?"
"Great idea!"
Thank you for your insight into the human mating process. I am very interested in this process so someday we can stop it and stop the humans from breeding so much.
Grin.
I think that there are two related, but separate aspects to the open marriage you describe: honesty, and polyamory. Personally, I believe the former is important, the latter less so. In fact I can't help feeling pangs of sympathetic jealousy when you describe your husbands affairs with younger or "smarter" women. But it is, as you point out, lies that are so destructive to marriage more than adultery itself.
My wife and I have lived apart in the past, and will shortly be separating again. Frequent sex and young kids kept us together under the same roof, and the fact that the kids are grown, and the lack of frequent sex has let us drift apart. We care for and love each other like close family. But unlike you, we feel no desire to remain together, nor do we consider separation as "blowing up our lives". I have a similar problem to you because we've had an unorthodox marital relationship that not many people "get".
As for me, I look forward to monogamy... but frankly, I'll take just about any ogomy that comes my way! I'm a polyagomist. I'll take anything...small farm animals, fire hydrants...okay, I'm just be silly.
ha....I'm laughing really hard right now.
++ I know I demand monogamy from my partner (and I expect it to be demanded of me). It has nothing to do with "control."++
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with applying structure to a relationship, assuming both partners are in agreement with the terms of their relationship contract. (And all relationships *are* contracts, in a manner of speaking.)
However, "demand" is an awfully controlling word to use, while stating with the next breath that it's not a control issue.
Just sayin'.
A well-deserved tip of my hat, and of course, rated.
Maturity is understanding the shades of gray between the black and the white.
For me, and for my fiancé, monogamy is the only way we could possibly be. We simply have no need or desire for other people to be involved in our sex lives, or in our deepest feelings. It's just how we are--just like you're how you are.
Don't be a hater!
That was me for 2 marriages. Took me till about age 35 to finally work it out and get the self-confidence to declare what I'd always known ... the idea that its impossible to love more than one person at a time is absurd.
I am now happily poly. I tend not to "rank" my relationships like you do ... my primary is whoever I am with at the time. But then again, I also don't share resources or finances with anyone at the moment as I live alone.
Rated (would have rated it a dozen times if it let me) ... we need more people speaking intelligently and thoughtfully about the poly life. Thanks for an excellent addition to the milieu.
That said, I'm skeptical that many people can maintain a long-term relationship with non-monogamy. You've managed it and others do, but it really depends on the good fortune of being people who are compatible in their attitude toward monogamy/non-monogamy. I would think it would also depend on being able to work out ground rules that both could be comfortable with.
Personally, I don't think marriage works all that well for most people. I think it's the best way to raise children, but beyond that I've not seen lots of people who really thrive in a long-term marriage.
1WomansVu, thank you!
Beth, there is a lot to be said for love with a fire hydrant, or anything that stays wet. ;-)
Siri62, I think it's just a choice of words, but demanding rather than negotiating is not my style, either.
Lea, you piece was perfect and made me feel better about sticking my neck out.
AshKW, thank you. I tip my hat (see avatar) to the OS community for handling this discussion in such a respectful manner.
M. Chariot, you nailed it. " I've always felt that there is a biological imperative for both monogamy AND promiscuity." That is absolutely true. The messiness of emotion, the shades of gray, are what make us human. Expecting perfection, whether perfect monogamy or perfect non-monogamy, leads to unhappiness.
dcvdickens, thank you! I love the comments from happy monogamists who do not feel threatened by my choices. It gives me hope that we can understand and accept each other.
Lyle, 35 is young to figure out who you are and what you need. The pain of people who cannot live up to the monogamous ideal and the partners who suffer because they feel betrayed was largely what I was addressing in this is piece.
Suzn, you get my point, why destroy a relationship that works otherwise over a sexual encounter? A lot of marriages of whatever nature don't work. I see the freedom to have other sexual partners in my own marriage as part and parcel of the freedom to live my own life side by side with my best friend and lover. Some people prefer marriage to be a cocoon; I happen to prefer a launching pad.
First, let me say, having been there, that, sadly, most people who "experimented" with different social mores came out feeling bad in the end. But, this reflects poorly on them, NOT you!
Second, its very hard to be original and as you know small numbers of enlightened people have lived this way from Day 1.
I'm not sure if I can reconcile what I know to be true ... that this can work, with the idealistic hope that you have the one person who is your twin flame type mate. Oh yeah, no matter- we are not all the SAME- different strokes; different folks- HATERS GO HOME!
