Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

monogamy

Page: (1)2

13:04 / 21.02.02

reading zooms love thread and reflecting on events in my life, I began to wonder about your views on monogamy. whats so bad about it? Im pretty keen on the idea of reserving something special (whatever it is) for one particular person who you love

what do you think?

Elijah, Freelance Rabbi

13:22 / 21.02.02

well, im currently living with a girl who i love dearly and will gladley spend the rest of my time with
She's been a little odd lately, but thats another thread...

but anyway, i approve of monogamy, you just need to keep things fresh as much as possible

pointless and uncalled for

13:25 / 21.02.02

Monogamy is a good thing.

I like the concept that your devotions are focused on one person. There's a kind of purity in that which I find highly desirable.

13:27 / 21.02.02

you don't have to worry about getting names wrong, either

13:34 / 21.02.02

i'm a big fan of monogamy personally. if i'm with someone, i'm WITH THEM.

"love is realistic desire is unrealistic it's easier to blindfold yourself change your girlfriend every six months and not look in the mirror than to live with someone forever and see change" (Damien Hirst)

13:37 / 21.02.02

As far as I've gotten with the idea of monogamy is that it's a choice you make to see what happens down this road, and you have to go down the road or you don't get to see.

Pretty much lifted that idea wholesale from this This American Life program, the Ian Brown piece.

[It's the 3/6/1998 program, titled "Monogamy".]

[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: Persephone ]

14:12 / 21.02.02

(puts on horns, sunglasses and picks up cigarette holder)

(Ah, only Canadians familiar with City TV will get that one. Devil's advocate, people)

Why do you want to focus only on one person? See, this is a discussion Tara and I had about kids. Neither of us wants to have another one as we can't condone the idea of loving another child as much as we love Sage. I can see the same concept applying to monogamy, but why? What is it about the human creature that makes us want to have one person to focus solely on through life?

Zoom.

(And boy am I in trouble when Tara reads this!)

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

14:18 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by Captain Zoom:
What is it about the human creature that makes us want to have one person to focus solely on through life?

Limited personal resources, intelligence and flexibility of thought.

Obviously.

14:22 / 21.02.02

Haus, you rule.

Except for when you don't.

Zoom.

Regrettable Juvenilia

14:26 / 21.02.02

Sometimes you just can't tell whether Haus is being sarcastic or not, can you?

nikon said "if i'm with someone, i'm WITH THEM." - that's all well and good, but nothing pisses me off like the attitude that often accompanies (or even exists on its own, instead of) this: "if i'm with someone, they're WITH ME."

I can't really conceive of being in a monogamous relationship anytime in the near future, basically because if I ever met anyone so amazing that I only wanted to be with them, I doubt very much that they would only want to be with me. Now, in a moment someone is going to come along and tell me that this is a sad and bad thing, and that either my standards are too high, my self-esteem is too low, I'm afraid of commitment, or possibly all three, but... thass just how I'm livin', y'know? For now.

14:27 / 21.02.02

but dont we all want to feel special? I mean, just a little, to at least one person? the very best at something, even if its just the best at occupying a loved ones heart?

maybe that desire is sad, pathetic, or pointless. I dont know. maybe that desire comes through social programming of some kind, and we should all get over it. but despite all the explorations Ive gone over, in my heart and in my mind, I crave that devotion. both given and received.

14:31 / 21.02.02

flyboy - I dont mean every person you date should be The One. I certainly dont work that way - I dont make commitments lightly, and until I do I dont limit myself. however, ultimately, Id like that mutual fidelity

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

14:46 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by bitchiekittie:
but dont we all want to feel special? I mean, just a little, to at least one person? the very best at something, even if its just the best at occupying a loved ones heart?

And do we have to insist on monogamy to make ourselves feel special? Is it necessary to believe that your partner is contractually obliged not to rub up against other people in order to feel confident that you "occupy their heart". Because, between you and me, it's not their heart that the third party is going to be running their fingers and tongue over...

Put it another way. WoI says that "monogamy is a good thing", because of its "purity". But what he's describing is not monogamy, it's devotion - which presumably means not wanting to sleep with somebody else rather than grimly holding on to your penis in crowded spaces.

Thoughts?

14:46 / 21.02.02

Monogamy doesn't work for everyone, and it certainly doesn't work for me. There's just too many interesting people out there for me to obsess over one specific person. The idea of someone being romantically preoccupied with me, where s/he wants ME and THERE CAN BE NO OTHER, is distinctly creepy.

As for feelings of "specialness", I should prefer that more than one person in this world care as deeply for me as I do for hir.

[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: Ierne ]

14:47 / 21.02.02

Originally posted by Haus:

quote: Limited personal resources, intelligence and flexibility of thought.

I think equal parts sarcasm and not. Or at least I read it that way. Haus'll never tell I'm sure.

Originally posted by bitchiekittie:

quote: but dont we all want to feel special? I mean, just a little, to at least one person

But how about feeling special to more than one person? Or about more than one? I've had this conversation. I think you're right, it is social conditioning, but unlike much conditioning I don't see this one ever going away. The thought that there is a "ONE" out there for each of us feeds something vital in our egos. One person to whom you are the best, most beautiful, wonderful individual in the whole world. I don't think this is necessarily a good way to be, but I'm as guilty (?) of it as everyone else. Most of the time anyway

.

