[plotthickens]

Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

And sometimes I can't help but roll my eyes at this. Perhaps it's because I'm young (and still a technical virgin), but physical needs are usually third on my list after emotional stability/intimacy and intellectual prowess. Sure it's all good and fun, but I think there is far too much emphasis on sexual aspects of relationships.   Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To the guy who's in monogamous relationships: I respect your choices, and wish you could be mature enough not to point and laugh at other's choices. Also, who's to say that all relationships involved are hetero, and only one-on-one? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Don't knock it till you've tried it.   Originally Posted by Wilderness To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Or, like you've just posted above the squiglies, everyone could just do what's right for them and we could all respect that? Some people don't have to try something to know it's not right for them.

You would be absolutely correct if Symphi had said "Sure it's all good and fun, but there is far too much emphasis on sexual aspects of relationships FOR ME." Instead, her eye-rolling and lack of personal pronouns indicates that she is commenting on other's choices and her scorn of same.

[PlungingHornets]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Sounds to me like it bothers you how easy it is for others to remain monogamous. In refuting it, you're running others through your personal lens of behaviour where it appears that many others are different.

I'm enough of a grown up to know that some people are emotionally geared to monogamy. In fact, in my inexperienced years when I still bought into the "Men just want sex" stereotype I burned a few of these types of men with a casual relationships. I don't do that anymore. I also don't act like I know what its like to keep my paws off other people throghout a 30+ year marriage.

[VagrantChord]

Monogamy is part of my value system but only if it's mutually agreed upon. If no such agreement exists, I will play with whoever I'm attracted to.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by PlungingHornets To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm enough of a grown up to know that some people are emotionally geared to monogamy. In fact, in my inexperienced years when I still bought into the "Men just want sex" stereotype I burned a few of these types of men with a casual relationships. I don't do that anymore. I also don't act like I know what its like to keep my paws off other people throghout a 30+ year marriage.

Note "proverbial nuts" = women.

Unknot thy thong!

[Liquid]

	Originally Posted by Senseofrelief To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	To the guy that is into an open relationship...I just laugh at the idea of feeling 'evolved' and 'less constricted'...while your girlfriend is getting boned by another guy.

Where did I say that I felt 'evolved'? Are you sure I said that, or are you just projecting your own insecurities?

	Originally Posted by True Rune To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Do you want any kids? How would your relationships work with kids? Do you use contraceptives? What if one of your side relationships got pregnant? Do you really think your path is the higher one?

Here again. Where did I said "[my] path is the higher one?". I'd like to know, really.

And no, I don't want kids. Of course we always use contraceptives. The chances of one of my side relationships getting pregnant is very small. Of course there is a chance, but it's not reason enough to stay monogamous.

[plotthickens]

	Originally Posted by Liquid To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The chances of one of my side relationships getting pregnant is very small. Of course there is a chance, but it's not reason enough to stay monogamous.

Being afraid of pregnancy is a reason to be celibate, not monogamous. Monogamists use this argument against polys without understanding that it applies to ALL het sex.

[Symphi]

Originally Posted by Wilderness To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

That may be your opinion, and personally I'd put physical needs a lot lower than third, but there are many of people out there who equate sex with emotions. That's just how they are... no problems there. It is a problem, however, when two people aren't open with each other about what sex means to them to make sure they are compatible in a relationship. (Alternatively, people haven't thought enough about what sex actually means to them so they can't express it.) Another example of how not communicating can be a recipe for trouble!

The "top 3" was an oversimplification on my part; my list goes on and on for a while before we get to that stage of intimacy (emotional stability/intimacy and intellectual prowess are pretty massive, encompassing categories for myself). But, put the way you have, I can understand where some of the other attitudes emerge.

And yup, communication is always the key.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You would be absolutely correct if Symphi had said "Sure it's all good and fun, but there is far too much emphasis on sexual aspects of relationships FOR ME." Instead, her eye-rolling and lack of personal pronouns indicates that she is commenting on other's choices and her scorn of same.

Whoa now, I thought that there was an implied "for me" in there. My apologies, I forgot to copy- paste my usual added note indicative of personal opinion. No hard feelings here, people are free to do as they wish with themselves. But to be honest, yes, I think many, many people are ridiculous.