You are now a hero of mine for doing the same for non-monogamy.
First, I understand "Yikes", and I'm glad that your honesty and courage paid off, I think you've pulled off a very tricky challenge in making a case for something that threatens so many at the core of their lives and self-images, and you've gracefully and graciously acknowledged every comment
It's seemed to me since I was old enough to think about it, that monogamy isn't hard-wired in humans, that the ideal of women's sexual fidelity serves a societal purpose that goes hand-in-glove with patriarchal authoritarianism ("I'm going to own this woman and her sexuality, and her babies will be mine, Goddammit!"), that jealousy is an expression of insecurity and low self-esteem, that love isn't in limited supply and doesn't get used up by passing it around
I also learned how easy it is when loving freely to love carelessly and leave hurt feelings behind
I believe that "natural" human relationships have a healthy range as wide as the range of human gender/sexual expression, and that's supported by the range of attitudes and experiences expressed in this comment thread
I think you and Mark have been really fortunate to find such compatibility in an open relationship
SupHerb, I've been meaning to read that book. Thanks for reminding me. You are very kind to mention me in the same breath with someone like Richard Dawkins.
Roy, thank you so much for having the commitment to read through the piece and the comments, too. Mark and I are indeed lucky, and luck does matter a great deal in relationships. I think in our generation, it was, at least for some, more obvious to question monogamy because it was applied more unfairly than it is today. I remember more than one guy joking "my wife is monogamous" in the bad old days. But it doesn't redeem monogamy for me that men are equally oppressed today by unreasonable expectations.
Cap'n, I'm not the pink-haired chick, unfortunately. That is the incomparable Stephanie, in her punk period.
Hi again, Tony. Sounds like you had a relationship that was healthy and honest and eventually, not what you needed. You prove my point that openness coupled with responsibility (those rules) is just healthier, as you and your ex never had a reason to resent each other and can be friends today.
Your post reminds me, though, perhaps I've gone about it the wrong way, always looking for the primary relationship first, whereas the kind of creature I might actually be is Happily Third Wheel, That's Me. As in, duh Butchy, instead of looking for another polyamorous single person, why not look for a couple already living and well-practiced at it instead? But that's partly about aging--I don't know if I have the energy or emotional interest for the whole shebang anymore, but I'm still up for a steady shag and a good friend.
I feel for people afflicted with jealousy. I know it's a very real torment for them. I don't feel it so much and suspect I got a double dose of gluttony instead. I like what I like and don't mind sharing, nor do I believe in the scarcity principle that sharing will give me less. But then I've been in LDRs so long now, a decadent week/sometimes month once a season is living large, baby!
Thanks! You've helped me with my next personal ad: Third Wheel Looking For Same (BoinkoramaParty) Time Next Season. Would be nice to come in at least third (since I'd still get a medal), but mostly prefer an ongoing fling that's vulnerable enough to be good friends in between.
I haven't blogged here yet; blogging comments is enough of a novel (-writing) procrastination for me at the moment. But I so very much appreciate the conversation you and Incandescent and And Yet (granted, on a different sexual subject) have started here. Your views and shared experiences are a great solace to me as I ponder what type of relationship I'd like to pursue once my ex, who wants a live-in lover, finally finds someone and no longer wants to be "fuck buddies" (even as our intimacy is much deeper than the nomenclature). In fact, I tell her, Why don't you find a live-in lover who doesn't mind our wee, little, grandfather claused-in, relationship on the side? And part of her thinks she could do that, and part of her thinks there just aren't many people who'd be open to that, precisely for the reasons you've said.
Of course, her double standard (she got my dose of jealousy and several other people's) is that she would have to be my only lover, so there I am settling for one-lover-at-a-time-dome again while she's getting a second income (alas, the real need for a live-in lover) and a fling. But I don't mind, really. The sex is great and I can cry and laugh and share my babbling--worry dolls on speed--anxieties with her. Life is good. If only we were raised to let life be that simple and taught one can choose any part of the package and one can choose multiple packages, kind of like family portraits at the mall.
Sorry you've had such a struggle with your health, but glad you're still gambare--fight-o, fight-o!-ing. All the more reason to stay healthy and keep writing about multiplicity for those of us who live your language as a blessed moment to breathe. Thanks, again.