Originally posted by bitchiekittie:

quote: the very best at something, even if its just the best at occupying a loved ones heart?

I'd like to be the best at occupying a part of a number of people's hearts. I mentioned this in the love thread. We, all of us, are so multi-faceted that there can't possibly be one person who satisfies every need. I don't think it is possible.

(Realizes he's digging his hole even deeper)

Imagine a society where there is no monogamy. Perhaps people gather in groups, but more than likely they all live alone. And there is one person you love dearly 'cause they like to go out and dance with you a lot. And another who loves to go to the theatre and another who will sit and talk with you for hours on end. And perhaps some of these qualities exist simultaneously in one person, but definitely not all of them. But it's like this for everyone. Everyone had a group of people who satisfy various desires for them. And perhaps you find someone you'd like to have a child with, or move in with, but that doesn't mean that that person supercedes everyone else, just that they satisfy your desire to procreate or to cohabitate.

I dunno. Just thoughts, that's all.

Zoom.

pointless and uncalled for

15:19 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Deletia:

And do we have to insist on monogamy to make ourselves feel special?

Monogamy is a lifestyle choice, like many abstracts. I choose monogamy because of what it means to me. As for feeling special, that's an issue of what works for you. Monogamy and partnerships are not the sole source of specialness, just one of a myriad. I don't judge the polygamous and don't expect monogamy from anyone.

quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Deletia:
Put it another way. WoI says that "monogamy is a good thing", because of its "purity". But what he's describing is not monogamy, it's devotion - which presumably means not wanting to sleep with somebody else rather than grimly holding on to your penis in crowded spaces.

To me devotion and the purity thereof is monogamy. I may devote to many in many different ways but will only devote to one with love and affections. Yes people only one of you must be sacrificed for the safety of others.

Not sure where it comes into it but I always grimly hold onto my penis in crowded spaces. Maybe it means something else to me than it does to you.

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

15:24 / 21.02.02

I think that may be where your "specialness" comes from...

15:25 / 21.02.02

Im sorry, Im presenting my point wrong again. what I mean is, whats so wrong about wanting that little bit reserved just for you? wanting to savor a few words and physical moments as something just between the two of you?

Im in no way condemning wanting to not be monogamous - to each his own, it makes the world a far lovelier and more interesting place. however, I want to know why monogamy is so often seen as something stale and outdated? like romance or any other form of human interaction, it can be analyzed to death, exposing its seeming irrelevance. does that make it any less important between two people, that it is essentially, in the grand scheme of things, nothing but words and gestures?

15:28 / 21.02.02

We, all of us, are so multi-faceted that there can't possibly be one person who satisfies every need. I don't think it is possible.

I agree. but Im not talking about devoting all of your time and energy soley into one person, only reserving a few select bits (sex, for example) for that person only

15:36 / 21.02.02

But in a monogamous relationship, what are the bits that have to be reserved? What is a part of monogamy and what isn't?

Zoom.

15:38 / 21.02.02

Just on the phone with Tara and reading her this thread, (death wish, moi?), and it turns out she agrees with just about everyone here except me.

Opposites attract anyone?

Zoom.

Regrettable Juvenilia

15:42 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by bitchiekittie:
Im sorry, Im presenting my point wrong again. what I mean is, whats so wrong about wanting that little bit reserved just for you? wanting to savor a few words and physical moments as something just between the two of you?

There's nothing wrong with it, which is why I only spoke for myself: it's just that I would feel unreasonable and dishonest asking someone to reserve something for me which I wasn't willing to reserve for them, and at the *moment* (and I am young, and irresponsible) I meet very, very, *very* few people who inspire me to feel that way (although oddly, I seem to see them in the street or across the bar all the fucking time).

quote:Im in no way condemning wanting to not be monogamous - to each his own, it makes the world a far lovelier and more interesting place. however, I want to know why monogamy is so often seen as something stale and outdated? like romance or any other form of human interaction, it can be analyzed to death, exposing its seeming irrelevance. does that make it any less important between two people, that it is essentially, in the grand scheme of things, nothing but words and gestures?

I've nothing against monogamy, honestly, and I'm sure it's for some people, probably me at some later stage. But then again, at the moment it is widely seen as not only the norm in terms of average, but as a moral standard, and a 'natural' convention. And this can be very restrictive...

[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: Flyboy ]

15:45 / 21.02.02

Im not talking about devoting all of your time and energy soley into one person, only reserving a few select bits (sex, for example) for that person only –bk

Why allow only one person to have access to my sexuality? Why should I keep myself – or parts of myself – in reserve for just one individual? Why deny myself the experiences of sharing love, affection and sexuality with people that I feel a strong connection with? Why limit myself?

It doesn't make sense to me.

15:48 / 21.02.02

LOL. I was just thinking about responding to this thread, when Snapping Turtle sugested I take the personality test that she filled in earlier today. As expected, she's great at all the things I'm crap at, I'm great at all the things she's crap at. We make a good team.

