Bunnie wrote:
Esther Perel said:
‘Monogamy used to mean one person for life. Now monogamy means one person at a time.’
I came across this quote, and couldn’t help but agree with it.
Any thoughts?
If you have observed this same shift in mentality, why do you personally, think it has occurred?
I would agree the shift that quote is describing has happened, but it sounds like the author is mourning the fact. I think it's something to celebrate, a progression. Sure you have licentious horndogs who fuck anything that moves, but you've always had that, even when people were "together for life"; if they wanted to get strange the wedding band on their finger didn't stop them. I don't think it has anything to do with polyamory either. Sure more people are walking down that path, myself included, but I think it's just shifting away from the patriarchal institutions of the past. It means that it's easier for a partner to escape the abuser sleeping under the same roof than it was in the past. It means not having to be stuck in situations that are clearly no longer working for either party just because a church or society said it was the only option. May that form of monogamy stay dead and buried forever.
Sure, it's wonderful and beautiful when a couple can spend their entire lives together, but the odds on that are not as rosy as popular culture/society led us to believe it was when at least I was growing up. Not to mention, a lot of those examples we hold up as examples of the ideal couples who were together 80 years or whatever; We have no idea the naked truths of those relationships positive or negative.
The only thing that matters is if people are happy, loved, and safe. Whether that be with one person for life, one person at a time but different people if one of those conditions changes, or multiple people at the same time. The rest is noise.