I actually have an anthropology degree and am familiar with those kinds of studies, but non-human primate studies aren't too convincing; behavioral adaptations seem a lot more likely to evolve rapidly than purely physical adaptations, which is why the sexual behavior between even closely-related species differs so dramatically. I base my belief that monogamy is hardwired into most of us on the fact that while there are polygamous cultures (and even a few polyandrous ones), most people in most cultures are expected to marry for life and (ideally) have one partner. Hunter-gatherer cultures, which exhibit the lifestyle that humanity has had for most of its history, are overwhelmingly monogamous.
one of the main things i get from reading this is that if both partners are civilized people who are on the same page about it, and are prepared to deal fairly and honestly with each other, an open relationship is something which would work just fine. also, there's a lot to what you say here about many monogamous relationships being exercises in lies and boredom. that being said, i'm not against monogamy, or against anything which works for the people involved.
This sentence makes me pretty uncomfortable. I can't quite put my finger on it -- something about perhaps you feeling guilty when you aren't sexually available.
In the interest of full disclosure, I participated in non-monogamy for several years, and I did not have a good experience. My experience was full of attempts to intellectualize emotions to death, and I suspect my experience was not unique. There was so much parsing out of feelings, and so many rules, that in the end I actually felt *more* restricted by polyamory than when I was monogamous.
Like another here, my experience was full of manipulation masquerading as concern. There was a lot of pressure to be "ok" with things; and if we weren't, then it was time for a Conversation (god, if I never have to go through one of those again I will die happy). There were those in our group who were actually not cut out for polyamory; and those people got a lot of the others trying to "help" them get over jealousy -- by stating many of the things you've said here: "Monogamy is unnatural"; "jealousy is unnatural"; "being satisfied with one person is unnatural". This led to those people feeling, well, "unnatural" and basically duped by society, and as "failing" to deprogram successfully. It's hard for me to read those things without thinking of the pain they went through.
In your post, you said something like one woman was the only other person you've ever met who was smarter than you. This makes me cringe a little, because the view of the intellectual superiority of one's self and one's choices is rampant in the poly world. Who is "more poly than thou", and all. Monogamy is seen by many as a fool's game; an open relationship with many rules is smarter; and a poly relationship that's completely open, as in, no one is restricted from anything and can date/have sex with anyone at anytime, with no prior authorization, is in the realm of the highly evolved. You say that monogamy is a valid choice for some...but the whole tone of your post is talking about how poly is so much better and more natural; hell, look at the title of it. If you really think monogamy is unnatural then stick to that, don't follow it up with a patronizing "but oh, it may be right for others". I think that many people who have experimented with poly, and found out it's not for them, have been deeply hurt by poly people's thinly veiled ideas that poly is the only "real" way to go.
Your post is well written and thought-out, but frankly, I've heard this all before and it still doesn't feel totally kosher to me.
I realize that I probably have left over hurt feelings and guilt that color my opinions. Your post inspires me to write one of my own, for two reasons: to work through residuals, and to present another, not-so-nice side of how polyamory can play out. To be fair, there was some good: for example, one of my now ex-boyfriend's girlfriends is still one of my closest friends today.
Also, one last thing: I have a spinal cord injury, so there is an interesting parallel between our two experiences already.
Butchie, ne! You're so cool. I recently had occasion to look at Craigs list personals, which, in spite of being rather out there sexually, I was ignorant of. There are all kinds of things on offer, and I gather, lots of takers. Thank you for your encouragement. Gambarimasu.
APC2008, Thanks for contributing from the POV of an anthropoligist. As you know, what is hardwired behavior is a huge discussion, which has been going on in modern form since the 19th century and the advent of Darwin. In the definition I'm using, hardwired behaviors are those that are in some sense physically encoded, that a critter does without being told he should, such as geese migrating or cats purring or pouncing. These behaviors may be honed and adapted to the circumstances, but are not simply learned. Primates of all kinds are spectacular at cultural change, learning and preserving new behaviors, but not all behavioral adaptations are based on biological, physical change and not all are adaptive. Those that are, are not adaptive forever. We need more to breed responsibly than to be in pair groups whose offspring can be reliably traced to a male parent. In fact, there has never, to my knowledge, been a society that had no extramarital sex at all, regardless of the ostensibly enshrined marital arrangement. That there is polygamy at all, along with the incidence of extramarital sex, rules out monogamy as the default species behavior.