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Don't knock it till you've tried it.

If I'm not allowed to roll my eyes, may I at least chuckle at this statement? In good faith and humor, of course.

[plotthickens]

	Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Whoa now, I thought that there was an implied "for me" in there. My apologies, I forgot to copy- paste my usual added note indicative of personal opinion. No hard feelings here, people are free to do as they wish with themselves. But to be honest, yes, I think many, many people are ridiculous.

I also think many people are ridiculous: irrational behavious just gets up my nose. I personally would never do CBT to the point of nonfunctionality, yet I would never judge someone who wishes to. Would never roll my eyes. Would never call them freaks, or sickos, or anything else. "Consenting adult(s)" is all that matters. Passing judgement indicates an inflexible adherance to your own prevailing morals to the point one believes them to be 'correct'. This path of "my kink is OK but yours is wrong" (MKIOKBYIW) has led to many tragedies.

	Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	If I'm not allowed to roll my eyes, may I at least chuckle at this statement? In good faith and humor, of course.

You're welcome to do anything you wish. However, you might want to consider what your chosen path says about you, and where that path might lead you.

I will continue to point out any utterances of MKIOKBYIW every single time I see it. Heteronormativity is helpful only to the normal heteros.

[Symphi]

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Passing judgement indicates an inflexible adherance to your own prevailing morals to the point one believes them to be 'correct'. You're welcome to do anything you wish. However, you might want to consider what your chosen path says about you, and where that path might lead you.

I do believe my view is the correct one, and yes, I am inflexible and stubborn on what I have deduced to be right in light of argument. Moral subjectivity does not mesh well with my person.

However, by stating this I am doing nothing but just that: stating it. My words do not force my opinion on anyone else, they simply underline my perspective as you have underlined yours. "Rolling my eyes" isn't the same thing as name-calling or somehow making the other party less human or their opinion less valuable. It is simple expressing my own reaction to the said process in question and nothing more. Scorn? I doubt I would go as far to say that is what was lying beneath my statement.

I hold no grudges against differing opinions, just against people who attempt to force me into their bubble by attacking mine. You cannot tell me that you are not judging me right now in a similar manner as you are accusing me of judging others by "point out any utterances of MKIOKBYIW" in my words and implying that my thoughts are the incorrect ones.

Finally, this has very little to do with the actual thread, so perhaps we should continue this conversation privately?

[plotthickens]

Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I do believe my view is the correct one, and yes, I am inflexible and stubborn on what I have deduced to be right in light of argument. Moral subjectivity does not mesh well with my person. However, by stating this I am doing nothing but just that: stating it. My words do not force my opinion on anyone else, they simply underline my perspective as you have underlined yours. "Rolling my eyes" isn't the same thing as name-calling or somehow making the other party less human or their opinion less valuable. It is simple expressing my own reaction to the said process in question and nothing more. Scorn? I doubt I would go as far to say that is what was lying beneath my statement. I hold no grudges against differing opinions, just against people who attempt to force me into their bubble by attacking mine. You cannot tell me that you are not judging me right now in a similar manner as you are accusing me of judging others by "point out any utterances of MKIOKBYIW" in my words and implying that my thoughts are the incorrect ones. Finally, this has very little to do with the actual thread, so perhaps we should continue this conversation privately?

Heteronormativity, such as you espouse, is the backbone of this thread. Therefore this conversation has everything to do with the topic at hand. If you feel that the conversation has gone off-topic, feel free to use the REPORT button. Since that hasn't happened, let's drag this shit out into the light and see what we can see.

Let me point out that intolerance of another's non-harmful predilictions is not the same as intolerance of intolerance. Everything else in your post can stand on its own, and thank you for spelling it all out so very clearly.

[PlungingHornets]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Note "proverbial nuts" = women. Unknot thy thong!

I don't know what this means. Are you running your posts through a Hungarian to English online translator? I'm only half kidding.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Symphi]

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Let me point out that intolerance of another's non-harmful predilictions is not the same as intolerance of intolerance.