Plus she's stunning, clever, funny and faithful. And she'll put up with a fat bald twat for life. Hence monogamy in my case.

15:53 / 21.02.02

Originally posted by bitchiekittie:

quotenly reserving a few select bits (sex, for example) for that person only

Something else just occurred. Could this allow you to be monogamous with different people at the same time, just with differently defined monogamy?

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding.

Zoom.

16:05 / 21.02.02

Its awfuly convenient. Its a source of security, you know the other person will always be there, and you will never be alone. Its stable, and a good environment to raise children in.

Of course, you get all that in a tribal culture where children are raised by the community, women cared for by their brothers, and everyone's needs met in other ways in a collective fashon. Western culture just doesn't work that way for the most part however, so monogamy is the more workable solution for most.

I see two conflicting desires in human nature here: One, for the security of a permanent life partner. I'll even go so far as to suggest we have an instinctive bias towards this. On the other hand, we seek many partners, so as to spread our genetic material as far as possible. Conflicting programming?

I'm with Irene on the wanting to experience as much of life as possible bit. But security is important, too. I think the proper balance is a life partner, with an allowable amount of personal poligamy on the side to satisfy the needs that might cause you to pull away from said partner should they remain unfulfilled. Best of both worlds?

Its a bit harder to pull off in practice, unfortunately. I only know one couple who do it right, and manage it without friction. It requires a lot of maturity, sense, communication, and adherence to rules. Monogamy is a lot less work

16:09 / 21.02.02

I see monogamy as devoting your life to figuring someone out. You settle in with your special person and spend the rest of your days trying to get inside their head (instead of just their pants). Sure there are other interesting folks out there, and you could pursue them instead of your partner, but that's like abandoning your life's work just to watch a particular episode of Friends.

16:15 / 21.02.02

Could this allow you to be monogamous with different people at the same time, just with differently defined monogamy? – Captain Zoom

That's an interesting idea, because different people will inspire me in different ways, and I can have interactions with person A that would never happen between me and persons B, C, etc. Yet each of those other people have their own fascination and shared interests that person A and I might not have.

Each person is cared for and appreciated in this example; person A doesn't have to be singled out as "better" or "more important". A win-win situation?

16:18 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by Captain Zoom:
But in a monogamous relationship, what are the bits that have to be reserved? What is a part of monogamy and what isn't?

Zoom.

would depend on the players, Id think. I dont think you can restrict your feelings at all ("dont you dare ever love another woman!"), but actions can and sometimes should be

then, when talking about added players (more than 2), do you really think it would end there? theres going to be boundaries that you are expected not to cross - but things change, peoples desires change and then what? the more people you toss into the equation the more chance you have for a rift that may very well lead to a collapse

16:23 / 21.02.02

Actually the very thing Tara said to me on the phone. Without monogamy there's no point in sticking something out. Because you'll always have in your head that you can just go out and find someone else who fulfills that particular desire.

Fine, fine, all of you bring my glorious perfect society crashing down.

Where'd Ierne go? Win-win indeed

Zoom.

16:23 / 21.02.02

quote:Originally posted by Ierne:
Why allow only one person to have access to my sexuality? Why should I keep myself – or parts of myself – in reserve for just one individual? Why deny myself the experiences of sharing love, affection and sexuality with people that I feel a strong connection with? Why limit myself?

It doesn't make sense to me.

I dont think you should - if you dont feel the drive to. my question is more about why people see it as so very archaic and useless - why cant it be a challenge to savor and explore? Id think, personally, it would be a much more difficult (and rewarding) task to learn one really fantastic person through and through

Mr insensitive

16:28 / 21.02.02

Monogamy?

I prefer oak myself.

Matthew Fluxington

16:44 / 21.02.02

Does it really always take such an incredibly long period of time to 'figure someone out'? I think that in most people's cases, it really doesn't take very long at all, and once you do, the familiarity can breed contempt, as it were. If you happen to have found a person who really is infinitely interesting, that's great. But I think most people are fairly justified in becoming bored and disinterested in other people, and moving around a lot. I'm a big fan of commitment, but not to lifelong contracts or the notion of being 'together forever'. I think that most human relationships have an expiration date - commitment and loyalty are admirable qualities, but certainly shouldn't be absolute. People should have the option of letting their relationships fail, and they should be allowed to grow without having too many promises get in the way, ideally.

17:03 / 21.02.02

if they are really fantastic, and carry on to change and grow, as we all do, Id think there would be plenty to explore. I dont think any single person is ever easily or completely understoond - ever

17:05 / 21.02.02

Originally posted by flux:

quote: People should have the option of letting their relationships fail

But see, it isn't failure according to what you said. It's just the natural progression and ending of a relationship. Perhaps for a lifelong relationship to work, both parties have to be interested in constantly, or at least occasionally, completely re-inventing themselves. Completely. And I'm not so sure that's really possible while keeping the integrity of the relationship. If you change so much that you're no longer the person your SO fell in love with, how can the relationship continue?

Zoom.

Page: (1)2