Max, I'm thrilled that you remember our magazine and all those other great zines. We may be due for another cycle of sexually-based activism and art. I hope the kids are listening. ;-)
Laurielou, I understand how you might filter my post through your own experience, but there is no similarity. I am not in a polyamorous relationship, that is, a plural relationship. I've never been in one and I can't speak to it. I have a marriage that is traditional in all but the sexual exclusivity. We allow for other sexual partners outside of our marriage. Not a plural relationship, not a threesome, just other places to go for sex in addition to the marriage. I can't answer all your points, but I hope you go back and reread what I wrote and try to be fair. I explicitly said I did not feel guilty for denying my husband sex. It was not my choice. That a person who combines linguistics and physics in their Ph.D. might be smarter than me is like saying Steven Hawking is smarter than me. I like being smart and don't apologize for it, though there have been plenty of times that my brains pissed people off as being inappropriate to my race and gender. But brains are irrelevant in discovering the form of sexual relationship you prefer; that is not an intellectual exercise, it is an emotional one. My point was, I'm not intimidated by younger or more accomplished women, of whom there will always be some in our ambit. I'm me and we like that. Monogamy is the mainstream norm and many, many people are made to feel bad about not fitting that norm. You found yourself in a pressure cooker situation in which another oppressive norm was substituted for the mainstream one. I hate that, too.
No lies, ever, is probably the key. "I'm telling you about it now!" is a poor substitute.
you say you dont consider your relationships polyamorous in a recent comment. you say you cant figure out what to call them. now you are starting to sound like a swinger.. that seems to be a main distinction. it would be helpful if maybe you defined the terms that you reject. for me,
a) polyamory-- not merely about sex but emotions, nonexclusive
b) swingers-- tend to be more about the sex as a sort of recreational play activity and its a "no-no" to develop stronger feelings. maybe more of a 1nite stand/adventure type thing.
but, it seems to me, you cannot keep "having sex" with anyone without developing increasingly strong feelings of attachment. its built into human dna, Id say. at some pt sex always seems to turn into "making love"....
ps as for "frightening the horses," I recognized it as a classic/old quote but no, I didnt recall the details, thx for clarifying that, it would have taken me awhile with google :)
there is a new book by "jenny block" who writes about polyamory. she's got a blog on a site www.tango.com .. a video or two also. havent read the book but I think shes got a great blog. brave, along the lines of sirenitas original post.
I dont know who originated the term, but my understanding is that polyamory is basically about an open relationship where at least one partner accepts the other partners other relationship(s). this is not to say that both partners must have other partners, although that would be one case (as in your case). basically, a primary relationship with one or more secondary satellites so to speak ..
also the "amorous" part means Love, ie feelings/sharing, ie not merely sexual relationships. the 2ndary might be shared among the primary's or not. jenny describes where she once shared one of her lovers, her husband tried it, and then just decided it wasnt for him any more but allowed his wife to continue her "adventures".
"commitment" is defn one of the magic words. what is the commitment of the primaries to each other, and the primary to the 2ndary? it sounds complicated to some, but human relationships are complicated. its about relationships that live in, and embrace the "spaces between" .. polyamory embraces ambiguity.
people who are ambiguity-averse are obviously going to reject it.. I think its basically about people being clear on what their ideas of commitment are, and then trying to work out something where a relationship can exist within those parameters... serial monogamists actually tend to operate under a lot of ASSUMPTIONS instead of clearheaded discussions of what they expect... polyamory brings out into the open all these usually shadowy/peripheral ideas....
for those who think that not merely relationships but arguably, all of LIFE is inherently ambiguous.. it seems to be the Way..
ZaZaCat, thank you, we do have clarity and depth of feeling for each other. I appreciate open-minded readers who do not choose to live like we do. I'm just hoping to raise the question, perhaps indirectly, of what matters most in a relationship. Is it the life you share or knowing he or she never, ever has sex with anyone else? Thanks for coming by.
We were married for 18 years and have two children together, and are now legally divorced but still together. Marriage is a religious concept, anyway. Being told you were a "slut" is also from religion, most likely that bastion of male hypocrisy, the R. Catholic Church. I've told my daughters that marriage is purely optional as we're not religious, and if they ever find a worthwhile man, they can marry or not, as they choose.
I love your statement, "this was my introduction to being blamed for what boys wanted...." Yeah. Another idea from the Catholic Church and Fundamentalist Protestants: women are whores, even though men love "whores", but once a woman engages in sex, she's a whore to be scorned and rejected. And she's a whore whether or not she has sex with the man in question or not! If she rejects him, she's still a whore!! I'll be so, so, so happy when organized religion is gone from this planet. It's perpetuated sexism like no other institution before or since, and has been a curse on women's lives for more than 2000 years!!!
