|
|
|
Giltwist
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
 Posted - 06/02/2006 : 00:52:47
|
Just something I want to throw out. I just wonder about the soundness of a monogomous ideal in today's society. The pros everybody really knows, but I'll mention some of them. My cons can really be debated, but here's just some thoughts that I have. Let me make clear that I am not talking necessarily one man with many women. This can be just as effective in a group marriage of between multiple couples of any sexual orientation. Honestly, I think the more diverse the better.
Pros:
- Best way short of abstinence to prevent STDs. These days, that's a biggy. Granted, you can get this in a closed group marriage, but it's just that much harder to find that many clean people
- Ideally requires partnership rather than a potentially "majority rules" system of polygamy/polyamory where somebody is almost always going to be overruled. Social dynamics are a lot simpler in pairs than in groups
- Similarly, everybody ideally benefits equally whereas the potential for someone in a group marriage to come out on top is high. In monogamy, A loves B and vice-versa. In polygamy, A loves B and C and vice-versa, but B and C may not love each other.
Cons:
- Often requires parents to hold multiple jobs just to get by. It's a lot easier to get by with 4 working adults than 2 working adults. Heck, with 4 working adults in a household, you might actually be able to afford a stay-at-home parent.
- Everybody needs a lawnmower, but you only need one per household. In a monogamous system, people need to buy a lot more per capita than when such resources can be shared. Similar items: telephone, oven, heater/air conditioner
- Low resilience. Let's be honest, marriages are failing left and right. I think that in a group marriage, some of the interpersonal stresses can be diffused/diluted a bit -- not to mention there is a larger body of problem-solvers at hand. Sometimes you just need to get away from your partner, no matter how much you love them. Monogamy tends to make it "inapppropriate" if not "wrong" to find solace outside of the marriage, even if adultury is not involved.
Thoughts on my pros/cons? Something I missed?
|
 |
Edited by - Giltwist on 06/02/2006 00:53:53
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 02:33:15 [Permalink]
|
Pros: It's a guy thing.
Cons: It's not my thing. I can't speak for all women but from my perspective loyalty is at the top of the important list and the idea of polygamy just doesn't sound the least bit enjoyable. I think I've liked more than one guy at a time but not in a significant relationship. Where as both of the men I have had a longer a relationship with had affairs and that was it for me. |
 |
|
|
Giltwist
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 03:35:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Cons: It's not my thing. I can't speak for all women but from my perspective loyalty is at the top of the important list and the idea of polygamy just doesn't sound the least bit enjoyable. I think I've liked more than one guy at a time but not in a significant relationship. Where as both of the men I have had a longer a relationship with had affairs and that was it for me.
See, I don't necessarily see sex as being a necessity, per se. Just that most people don't consider it a relationship without that. I could see my gf and myself living with a gay couple in this manner, for example. No physical intimacy of course, but to live in this manner for an extended time requires every other aspect of what might be called an intimate relationship.
I guess it's not really just monogamy/polygamy I'm wondering about here. Maybe it's the modern view of family. Back in the day, the extended family lived together out of necessity. I guess what I'm really asking is, in modern society do we maybe need more than one "family unit" living together? |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 05:57:23 [Permalink]
|
As with anything, it depends on how it is done.
I know of only few set ups for group marriages.
One husband and wives - tends to be the norm for most major religions that allow polygamy. I agree with beskeptigal on the perception that this is a guy thing. It tends to come from societies that still consider women as property.
One wife and husbands - Unknown in the world. Would be the female equivalent to the first case.
True group marriage consisting of multiple husbands and wives - Very rare. Requires an unanimous decision to add members. In this case, the marriages work on a form of democracy except in some matters which require an unanimous decision. The loyalty factor instead of being imbued in a single individual, is applied to all the individuals in the group. This is not traditional, but possible. I have known some women who a group marriage was ideal for. Definately not everyones cup of tea, but each marriage social contract is unique.
One needs only to examine the various forms of monogamous marriages to see the differences. Classifications below are my own.
Open marriages - Just because we are married doesn't mean we can't keep dating other people as long as you come back to this bed.
