Monogamy

Boil it? Poached is far to sophisticated as well. What is ? scarrrry!

Hello Mr. Pennywise! I read your comment and I couldn’t help but respectfully disagree with your opinion. So here I am! About to insert my own opinion. But I hope you’ll read this with an open mind detached from a defensive or reactionary response trigger.

Now if I may input my commentary, “ahem.”
There is a reason why biology separated humans and animals. Yes humans and animals have the basic similar instinctual traits such as survival, hunting, reproduction etc. But again science dictates that we are different for a reason. We as humans do not live like lions, wolfs, deers or any other animal that resides within a pack.

Sure humans live within their communities/ family’s but we do not live in nature as the animals do. Therefore humans do not do as the animals do. Animals do not have social constructs or societal expectations of them like humans do. Humans are now considered domesticated. Humans have emotional responses to sex weather you believe that or not Mr. Pennywise is neither here nor there. So let us keep humans and animals separated from one another since that is how humans and animals live writhing todays time period.

Now what biology has told me is that animals/ humans don’t decide to reproduce . It’s our cells that decide this. If a habitat is unlivable our cells chose to protect themselves over reproduction. However if the habitat is favorable/ livable then cells will chose the opposite side and reproduce. Because we reside in a world that is livable our cells have chosen reproduction.

Now I am moving into my final point. You say monogamous relationships are lose/lose scenario? I feel that this comment is based off of your personal experience. At least to me it feels personal. Maybe you didn’t have the best luck with monogamy and had your heart broken, so you’ve given up on monogamy?Maybe you’ve formed an emotional detachment from sex? Who knows!?

However there are many reasons why society as a whole has changed what the definition of monogamy is. Just like many other words in the dictionary have changed in the last millennia. The world is changing as we speak.. But to proclaim that people are “waking” up to the idea that monogamy isn’t all that great. Many people can proclaim that poly relationships aren’t all that great either. But it is a fact that monogamy has been around for the last 3.5 million years. To refute that fact and say it doesn’t work.. Well.. That would mean 3.5 millions years of humans practicing it would be for not! But I rest my case.

Thank you for you reading this and I’m curious to see what your response will be.

Love,
Noire.

P.S: I’m sorry Bunny! If this has thrown the original intent of your blog off the rails I do apologize! But I couldn’t help myself! I had to say something! ?

Esther Perel said:
‘Monogamy used to mean one person for life. Now monogamy means one person at a time.’

This is very true. Most (not all) have lost the ability to pair bond. Because everybody (not literally) has a bunch of bodies under their belt. And in this day and age I'd argue the "one at a time" part. Unless we're talking one at a time in the BED. And religious people are not exempt from this behavior. This is an emotionally disturbed world that just does what FEELS GOOD.

Personally, I think society has changed in such a way that people are exposed to so many new things, ideas, and people outside of their small circle.
They're able to take that new information, apply it to their circumstances, and reinvent themselves (throughout any stage of their life) in a way that may have been stifled in previous time years (going back some time).

People have just been given room to grow and change. And sometimes they outgrow each other.

Some people will find that special someone that will grow with them for the rest of their lives. And some people will find many people to love over the course of their lifetime. Maybe a majority are embracing the 'I only get one life' and so they want to experience all they can?

I, personally, don't think that's a bad thing or a sad thing that something like the notion of monogamy is changing.

I like that there are many ways we can love and connect with each other.

Thanks for the post. It's definitely nice to think over things like this.

While I won’t yuck someone else’s yum (far be it for me to dictate how others conduct their relationships) I have to agree.

That’s not to say that poly *can’t* work, but it’s been my observation that too many who practice it all tend to up with serious trauma because of the selfish “feel good factor” inflicted upon them.

All too often, people who are already broken are further damaged in this dynamic and it’s just tragic for me to witness.

Given the 1 out of 10 rate of affairs, that is how often on average a genetic line is broken, and the Fitz, meaning out of wedlock born child of nobility the the main issue comes down to are people honest with themselves and others.

A king, sleeping around, is not exactly a bad thing, it insures there are hairs for his kingdom, and lack of an heir is not just his family's lives on the line but those under him lives. For no heir can mean war, and hiding the out of wedlock child by one of the queens ladies, by having the whole group go into sequester because the "queen" is pregnant is quite possible. There is even a song about a woman being executed for accidentally killing a royal child, hers, from an affair with the king. The French kings at times had official affairs, and this kept him honest, and yes the queen had one too, the was the dual responsibility of titles and the assorted responsibilities, and the royalty sneaking around to have time with their true love, so they just kept it honest.

You have older stories where husbands and wives are not what we would call monogamous. There was also no fertility treatment, no doctors, no invitro fertilization, you had other humans, and sleeping with choice individuals to try and deal with the issue of no children. Can you imagine how dedicated a husband is when he is open he may be the infertile one?