"Hey, vzn. I don't use polyamory for me because it suggests being an a group relationship, such as incandescent's, where all the people in the relationship have a commitment to each other as lovers"
Most people use those terms like you do - I wouldn't really say you are a swinger or polyamorous. You are just as you described yourself - non monogamous, in an open marriage.
The "technical" term for my type of group family arrangement is called polyfidelity... ala http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyfidelity though I don't really "love" Wiki's definition of it.
Then again, even in our polyfidelitious arrangement, we're polyamorous and open - there are still friends of ours with whom we are intimate; but we don't share a house or bank account with them, as we three do with each other.
I say we scrap all the extra terms and use yours. Non-monogamy works. ;)
My bet is there is something in your history, and/or your mates history that makes monogamous fidelity unappealing. It could be the experience of being called a "slut" for doing what you felt like doing at such a young age. That is not a judgement, only an observation made through the years. The majority tend to play their trauma out behind each other's back, and cause themselves, each other, and those they enroll pain.
I like how you don't ideologically reject monogamy, only that you don't find it preferable for you. That tells me you aren't "selling" so much as "sharing" and makes you appealing as a person. The rarest part of your story, in my estimation, is how you and your husband are able to keep coming back to one another--that the affairs are seen as such, and you are able to maintiain "non-exclusion" over long periods.
Do you think it is the openness that makes this possible, or is there something else going on?
I honestly thought your post was going to offend me and the values I consider myself (heh, heh) to hold. I was prepared and ready to work up some major indignation.
I wasn't very shocked to not feel indignant at all. What works for me and mine works for me and mine, what works for you and yours works for you and yours.
I finished your post with the thought: "Good for you and good for me!"
Some people never find happiness. I found happiness twice. You found happiness. Am I going to judge you because what makes each of us happy is a bit different? Hell, NO!
(maybe in the form of a 'How-To' manual?)
Among its definitions jealousy is "vigilance in guarding ones possessions." It is a natural state for many, which is why I reached the conclusion that polyamorism takes a greater committment than monogamy, when monogamy is a genuine choice rather than a default position.
Many desire with all our hearts to be "owned" exclusively but to admit it is more than our emotions will permit. It takes a conscious attitude toward living that the innocent cannot take, or cannot endure for long.
Which is why I ask the genuinely polyamorous: what led you here? What made you so conscious when the consensus is to suffer and endure? The journey, after all, is what truly matters.
Remember: this is Ben Sen. See on my blog: ON MY WIFE, JOAN, and WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A SUBVERSIVE. I've been there, I'm back, and I can still type.
Can we love other people's children? Of course.
Should we be responsible for all children? Yes but firstly to our own.
And part of that responsibility is ensuring they know who their biological parents are. It's the child's right to know. You said it yourself, we have enough of this in society today so why add to the chaos? Now don't get me wrong, polygyny is certainly not without its drama but I find comfort in the knowledge that the paternity of my children is well known.
And believe me when I say, the children of a polygynous or non-monogomous marriage will either thrive or suffer depending on how well the parents deal with one another. Taming the beast of jealousy is imperative. And you would be amazed at how jealous a woman can become once her husband has fathered a child by another woman. Let that sink in.
I think it goes a long way in explaining my own choices, some of which were like yours, and those of my wife, who made similar choices, so I know from whence you speak. That is not to say the most intimate of relationships cannot be polyamorous, but I am also sure, having read your comments you know it isn't for everyone--as "sensible" a response as it may be in someone's situation.
That you say you are devoid of all jealousy is hard to believe, but certainly sounds credible given your background. Not everyone is able to pull that off, or if they do not for long. I can also see why you and your husband have made such a commitment to it. You sound like honest and forthright champions of the life style.
I am glad you and your husband are happy. You should read Incandescent if you don't already. He's in a relationship similar to your own.
Travis, I missed the Summer of Love, too. I was 15, still a dork. The next year, I was all cool and shit, going down to the Haight and the free concerts in the park, where I saw Janis Joplin. But by then, people were all, oh, this is so uncool now, not like last year...;-)
It seems to go both ways-- I had a nice serendipitous three-way with a friend I was dating and one of my roommates. The night was lots of fun and everybody enjoyed themselves, but she wouldn't speak to me for months afterwards. It wasn't my idea either.
Glad you have things worked out!
As long as people are being smart and careful about protecting themselves from diseases, I don't see anything wrong with having casual partners, even while being married or in a non-marrital committed relationship.
