Why monogamy?

[Shadow Wolf]

Same situation here. Us 3 have different fathers. I never call them my half-siblings, and it's weird to do so.

Yeah. They're just my brother and sister. We don't have half bonds or half feelings or half connections. My brother and I were even closer than what many "full" siblings are.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

And no, I don't understand why biological paternity is a huge issue... do you feel jealousy when thinking of raising somebody else's child?

Because raising children is a lifetime of physical and emotional responsibility and monetary expense. I would feel repulsion at the thought. And extreme anger if I was put in that position due to manipulation or dishonesty on the part of my partner.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Wanna know how many times I've been called the milkman's baby? At times I even wonder because I don't resemble my dad's family, and neither of my parents have been the most honest with eachother.

Well, I'm sure we can at least agree that honesty, trust, and staying true to the mutual expectations of the relationship are paramount to the health of a relationship, regardless of whether it's monogamous or poly.

 

[Jimmy]

Cuz mommy carries life for 9 months then gives birth and daddy helped out then they all go to fun parks for vacation as a family imo

 

[Brickjectivity]

From the little I know, it's said that many indigenous societies are matriarchal. I'm aware of some in the Americas. Speaking of that, polyandry is apparently not that rare. Though I'm not knowledgeable enough to elaborate on these matters.
Suffrage is somewhat unrelated to the discussion, I suppose.

Polyandry is not rare in small societies, including in western lands.

 

[Circumradiant]

Polyandry is not rare in small societies, including in western lands.

Yeah, it might even be necessary for survival in certain cases.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because raising children is a lifetime of physical and emotional responsibility and monetary expense. I would feel repulsion at the thought. And extreme anger if I was put in that position due to manipulation or dishonesty on the part of my partner.

I did NOT say that! You misquoted another member and said it was me.
Amd as we've been pointing out, real Dads do that.

 

[Circumradiant]

Well, I'm sure we can at least agree that honesty, trust, and staying true to the mutual expectations of the relationship are paramount to the health of a relationship, regardless of whether it's monogamous or poly.

That is true, but one isn't necessarily better than the other... all subjective.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

I did NOT say that! You misquoted another member and said it was me.
Amd as we've been pointing out, real Dads do that.

I'm sorry, I did not realize that had happened. I've edited the post.

I think it's important for biological fathers to adopt that responsibility. If the child's real father is not in their life, they can become emotionally burdened with that rejection.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

That is true, but one isn't necessarily better than the other... all subjective.

No, it is not all subjective. Some of it is objective.

Monogamy has protective benefits. Practicing monogamy provides inherent protection from paternal ambiguity and transmission of STIs. Those are objective benefits.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm sorry, I did not realize that had happened. I've edited the post.

I think it's important for biological fathers to adopt that responsibility. If the child's real father is not in their life, they can become emotionally burdened with that rejection.

That claim is not supported by research. That says a child need a stable environment, stable rules and clear boundaries, and loving and supportive caretakers.
But it has also been observed that lesbians tend to raise the best emotionally adjusted kids.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

That claim is not supported by research.

Anecdotal evidence is enough to know that it does happen. With what frequency, I don't have the answer to that question.

...a child need a stable environment, stable rules and clear boundaries, and loving and supportive caretakers.

100%

But it has also been observed that lesbians tend to raise the best emotionally adjusted kids.

I'm extremely skeptical that those results are because lesbians just make better parents. If the study is not controlled for things like socioeconomic status, then the results are meaningless. Because lesbian couplings are functionally sterile, they must have children through assisted means, i.e. artificial insemination and adoption, both of which are financially costly and complex undertakings. Additionally, adoption agencies impose competence barriers on prospective adoptive parents that natal parents do not have to deal with whatsoever.

 

[Circumradiant]

No, it is not all subjective. Some of it is objective.

Monogamy has protective benefits. Practicing monogamy provides inherent protection from paternal ambiguity and transmission of STIs. Those are objective benefits.

Well, I don't want to argue about the topic of paternity anymore.
In regards to STIs, I assume that in most poly relationships, partners communicate with one another and get tested before any intimacy occurs. With open relationships, you might not know who your partner is with, so you depend on them being responsible and using protection. In that case, I suppose you're right that monogamy offers protective benefits.
But cheating is always a risk in any arrangement, and that complicates things further. My mother told me stories about women who had contracted HIV after their husband cheated on them. That's pretty scary.

A problem that many AFAB people deal with is urinary tract infection, which isn't associated with sex, but it has a big chance of happening when you don't wear a condom, since bacteria gets in direct contact with the urethra. The canal is much shorter as well. It's always recommended to urinate after sexual activity.

 

[Left Coast]

It's less about religion and more about patriarchal social structures that enforce male dominance over all else. It's about males controlling females so they know the female's child is "theirs." All else is window dressing.

Nah. A marriage of one husband with multiple wives (the predominant polygamous arrangement throughout human history) provides the man just as much assurance in that regard. And of course, is just as patriarchal. If anything, the rise of monogamy has been associated with more egalitarian marital relationships. Marriages are now seen as a union of two equals rather than a man owning a woman as property.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I think monogamy being praised and polyamory being stigmatized is because monogamy has been the standard for our specific culture for so long. However humans praise fidelity in relationships, they are biologically wired to sexual desire and behave in ways that complicate the value of "monogamy."

