Monogamy Sucks

[Metal Vendetta]

Yeah, I don't know if that's quite coming through in my posts, but I believe that pretty firmly. I honestly think it's commitment that makes the difference. When you're firmly committed to each other then the sex reflects that level of emotional intimacy.

Well, I've had sex when I've been firmly committed and I've had sex when it's just been for fun between a couple of friends, and I've had sex with complete strangers and...I can't tell the difference, tbh. It's sex, that's what it is. Of course it's great. Sex is brilliant.

It's all the other stuff that causes problems.

[Cathy_Quinn]

Women are lying ****ing bitches, the lot of them.

Completely understand why you feel that way tbh, but having been in relationships with women and men I find most are as bad as each other given half the chance. My on-off girlfriend in high school used to kiss me, flirt with me and upon occasion tell me she loved me but just didn't want to face the social stigma of being openly in a lesbian relationship. Then I found out she'd been telling mutual friends I was a stalker and she was scared of me. So yes, women can be utter c***s. But I have found men can be just as likely to lie about what they want. Go figure. What people won't do to save their faces eh?

Very sorry to hear about your experiences though, you deserve better.

[Metal Vendetta]

Thanks Cathy. What you say rings true though...I'm pretty sure that most of my exes are out on their web forums saying the same sorts of things about me, tbh. We're all probably as bad as each other in the end.

What I want to address, though, is this myth that sex is somehow better if you're in a stable relationship. It's not. I've had some pretty lousy sex with long-term girlfriends and I've had mind-blowing sex with one-night stands. If monogamy isn't necessarily a construct created by society, this idea that "sex is better with a long-term partner" is for sure. It's a fallacy (or should that be phallusy?) created by people in long-term relationships to make themselves feel better about all the sex they're not having with other people.

What matters is if you're both on the same wavelength *at the time*, not whether you've met each other's parents, ffs.

[angloconvoy]

Actually, I've got to disagree a little there. Yes, while the act can be (pardon the pun) ******* fantastic with a one night stand, I find the experience a little hollow if there's no love to back it up, like its just a genetic imperative to be fulfilled. With love there's connection. Now I'm too drunk to go into any detail about how I've been burned in the past, and believe me I have (a few of you have seen the fallout once or twice, Rob incuded) and a lot of it is down to them lying from th start. I'm still waiting for the one who'll tell me what she wants instead of trying to fit into what I want while resenting me for it the whole time, but I'm holding onto hope,because, well, [composite word including 'f*ck'] it, hope is all that keeps me going. Point being if I gave up, I'd just have the emotionless (yet admittedly physically satisfying) experience for the rest of my life. It not enough, and its worth more than stupid fantasies that often turn out to be somewhat lacking without the theme music and editing.

[Metal Vendetta]

We seem to be arguing from the same place here though, Dan. If you separate love and sex (as Shanti did in his first post) then sex can be awesome with a one-night-stand and leave you feeling hollow after or it can be rubbish with your long-term girlfriend yet you feel great because she loves you. I just want to nail this myth that just because you're committed to each other then the sex is automatically going to be great, because it's not. Love, on the other hand, can make you feel amazing, even if there's no sex involved.

Having said that, a really good one-night stand can make you feel pretty damn fine too. Like I said, screw monogamy. It's for the breeders.

Got my ticket for Tokyo, btw

[sprunkner]

It's a fallacy (or should that be phallusy?) created by people in long-term relationships to make themselves feel better about all the sex they're not having with other people.

If you separate love and sex (as Shanti did in his first post) then sex can be awesome with a one-night-stand and leave you feeling hollow after or it can be rubbish with your long-term girlfriend yet you feel great because she loves you.

I would like to meet this person who can separate love and sex. Doesn't seem to have worked so well for any of us...

[bumblemusprime]

When thinking about an open relationship men seem to see things at different ends than woman do. Men tend to think of the sexual experience, women seem to think about the implications.
What if they like the other person more, what if the other person pleases them more, or has a better body, better sense of humor, better income?
What if your partner had someone one night that you didn’t? What if your partner wanted to see the same person several times in a row?
M.V. you are right woman are crazy, we want to be the perfect girl the one who can give her man every fantasy but it kills when we feel we aren’t (I know I am simplifying the story).
I’m know the same goes on with men, that’s why there are so many pills to make men longer and stronger.
In my opinion sex is not like a video game you reach the end and just have to play the same game again or buy another. For me sex gets better each time.
What’s more important is to keep your own sex life active. Do you strive to have sex frequently? I’ve found that frequently is most important.