Rated
I am wondering where you have got this data from? I have lived extensively in the Pacific Island cultures and in particular, Hawaii, had little or no concept of monogamy. Western Samoa does not have significant jealousy issues, interchange takes place quite freely.
Tahiti, in some of the villages, a fellow anthropologist commented on how refreshing it was that many of the children, not getting on with a particular set of birth parents, would select a more suitable parent, and totally regard them as their own.
Pacific Islanders were, until the arrival of Christianity, animists and did not believe in the concept of exclusiveness. God was everywhere and in everything. You could not own anything. That would be ridiculous. That went for humans too.
The Hawaiians have a saying. "Before the missionaries arrived we had the land, and they had the religion. Now they have the land and we have their religion."
The twelve years I spent living in Hawaii were the most wonderful and most challenging. It took me quite a while to see the benefits of sharing and caring. To see my beloved in rapturous delight with the added benison of my own particular joy was a revelation.
If you want to read a little more about this lifestyle, now largely gone I am afraid, go to getorgasmic.com
Wonderful article and posts, you give me heart.
Misbehave, it will keep you young!
I still have some questions in mind, such as how to make my beloved boyfriend share what I think. I love him, so I refrain myself, but it will end some day. I still can't help thinking about feelings, I think you and your husband are very brave people, and deserve admiration, I am not sure I could be over all that, though I would gladly give it a try.
The last point is a non fun although serious one. Sexual transmitted diseases. If there's an advantage I find to monogamy, it is that.
Your post was overall revealing, and very courageous your life. Can't help thinking about the nature of the troubles you went through (everybody goes through them), though.
Excellent post, thank you very much.
Narang, Kunar: "Death to Obama!"
Thanks for this post (I see that you wrote it some time ago). I totally support your point of view.
However, I wonder if there is a double standard in the sense that it is more acceptable for a woman to question monogamy than it is for a man to do so.
I am often scorned (by women) for having a view similar to yours.
-Jon
Jacob, I believe the cover today is devoted to popular posts of 2009. That idea doesn’t work with most time-sensitive posts about the war, though there are a few analyses that would bear repeating.
WUS, Happy new year to you, love, and wait until you hear the latest...!
Angela, I’m pleased to meet you and thanks.
Alexis, thank you.
Jon, that question was raised before in the comments to this post. There may be some truth to it, because men are immediately suspected of rationalizing doggy behavior. It’s out of fashion to call a woman an immoral slut in the same way it is allowed to call a man a dog. Funny how that’s turned around.
I believe that a man could raise these issues on OS because there is an intelligent audience that is willing to give writers the benefit of the doubt. What doesn’t work is to retail myths and stereotypes, so, for instance, it would not succeed with this crowd to claim that men are better suited to nonmonogamy than women, so it’s ok for guys but not girls. I would go for it if I were you, making it clear that what sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Then again, I shouldn't be surprised, because the casual disregard is just one side of a coin, the other side being a level of self-involvement and self-regard bordering on solipsism.
A relationship hits an inversion layer, switches from exothermic to endothermic, when it goes from "closed" to open, requiring energy from the outside to keep it going instead of generating its own, instead of being its own self-sustaining thing.
There is no a priori defining of a relationship between two fully reified human beings with any reasonable expectation that things will always stay neat and tidy and follow those initial rules and regulations.
You can't even keep your own story straight--and it's your own relationships you're talking about! Do the relationships compete or don't they? Are they orthogonal or do you have to maintain priorities?
I've heard all these things before. Many times from many people. Many different kinds of people. And in the end, human beings are human beings and if there's no jealousy in your life there's just no jealousy *expressed* or *seen* and you're willing to leave it at that.
We all make our choices, of course, but let's be sure to call it what it is, shall we? This blog post reeks of denial, or at the very least, a constant fleeing from context to context at a rate that keeps you ahead of the point at which jealousy and human foible can no longer remain unexpressed and unseen.
Haters are good at denial.
And running.
Personally, I'd rather have a partner be upfront about wanting an open relationship than to find out later that they cheated on me. One of my issues with monogamy is the high potentiality for broken promises. My problem is not so much one of jealousy but rather one of missed opportunities. As a male friend of mine once said after he found out his girlfriend had been running around on him: "There are so many times I could have cheated on her, but I didn't! So many hot chicks I could have been with!"