I fail to see how my "intolerance" is harming anyone as I am not acting upon or forcing it upon others. I have befriended many people who hardly fit my heteronormativity model, and they are all amazing folks whom I respect. I may believe their actions are wrong for various reasons, but the people themselves are good people and in the end that's all that should matter.

In this light, I fail to see how my "intolerance" is intolerance at all, actually. I have an opinion and have stated it, as have you. I feel as if this has been an entire misunderstanding over the missing of two words and a lack of clarity of intention on my part, despite my best efforts.

I'm sure I'm wrong on a great many things, and will discover them as such as I continue through life. However, constantly drifting into "this is okay for one person, and this is okay for another" causes more ethical problems than it solves, so for now I stand my ground on the way I think.

In short: Yes, I think some things are wrong, period. This includes some thoughts on monogamy. Yes, I am flawed myself and am probably wrong in some of my judgements. And yes, I have no doubt I am not making any friends today, which is unfortunate over a single disagreement.

[PlungingHornets]

	Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	However, constantly drifting into "this is okay for one person, and this is okay for another" causes more ethical problems than it solves, so for now I stand my ground on the way I think.

Expound on this, please.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by PlungingHornets To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I don't know what this means.

Apparently not. Understanding has implications, hence rejection muddies clarity.

[sevans]

Monogomy is bullshit. I believe in enjoying the company of all those that surround one and Monogomy is just another one of religion's stupid ideas to control the urges and needs of normal real life humans. They are trying to control us and make us warriors for a blind cause.

[Symphi]

	Originally Posted by PlungingHornets To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Originally Posted by Symphi To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. However, constantly drifting into "this is okay for one person, and this is okay for another" causes more ethical problems than it solves, so for now I stand my ground on the way I think. Expound on this, please.

I'm a bit rusty in explaining, but I'll see what I can do.

For a definition of what I'm basically arguing against: Moral Subjectivism (Or just a lot of postmodern thought in general). The world does not have a set ethical code of conduct and right or wrong. What may be proper and good for one person may be consider bad for another; all people have different moral codes that are right for that specific person.

This all sounds good. No wars over things like religion, or hate against target groups, etc. It's really an appealing mindset with a lot going for it, and many people could learn something from at least taking a look at its benefits.

However, here's a little of what I gather I dislike about it:

-If, by rational and logical argument, something is wrong, one is prohibited from saying it is wrong because it's all relative. Likewise, if you are truly for the subjective, praise for the good aspects of things is ultimately meaningless as well.

-How can someone who claims "What may be proper and good for one person may be considered bad for another" also claim "Tolerance is good for everyone"?

-How does one arrive at the idea that "What may be proper and good for one person may be considered bad for another"? If it's by observation of how varied human nature is, then it faces any issue that any conclusion relying on induction does; when does the observing stop and the concluding begin?

-What about things like murder? There may be different actions considered murder, but the concept of murder itself is still considered wrong by everyone mentally capable of understanding the concept. (This excludes the mentally handicapped, etc.)

There's probably more to this, but I've got to get going to my night class.

Also, I'm really not trying to hate on anyone here, I'm just trying to explain the reasons behind where I'm coming from.

[333conspiracy]

monogamy is almost compulsory for me, but it just has to do with the way I become attracted to people. I'm not really attracted to typical and so I become attracted to one person and I can't take anyone else seriously.

[AnaK]

If I found out my boyfriend was seeing someone else, I would not want to be with him anymore. He can do what he wants, but I'm not into sharing. I give the the needy, and not the greedy.

[PlungingHornets]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Apparently not. Understanding has implications, hence rejection muddies clarity.

Judging from your 'tude, I'm going to infer that you're saying I'm a terrible person because, in my immaturity, I was a man eater a couple of times in my early 20s (a common mistake) and have since recognized the error of my ways and reformed. Or you're saying I'm a garden variety dirty whore.

Hold on, I'm working up a tear to roll down my cheek. Hhhhhhhrrrgghhhaaah. Hmmmmmmf. Oh. No. I guess not today, sorry. Maybe catch me when I'm PMSing in about a week.

