i find such rule to be inherently controlling and coercive. and used to punish abused and neglected partners who find affection elsewhere but can’t leave their relationship due to coersion or fear of homelessness.
Cheating like that should be like “we agreed were both in a diet, but I had a donut that someone brought to the office”, not “you are inherently a horrible human being who deserves to be shamed and hated for seeking human connection”.
If two parties agreed to it under no sense of duress then anyone who betrayed the mutual trust required is making a selfish choice.
If your feelings toward the agreement change you need to have a discussion with the other person.
You can say they’re antiquated for agreeing to it, you can even say that it’s an unrealistic expectation but if it’s consensually agreed to it’s about trust in your partner’s word
I would never agree to those terms, so they don’t apply to me.
the problem is that society, states, and religion pushes those standards as if they are the only correct form of relationships. they are arbitrary rules based on ancient forms of control, where women were seen as free household labor and baby factories.
I empathize. Women are absolutely coerced into a role by modern society a habit we are sadly falling back into and that is horrible.
However, to say that no two people wish for a monogamous relationship and that trust ultimately doesn’t matter is a step too far for me. But I understand why someone would feel that way.
I too have seen people trapped in a loveless marriage.
still agree with that. it’s a stupid standard that hurts and shackles people rather than help them
so many loving relationships are torn because an affair, even an emotional one, even if one partner does noting but just develops feelings (100% out of their control), or worse, jealousy. all because monogamy is the standard.
ask elder people who were married through most of their lives and they all have stories of those hardships and how it hurt them.
wouldn’t it be nicer and simpler of cheating was viewed with the same severity as cheating in a diet? rather than being a devastating blow to a relationship and might even lead to severe social punishment?
We are animals we need connections and we aren’t always in control regarding what connections form.
So am I correct in saying under your framework monogamy can never be chosen freely? Or would it be at more accurate to say that if it was chosen it’ll be chosen via action and not agreement?
Humans can’t control what they feel, you cannot agree to not develop feelings or interests on other people, doing so is inherently dishonest, not to your partner but to yourself. and expecting it from your partner is equally unfair.
yes, two people can agree that they expect all their romantic and sexual needs to come from within the couple and promise not to engage romantically or sexually with other people. But if it wasn’t because it is the social norm, that would seem a strange and ridiculous expectation.
I myself am poly but I’ve been in a relationships where the other person wasn’t comfortable with it and agreed to monogamy and have been on the giving and receiving end of infidelity. As I’ve gotten older I’ve understood the damage I’ve done and how to properly engage with those feelings and have an open and honest discussion.
I think we actually agree more than it seemed. Feelings aren’t choices. Actions are. And the social punishment for failing at monogamy is often brutal and unfair. I just think two people can still freely say 'don’t act on it and if they both mean it, breaking that hurts. That’s all.
my main take (right now, it likely changed though the many conversations and branches this thread has) is that monogamy is the normarive standard pushed by religion and states. and everyone should at least question it. regardless if they end up agreeing on it or not.
i find such rule to be inherently controlling and coercive. and used to punish abused and neglected partners who find affection elsewhere but can’t leave their relationship due to coersion or fear of homelessness.
Cheating like that should be like “we agreed were both in a diet, but I had a donut that someone brought to the office”, not “you are inherently a horrible human being who deserves to be shamed and hated for seeking human connection”.
If two parties agreed to it under no sense of duress then anyone who betrayed the mutual trust required is making a selfish choice.
If your feelings toward the agreement change you need to have a discussion with the other person.
You can say they’re antiquated for agreeing to it, you can even say that it’s an unrealistic expectation but if it’s consensually agreed to it’s about trust in your partner’s word
I would never agree to those terms, so they don’t apply to me.
the problem is that society, states, and religion pushes those standards as if they are the only correct form of relationships. they are arbitrary rules based on ancient forms of control, where women were seen as free household labor and baby factories.
I empathize. Women are absolutely coerced into a role by modern society a habit we are sadly falling back into and that is horrible.
However, to say that no two people wish for a monogamous relationship and that trust ultimately doesn’t matter is a step too far for me. But I understand why someone would feel that way.
I too have seen people trapped in a loveless marriage.
still agree with that. it’s a stupid standard that hurts and shackles people rather than help them
so many loving relationships are torn because an affair, even an emotional one, even if one partner does noting but just develops feelings (100% out of their control), or worse, jealousy. all because monogamy is the standard.
ask elder people who were married through most of their lives and they all have stories of those hardships and how it hurt them.
wouldn’t it be nicer and simpler of cheating was viewed with the same severity as cheating in a diet? rather than being a devastating blow to a relationship and might even lead to severe social punishment?
We are animals we need connections and we aren’t always in control regarding what connections form.
So am I correct in saying under your framework monogamy can never be chosen freely? Or would it be at more accurate to say that if it was chosen it’ll be chosen via action and not agreement?
Humans can’t control what they feel, you cannot agree to not develop feelings or interests on other people, doing so is inherently dishonest, not to your partner but to yourself. and expecting it from your partner is equally unfair.
yes, two people can agree that they expect all their romantic and sexual needs to come from within the couple and promise not to engage romantically or sexually with other people. But if it wasn’t because it is the social norm, that would seem a strange and ridiculous expectation.
I myself am poly but I’ve been in a relationships where the other person wasn’t comfortable with it and agreed to monogamy and have been on the giving and receiving end of infidelity. As I’ve gotten older I’ve understood the damage I’ve done and how to properly engage with those feelings and have an open and honest discussion.
I think we actually agree more than it seemed. Feelings aren’t choices. Actions are. And the social punishment for failing at monogamy is often brutal and unfair. I just think two people can still freely say 'don’t act on it and if they both mean it, breaking that hurts. That’s all.
my main take (right now, it likely changed though the many conversations and branches this thread has) is that monogamy is the normarive standard pushed by religion and states. and everyone should at least question it. regardless if they end up agreeing on it or not.