While I think open relationships have their flaws (as ALL types of relationships do), I am in one now and frankly I love it. I will blog about it soon, after enough time has passed for me to make meaningful comments on the effects of our decision (we were monogamous before my boyfriend deployed). Because he will be gone for a year, we've decided to allow one another some freedoms. I will say, the decision to open our relationship has made the deployment easier to deal with... I don't feel guilty about small flirtations, and I don't resent his absence nearly as much as I would otherwise. And dealing with other men...actually makes me miss him more.
Not everyone is an attractive, social person who can move easily between different relationships, either serially or simultaneously.
Not everyone is well adjusted either. Not everyone meets your standard for what makes a person "ok". And yes, some people are insecure.
For these people, the grip on happiness is much more tenuous...and there are threats from all directions.
godofbiscuits, why should you have caught a post back in June if you been on OS all of 15 minutes? Are you on OS under another login and created this screen name just for this comment? This post is about my experience and conclusions. If you do not believe it is an accurate and good faith description of my happiness and lack of jealousy, there's nothing I can do about it. I would not deny you the chance to show off your large vocabulary, but frankly, nothing that you say in your comment has any bearing on my post. (Please check the dictionary on "solipsism.") My point is not that open relationships are better than monogamous ones, it's the willful blindness to the tenuousness of perfect, lifetime monogamy can be destructive.
booklover, wow. That comment had impact. I applaud your heart and your courage. I hope he comes home ok and you will be very happy together, however you structure your relationship. I agree that asking people to abstain can create tension and resentments. Your statement that you appreciate your partner more because you can be open to other men is the perfect answer to those who think that being open to other people will automatically cause a rift in your relationship. I find the same thing--I enjoy other people, even love them, and still Mark is my constant, my benchmark of a good man.
John, there are threats from all directions, and...? Are you saying that monogamy is best for insecure people? Not much of a recommendation. Even I think more highly of it than that. Neither booklover nor I proposed as standard of ok-ness. Attractiveness and security do not necessarily go together. Emotional security is something that you can achieve. For that matter, a certain degree of attractiveness is available for a reasonable amount of work, if you care enough about it.
Yes. Sexual affairs, poly etc. are best left for the experts of emotional gamesmanship, not the novices.
I'm sorry you were sick. I hope you're feeling better now.
I don't know if I believe in monogamy, but I practice it because I love my husband. Somehow I know he would feel hurt if I were with another man or woman, intimately; and I would feel hurt if he were with someone else too. I don't understand the feelings but I know they do exist.
Good for you, to be able to get past those feelings.
Akemashita omedito gozaiimasu! Happy New Year !
Kim Fujioka
Thanks for your thoughtful and encouraging reply to my comment. Indeed....one must approach this subject with the idea that men and women are equal in their right to an opinion and that all human behavior is.....human.
Best,
Jon
The few times I have shared this information w/ friends or family, I have regretted it. People seem unable to comprehend that we are deeply in love and that our love is strengthened by our willingness to accept other lovers into our lives. As with one of the commentors here, we are labeled as "players".
This is simply untrue. We are as committed to one another as we were the day we married. There are no lies.....no reason to lie. And, as hard as it is for people to believe, there is no jealousy. I don't own this man. He doesn't own me. We have decided to chart our own course and it serves us well.
When I had my hysterectomy, I was "out of commission" for several weeks. When he had issues with his prostate, he was "out of commision". During those times, it has been a tremendous relief for each of us to know that we had "options" outside of our bedroom.
I know, I know........I can already hear people saying "What a lucky guy. How convenient. He has his wifes permission." But, we are both lucky. I have had a lover for the past ten years (my husband introduced us). I meet him about every other month for an afternoon of decadence. It goes without saying as to why this works for ME but, I will tell you that it also works for my husband. It arouses him, knowing that other men desire me and it heightens the passion in our lives. This is where fantasy comes into play and our ability to be honest with one another allows us to explore.
It comes down to making you own rules, even if they don't conform with societal norms. No one is being hurt here. No laws are being broken. Monogamy just doesn't work for us.........and that's just gotta be okay. Don't judge us. We won't judge you.
(But, maybe you'd like to meet us for a drink next weekend?) lol
Nonetheless, I shall never again make the mistake of settling for a sexless relationship.
I refuse to re-enter the airless bell jar of artificially-enforced monogamy.
So maybe I could get three really sexy part-time jobs instead...but really I would rather just have the one job, and live with the limitations.
This is not a "bell jar" so much as an acceptance of certain boundary definitions around the concept of "work", and I believe this example holds for romantic relationships as well.