Cheating marriages - Some of us have first hand knowledge of these. One partner strays and tries to keep it a secret from the other person.
Closed marriage - both parties feel that they have exclusive sexual use of their partner.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 09:09:52 [Permalink]
|
Polygamy in some cultures has been an economic necessity. I'm not talking about any “modern” culture either. To hunter and gathering cultures, it meant that there was a guy to hunt, a woman to and take care of the kids and a woman to gather. That set up increased survivability. Interestingly, some of those cultures were matriarchal.
Anyhow, I'm with beskeptigal on this one. At this time and in this place, it's a guy thing. I have seen a few documentaries on polygamous families, and there seems to be so much conflict, sometimes hidden because of religious beliefs, that it just doesn't look appealing or useful. And lets not kid ourselves, sex is involved unless we are talking about a cooperative (communes and communal living) which is not really polygamy.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 10:25:25 [Permalink]
|
| I had a friend years ago who joined a highly-organized "commune" in which the sexual conflicts were allegedly nullified by having a "sleeping schedule" which basically mandated who would boink whom on which dates. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 10:39:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
I had a friend years ago who joined a highly-organized "commune" in which the sexual conflicts were allegedly nullified by having a "sleeping schedule" which basically mandated who would boink whom on which dates.
LOL. Sex as a chore. How good is that?
"Sorry, kiddo. Tonight YOU have to take out the garbage." |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 12:11:24 [Permalink]
|
I'd have absolutely no qualms with polyamory, at all.
And VD, actually, there was a case of one woman who lived and had sex with three men, as husbands & wife, here in Brazil. All lived happily in the same house and agreed to the deal. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 12:31:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
I'd have absolutely no qualms with polyamory, at all.
And VD, actually, there was a case of one woman who lived and had sex with three men, as husbands & wife, here in Brazil. All lived happily in the same house and agreed to the deal.
Well, now I know of one. Thanks.
I would think that the whole concept of polygamy/polyamory would have certain downfalls such as who gets what week with the singleton. And, what if the singleton isn't in the mood. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 15:53:35 [Permalink]
|
Old joke warning!!!
What's the definition of bigamy?
One wife too many.
What's the definition of monogamy?
Same thing.
 |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 19:44:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by dglas
LOL. Sex as a chore. How good is that?
From what I understand, it wasn't very good at all. It was supposed to minimize feelings of jealousy and possessiveness associated with group sexual dynamics by taking the "control" aspect away from everyone (as in, for example, a guy thinking "I know Julie's hot for me, but I'm pissed at her right now, so I'm going to go boff her best friend"). However, it just moved the sexual conflicts from the direct level to the level of setting the "sleeping schedule," which, since everyone was supposed to be equal in the commune, was itself a group activity. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 10:09:50 [Permalink]
|
Giltwist, I'm glad you brought up the subject, but I think your initial pros and cons list only touches on the issues. The problem with making an adequate pros and cons list is that both monogamous and polygamous relationships come in a whole variety of arrangements. For instance, among some Mormon communities in Utah where men have numerous wives that don't work they are living almost entirely off welfare.
I think it's a very personal decision that people need to make for themselves. As Val said: “it depends on how it is done.” I've known people who have open relationships because they can't deal with the fact that their marriage/relationship is dying, but I've also known people who manage polyamorous relationships happily and healthily for years. The real pros and cons totally depend on the people involved. How prone are they to jealousy? What do they expect from a romantic partnership? How do kids fit in? The most important thing is that all the consenting adults are on the same page and no one is manipulating anyone else or lying to themselves about what they really want.
You might to right about us being better off with simply more adults in a family household. I work with a lot of inner city teens and many times it is a grandmother or aunt who helps the kid get their paperwork or whatever in on time. Extended families can be a huge benefit particularly to underprivileged populations, which is probably why we see bigger extended families that live together or near to each other among the poor.
Val wrote: quote:
One wife and husbands - Unknown in the world. Would be the female equivalent to the first case.