Symphi - Can't we get 90% of people to agree on basic things like, don't murder, don't cheat people in business practices, don't kick puppies? Pretty much only a literal Satinist or a neo-Nazi will seriously argue that murder is acceptable. In that sense I disagree with moral relativism, but something like polyamory seems open to debate, and therefor should not be prohibited/frowned upon. I don't see anyone here trying to agrue that cheating is acceptable.

[plotthickens]

Originally Posted by PlungingHornets To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Symphi - Can't we get 90% of people to agree on basic things like, don't murder, don't cheat people in business practices, don't kick puppies? Pretty much only a literal Satinist or a neo-Nazi will seriously argue that murder is acceptable. In that sense I disagree with moral relativism, but something like polyamory seems open to debate, and therefor should not be prohibited/frowned upon. I don't see anyone here trying to agrue that cheating is acceptable.

I don't kick puppies, don't cheat (or endorse it or any other kind of lying in relationships), and can't see why what happens between consenting adults should be judged. Seriously. All this finger-wagging is useless, incomprensibly motived, and leads to bad things.

[VagrantChord]

	Originally Posted by dennisevans To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Monogomy is bullshit. I believe in enjoying the company of all those that surround one and Monogomy is just another one of religion's stupid ideas to control the urges and needs of normal real life humans. They are trying to control us and make us warriors for a blind cause.

Respectfully, I disagree that monogamy is bullshit. However, I do agree with you that religion does use it as a control mechanism, something I find abhorrent.

For those couples that make a deliberate choice to be monogamous, if it works for them, I doubt they would see that choice as bullshit. Now, for me personally as an atheist, I don't let religion enter into my choice whether or not to be monogamous with a partner. It has to do with what we decide for ourselves. There have been times in my life where I savored the monogamy I shared with my partner. There have also been times where I enjoyed the company of multiple partners.

I think it's up to the participants to decide for themselves what does and does not work for them. Our personal opinions on their choices, hopefully, do not influence their choices.

[WyohKnott]

Been in a relationship for a little over three years. I find monogamy very easy - but that's probably at least in part because I have such high standards for men that even when my relationship isn't in great shape, I still have little to no romantic interest in the men I meet. Not a very romantic answer perhaps, but it works for me.

I'm curious to see if the "seven year itch" is a real thing, and if it'll happen to me. Maybe I'll change my mind about how easy it is, when I get to that point.

[Apophenia]

There's a big difference between monogamy and serial monogamy. What's the time frame for this question?

Also, if you all want to be discussing the same thing, you probably should at least have a common definition of monogamy. Or make that the center of the discussion: "how do you define monogamy in any type of relationship" and "can you follow your definition easily?"



Edit:

Looks like that matter has already been discussed!

[Distance]

Originally Posted by PlungingHornets To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Judging from your 'tude, I'm going to infer that you're saying I'm a terrible person because, in my immaturity, I was a man eater a couple of times in my early 20s (a common mistake) and have since recognized the error of my ways and reformed. Or you're saying I'm a garden variety dirty whore. Hold on, I'm working up a tear to roll down my cheek. Hhhhhhhrrrgghhhaaah. Hmmmmmmf. Oh. No. I guess not today, sorry. Maybe catch me when I'm PMSing in about a week.

Eh? Can you explain what this has to do with the price of potatoes in Russia? You've created a false defense for something that was never stated, inferred or...anything. Bizarre!

[Bisclavret]

Another factor to keep in mind for why some people find monogamy easy and others difficult, is how much an individual prioritizes the sexual component of a relationship in light of its other components. Regarding my mental list of requirements in a partner, sexual matters are of low priority to me; attraction to me is more geared towards intellect and personality (though appearances do factor somewhat). But, considering that some people base the very foundation of their relationships on sex and sex alone, it is not surprising to hear how their unsatisfied sexual needs could ultimately lead to the collapse of their relationships. This is just an observation on my behalf.

Another reason why I (for myself) reject polygamy is that it increases the risk of unwanted pregnancy and or disease transmissions. Since I don't want any children and actively desire to avoid sexually transmitted infections, I could not accept my GF sleeping around with strangers, nor could I allow myself to have sex my random women whom I don't know. The risk is even far too great within a monogamous relationship, so there's no way that I'll tolerate worsening my predicament by opening up the floodgates by living a premiscuous lifestyle.