I don't think that any of our groups can really say what we're "missing" by not being a member of the others, though... There's no way for us to really compare our emotional experiences since we all might be using the same words to describe different intensities, and let's face it, how many people are going to admit it if their 'kind' really is less prone to any "good" trait? :o)
In any event, all three groups I knew had good people and bad people of all kinds, including ones that felt everyone with a trait they had (children, autism, ovaries, whatever) was superior to those without. I saw quite a few such people post essays similar to yours about other traits. Unfortunately, since they relied on generalizations about both sides, the emotional claims made it hard to sift out the objective truths -- and I felt kind of the same reading this.
Jon, exactly. We’re all human, and not that different from each other.
ZenLady, I really appreciate your comment. I have a very old-fashioned view of relationships--they should be happy and supportive and especially, continuous. When you make an ethical relationship choice and it works for you for 15 years, how dare anyone question your commitment. I love that you say that you don’t own each other. Exactly. Sometimes it helps to know you have options, even if you don’t exercise them.
scully, I hope this works for you and you find it to your liking. If not, you can always bail. The airless bell jar hopefully isn’t the default for monogamy, but I get your point. I know of people in sexless relationships whose partners would be very upset if they went outside the marriage for sex. That makes *no* sense to me at all.
Snoreville, I *don’t* like them younger, at least, not too much, but you may be right. The younger generation is more adventurous, which is as it should be.
Amanda, thank you.
John, feel free to live with the one job with its limitations. No one is stopping you. Did you imagine this post was an attempt to persuade you to be non-monogamous? It’s amazing how folks read this post through their own filters and it really doesn’t matter what I say.
ZyzzyAvatar, same thing. I’m not making any generalizations about non-monogamous relationships. What I say is that half of all marriages end in divorce, and some authorities quoted on the net claim that roughly half of all marriages experience some extramarital sex. It’s not making a claim about polyamory to say that there needs to be some discussion of the fact that so many people are not monogamous--either by nature or by practice. What folks who try and fail to be monogamous are missing is a coherent understanding of their own sexuality, and this leads to making promises they can’t keep, suffering and broken marriages. As I’m not part of any poly community nor a scholar, I would never claim to know how this works for other people. All I can tell you is that it has worked for my husband and me for 23 and a half years, that we don’t lie to each other, and that we don’t suffer jealousy. I can add that neither of us is borderline, alcoholic, mood disordered or any of the other things that you say are associated in your experience with non-monogamous relationships.
The title of this blog entry is "Why I Hate Monogamy". Perhaps the tile of my responses should be "Why I Hate Non-Monogamy".
It's my experience on Open Salon that the writers here have little tolerance for negative comments, and I can see that you are no different.
I actually just joined to comment on this post. I am eighteen years old and have since my first boyfriend felt as if there was no one else in this world was like me in terms of my ideas regarding relationships and monogamy. From my very first boyfriend I have always had these conflicting ideas of what I want and what people were telling me I should want. I love having sex, but I don't place as much importance as people tell me 'I Should.' Unfortunately, for my past 5 boyfriends, this has proven to be a real challenge for me and every time I end up with another person during my relationship. I always feel guilty and horrible, not because I had sex, but because I couldn't keep the promise I had. I don't see why it's so important to have sexual exclusivity with someone and this conflicting idea in my head has led to a lot of suffering for both me and my boyfriends. I have loved them. Truly I did, but the forced celibacy felt like shackles that I couldn't take off. I am in a monogamous relationship right now, and I am in love with my boyfriend now. But unfortunately, all of my relationships have been monogamous because I have been afraid to approach this subject with the males I have been with. I live in a community where sexual monogamy and purity (virginity until marriage) is a very important belief, so you may imagine how difficult it is. I have always felt that no one would want to be with me if I were not sexually exclusive with them. But your post has given me inspiration to speak to my current boyfriend. It's time that I spoke to him of this, and if he doesn't agree, I will cut the relationship off before I hurt both of us. Thank you for the token of confidence and reassurance that there are people who think the same way out there. I hope you have a happy and wonderful life with your husband and everyone else.
-Soma
It is sort of ironic that I am in a happy monogamous relationship, though my partner and I both acknowledge that monogamy is truly crap. She knows of my desire to be with many people and doesn't find me disgusting or sleazy. Yet, the emotional triggers are there and I haven't crossed any line, as much as I truly want to. It seems like jumping off of a cliff, not knowing if you'll land in water or go splat on the ground.
I hope to someday find a similar sense of courage that you describe so articulately here.