That's not exactly accurate. Beyond unique exceptions within more liberal cultures (like Sib's example) there have been matrilineal cultures where women have total say in what sexual partners they allow to visit them, and the children are raised by mothers, aunts and uncles. One example that might better fit the definition of multiple husbands is that in some cultures where powerful men have a huge number of wives, often these sexually neglected and socially powerful wives take on several regular male lovers. Part of the problem with discussing this issue is what qualifies as “marriage”?
beskeptical wrote: quote:
Pros: It's a guy thing.
Cons: It's not my thing. I can't speak for all women but from my perspective loyalty is at the top of the important list and the idea of polygamy just doesn't sound the least bit enjoyable. I think I've liked more than one guy at a time but not in a significant relationship. Where as both of the men I have had a longer a relationship with had affairs and that was it for me.
That sounds a little sexist to me. Here's an article about the joys of polyamory from another woman's point of view: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_6_64/ai_n9532076
I'm personally into equal partnership monogamous, and fortunately, I fell in love with a man who feels the same way.
Val wrote: quote:
I would think that the whole concept of polygamy/polyamory would have certain downfalls such as who gets what week with the singleton. And, what if the singleton isn't in the mood.
And this is not a problem with monogamous relationships? Hell, one of the reasons many people turn to polyamory is because one partner is in the mood so much more often than the other.
But I don't thin |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 06/03/2006 10:13:11 |
|
|
|
Giltwist
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 12:00:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
That sounds a little sexist to me. Here's an article about the joys of polyamory from another woman's point of view: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_6_64/ai_n9532076
I'm personally into equal partnership monogamous, and fortunately, I fell in love with a man who feels the same way.
However, when I talk to people I do tend to get that answer a lot. "Love doesn't work like that for women" or the equivalent. This begs an interesting question. Is the, for the lack of a better adjective, possesive definition of love really a product of the genetic role of a female or is it a social construction ascribed as such?
I love my gf, and don't really have any desire to be with anyone else. However, I don't understand why those feelings should negate any feelings I might have for someone else. I've dated bisexual girls before, and I've never had a problem with it or even asked to watch. |
|
|
|
|
Zebra
Skeptic Friend
USA
354 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 22:53:42 [Permalink]
|
Just to clarify terms for purposes of this discussion -
Polygamy = multiple spouses (gamos = marriage). Often used to mean one man, multiple wives, but doesn't have to mean that.
Polygyny = multiple wives (gyne = woman)
Polyandry = multiple husbands (andr- stem of word for man ,husband). The Wikipedia section on polyandry, and other sources, say this used to be practiced in Tibet (among upper class), but is now outlawed there.
Polyamory = hybrid term, coined sometime between 1960's and 1990, from Greek poly= many and Latin amor = love. Lifestyle of openness to having more than one intimate relationship at a time, with knowledge & consent of all involved partners. Basically, concurrent multiple open monogamy. |
I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney
*some restrictions may apply |
|
|
|
Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular
Canada
510 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2006 : 00:03:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
As with anything, it depends on how it is done.
One wife and husbands - Unknown in the world. Would be the female equivalent to the first case.
I saw a documentary about a Sherpa in Nepal who was in a marriage of 2 men and 1 woman. |
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King
History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms
"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler
"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2006 : 00:08:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Giltwist
Just something I want to throw out. I just wonder about the soundness of a monogomous ideal in today's society.
Thoughts on my pros/cons? Something I missed?
My thoughts are, when I read the word monogamous I didn't think the post meant marriage. I think every individuals idea is different. There are as many reasons for one person or persons wanting to be with someone or ones as there are people.
I can tell you my personal situation if you want to put them in some sort of statistics.
I've been legally married to someone for about 30 years. Being with one person is boring. LOL, once you've gotten to know them, after about 5 years (or less), there's not that much more to explore. I've dated and or slept with more people during those 30 years that I can't keep count of them now.
Love is not sex. Sex is fun. There is no such thing as love.
Right now there is someone who I truly care about (this time it's 'different' . I'm more infatuated than with anyone in the past), I'll probably never be close to him but I'm not interested in any more relationships other than that .... too much trouble.
Been there, done that.(yawn) Moving on. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