Historically children were your retirement, they were your insurance, your future. Society used to be radically more dependent on land and a woman's fertility to keep things going. Why woman ended up forbidden from some jobs, when calories are scarce, and it takes quite a few to have children, a woman's fertility becomes way more important than we think of it now. If you look up woman in armies you will find all contents have women involved as warriors at times. It was a necessity to restrict roles, not because everyone wanted it. When you get into more developed societies this changes from necessity, to forced norms, with limited understanding as to why.

What we think of as appropriate for relationships of the romantic kind is both from self preference and by the times and conditions one lives in.

In the end it comes down to honesty and integrity, in the situation if things work or not.

Quite honestly I believe the internet has a lot to answer for !
In the old days people didn’t travel so much and society was a more parochial thing, there was no easy way to find partners with the same needs wants and desires without “dating” there was a multi step process in place which took time and also taking that time to discuss and discover ! So monogamy was a loose general rule, because this was in the main face to face it wasn’t so easy to be non monogamous I will agree yes some people played around but generally not so many

Now with the press of a few buttons you can find people that whilst maybe not an exact fit, they are close enough to be interesting!
Which leads to the temptation of “having fingers in many pies” so to speak ! LDR’s are much easier and acceptable too, so we have opportunities that weren’t as available as in previous generations!

Bunnie,

I think that people in the millennial and gen-z are more comfortable with talking about their sexuality and other subjects openly, hence the shift that has and still is occuring. I know that there were people into a poly lifestyle years ago but it was not spoken about freely. Because it conjured up images such as some of the horrific things that have occurred throughout some communities such as Warren Jeff who right now still has control over many many people. I remember that people were scared that they would be put in jail and/or have children taken away if they practiced these lifestyles.

Of course abuse happens in every sub- culture known if humans are involved.
I have and still would consider a poly situation under the right circumstances.

I have done a fair amount of reading and trying to learn about the different aspects about ENM and All I can say is that it can get quite complicated and there are those who have a strict set of guidelines that I'm not sure allow for human emotions. Poly doesn't have to include BDSM or D/s but when it does include D/s, it can further complicate matters. As with everything, communication is a definite must. There are rules about that too whether it's kitchen table, or I don't know. I have seen some stories though that had me in tears simply because someone in an established monogamous relationship decides that they are poly and the partner felt they had to go along with it. I have also seen where that happens and the non poly partner thrives and the one who initiated the poly did not.

Fluid bonding being broken down into oral only (I'm sorry but that is fluid bonding) or No actual intercourse but toys, hands being okay.
What can be shared with partners, gf, bf, etc.

I'm sorry I could go on listing stuff but I do believe that with the advent of technology along with a more casual attitude towards sex, along with people comfortable with stating that all their needs can not be filled by one person is why the increase in poly --ships.

Is that okay that I concise it to -ships.☺️

Edit:

I forgot to address monogamy. I do not think monogamy is dead, there are plenty of folks who are quite content in a monogamous relationship. I do not agree that 3/4 of society is poly, that seems very high . They would mean that I would know some poly -ships for sure and I don't. Of course I don't get out as much these days but it wasn't that long ago that I was out and about in the thick of things.

I'm going to have to disagree with your notion that poly makes it easier for someone to escape an abuser. That is not the reality of abused people.
They stay out of fear of the abuser and God forbid should the abuser think they were planning to leave or contemplate having someone else.

Did you know that it is the time after divorce papers have been filed by the abused in a relationship that the violence can escalate and/or turn I to kidnapping, murder?


Your point about long term marriages and not knowing the ins and outs, I have witnessed people married for 50, 60, 70 years and it can be a beautiful thing to celebrate that with them.
I mean there are no words to describe how.i have felt when I helped put my grandparents 50th wedding anniversary celebration on. I also am/was close to a great uncle and his wife (actually most of them) and they celebrated 70 years of marriage, sadly he passed away last year.

I'm sorry you have never gotten to witness any relationshipa of that kind of duration.

Lots of fun speculation in this discussion. Did a brief search to see if there's some study evidence on the evolution of monogamy. Not sure there is an answer to the question, but it's interesting to discuss, eh?

This study suggests mate availability as a factor. I.e., When the ratio of females to males is greater, "promiscuity" increases, when the ratio is lower, "pair bonding" (i.e. monogamy) increases.

"among humans, an abundance of men is associated with higher rates of relationship commitment35, monogamy38,39, lower reproductive skew among males40, and less promiscuity in both sexes40,42." Discussion paragraph 4
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep32472

i think there are so many new things to factor in to the evolutionary model though. The last 100+ years have seen unprecedented changes like reliable contraception, reliable food, water on one side. I.e., we have greater assurance of survival, so sex can be more pleasure based vs procreation.

On the other hand we have also created the ability to wipe ourselves out as well. We used to throw rocks and sticks at each other, now we have nuclear weapons. Our 'progress' is destroying our environment, so do we need fewer people to survive or more?