My partner and I have been together for over two decades and have only been monogamous for the first few years in college. We've had other partners both serious and casual. It's not been all rainbows and cupcakes but it's been successful in that we've navigated having an open relationship and continue to be dedicated to each other. We're continually described as a "strong couple" with "great communication" by various people, both those who know we are poly and those who don't. Part of that has come from the hard relationship work in the background that includes managing other relationships.

I recognize polyamory doesn't work for everyone, but neither does monogamy. Humans from an ethological perspective exhibit a wide range when it comes to mating, communial, and pair-bonding behavior.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

How many of them were interested in the rearing of their own biological children? Although I was cavalier in the delivery, that was the center of the argument I was making. Polyamory really throws a wrench into that dynamic.

There's a saying: It takes a village to raise a child. In most human cultures, children are raised communally.

There's a joke in the polyamory community: Monogamy? In this economy? Kind of the same idea. Having more people working towards a shared life is a very innately human behavior. It's hard, sure to have multiple romantic and sexual partners, sure, but that's life. I am not sure monogamy and a strict nuclear family lifestyle is any easier; it has difficulties in other ways than juggling multiple partners.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why is monogamy praised and polygamy or open relationships frowned upon?

Am I right when I say that religion has a big part in normalizing monogamy and demonizing other kinds of relationships?

I know, in Christian church I was taught that monogamy was the way because a marriage was a picture of our loyal and singular relationship with God.

Then in my first marriage, I know that I had immense feelings of jealousy and anger when my then wife suggested an open relationship instead of our monogamous one.

So, religion, and unjust possessiveness. These reasons I believe are why monogamy is the norm.

I remember my then wife saying that she felt that monogamous relationships where restrictive and didn't make sense. I just figured she was a whore, but I understand her words and actions from back then a lot better now as the years have passed.

Is monogamy natural? I suppose that's the debate point of the thread.

If you are monogamous, what are your reasons for being so? Are you simply are in a monogamous relationship, or would you not be in a different kind of relationship, such as an open one (e.g. swinger).

I'm currently in a monogamous relationship with my boyfriend. I know that's what he would prefer and I would never suggest to him we change it, for even suggesting that to him I'm sure would bring up feelings of insecurities in our relationship.

But I am no longer opposed to being in an open relationship or something of the sort. I see no good reason why monogamy is so highly praised and open relationships/ polygamy is frowned upon.

It has nothing to do with religion. European peoples always practiced monogamous marriage, as far as I know (Germanic, Celtic, Latin, etc. peoples). (Monogamous meaning they were married to one person at a time.) Christianity didn't change or introduce that. The Abrahamic religions did not and still don't completely support monogamous marriage. It may have been that Christianity was influenced by European civilization in only allowing for monogamous marriage, as Judaism and Islam either used to practice polygamous marriage or leave the door open for one to practice it. Polygamy is common in Middle Eastern and African cultures. It's never been a thing here, except for fringe sects like Mormons.

Also, it's natural for people to feel sexually jealous, especially men. There's evolutionary reasons for that. You want to know if the baby is really yours, after all. There's a number of reasons why monogamy is superior. There's been multiple studies carried out on the impact of polygamy on society, and the results are fairly dreary, leading to an unstable society, whereas monogamy has several benefits for society and especially children, and has elevated the status of women in relationships and society in general. Maybe I'll go into it more when I'm not at work. I might just copy and paste what I've said before as I've made my case about this topic multiple times.

 

[Alien826]

This has been an interesting thread. Polyamory has been of great interest to me for a long time, probably because I have failed dismally at monogamy. By this I mean I have failed to have a happy relationship with a woman in a committed one-on-one relationship, or at least one where the happiness lasted for long, though the relationships (three in number) did.

First, I want to comment on a lot of what has been said so far, and the biggest problem I see is that posters are not describing polyamory as I think of it. They are talking about monogamous relationships that are twisted to include other people, with predictable problems. Like adding another person to an existing couple. Like open relationships that are basically agreed on cheating. And the essential problems with these kinds of arrangements arise from the rules of monogamy persisting into the polyamorous situation. If my spouse agrees to my shagging another woman, then it is implied that she has authority over me to the extent that such permission is required. And vice versa of course. And so on.

Another point is that polyamory is trying to exist in a largely monogamous culture. It's not so much the idea that it's considered "wrong", though that is a factor, but the absence of a support system that monogamous couples enjoy. If polyamory was considered "normal" then how many books would be written about how to get along in a polyamorous relationship? There would be generally accepted "rules" that didn't have to be hashed out anew in each case.

I'd like to describe a situation where polyamory might work, and work a lot better than our current system. In short, the relationship would be "put together" by a group of people that wanted it, but were all new to that particular group. It would be done in a framework of existing successful polyamorous relationships, and there would be professional advisors available to help. In short, what monogamous couples now have.

I'd like to set out how I think the polyamorous "marriage" would work and how it would be superior to what we have now, but this is long enough already. I'll see if there is any interest before proceeding.

 

[Orbit]

I like being monogamous. I don’t care if other people aren’t, it’s none of my business. Everybody just find your snuggles where you can.

 

[syo]

Why is monogamy praised and polygamy or open relationships frowned upon?

I want polyandry to become legal.