[angloconvoy]

We seem to be arguing from the same place here though, Dan.

Yep, that's why I said I disagree a little. Cos it was just a little, granted I was drunk and it was 7am, so I may not have been at my most eloquent.

Got my ticket for Tokyo, btw

And that right there is pure awesome on toast. What dates?

Do you strive to have sex frequently?

Given that the majority of people here are guys, I'm assuming that's rhetorical.

[Metal Vendetta]

I would like to meet this person who can separate love and sex. Doesn't seem to have worked so well for any of us...

It's not too difficult. I am (or at least I was, before I left the UK) having sex with a girl. She's not the girl I love (or at least not one of the, eh, few girls I love, some of whom I haven't even had sex with) but she's the girl that I have sex with (well now we're on other sides of the planet we just exchange naked pictures and masturbate, but that's a whole different story).

Now she might see it differently to that - see above comment regarding being ****buddies and how she lied about that, but I've been open about it from the start, and I've never promised her that we'd have a future together, settle down, have kids etc. All I said to her was that I wanted to have sex with her. As far as I'm concerned, a deal's a deal, and if I don't want to take it further than that...well, I'm not going to anyway. Sex is sex, love is love and sometimes the two mix, but not all the time.

What if they like the other person more, what if the other person pleases them more, or has a better body, better sense of humor, better income?

Who gives a **** about that kind of thing? This is sex we are talling about, not settling down and raising children. If I give my word to a girl that we *are* partners, then we *are* partners, I'm not going to leave her because we meet someone richer, ffs. I pride myself on being a man of honour, and my word is my bond. If the ex had kept *her* word and gone through with it then I wouldn't have cared if the other girl had been Kylie Minogue, I would have been hers for life, as long as she didn't lie to me, or **** me over. Which she did, but I've gone over that.

What if your partner had someone one night that you didn’t?

That's cheating, and I wouldn't do that to my partner.

What if your partner wanted to see the same person several times in a row?

That's also cheating, right? I mean, I'm not talking about going out and ****ing everyone you fancy, I'm talking about a one-off event, shared between a couple who love and trust one another. I wouldn't do that to someone I trust, and if someone did that to me, then yes, I would leave them. FFS, what you're talking about is straight up infidelity, which I believe is wrong.

M.V. you are right woman are crazy, we want to be the perfect girl the one who can give her man every fantasy but it kills when we feel we aren’t (I know I am simplifying the story).

It still doesn't justify lying to your partner, does it? I happen to be one of those old-fashioned types who believes in honesty.

I’m know the same goes on with men, that’s why there are so many pills to make men longer and stronger.

Never needed 'em, I'm long and strong enough. Maybe when I get older, but I doubt it. The only time I've ever taken Viagra was for the ex, as a shared experience, to see what it was like so maybe it would be better for her. Gave me the worst mother****ing headache of my life, I wish I'd never bothered, tbh.

In my opinion sex is not like a video game you reach the end and just have to play the same game again or buy another. For me sex gets better each time.

Eh, sometimes sex is better, sometimes it's worse. As long as it's with someone who is honest with me, I don't really care. If I love her and I find out she's lied to me, then it doesn't matter how good the sex is, tbh. I'd rather have sex with someone else.

What’s more important is to keep your own sex life active. Do you strive to have sex frequently? I’ve found that frequently is most important.

I do it whenever I can. Sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse. Again, if we're talking about a relationship, I value honesty over regular sex.

I dunno, you may not agree, but my personal philosophy when it comes to this kind of thing is:

[composite word including 'f*ck'] me: fine.
[composite word including 'f*ck'] with me: goodbye.

Don't [composite word including 'f*ck'] with me.

[Metal Vendetta]

And that right there is pure awesome on toast. What dates?

Looks like some time in February...the 8th I think...Let you know closer to the time

[Best First]

I just want to nail this myth that just because you're committed to each other then the sex is automatically going to be great, because it's not.

no one has said it is 'automatically' - just that it can be. Which does not seem ridiculous at all, just as a one night stand can be mind blowing but equally can be crap.

In terms of the original question its pretty much about weighing up what you want, the chances of getting it and what's really most important to you.

Sorry you are going through a rough time - i don't think its gender specific though, i just think some people are c*cks. I've yet to get to the point of believing they all are though.

Sprunk , was challenging Shanti's assertion monogomy is a 'made up' concept, not your post.

[Kaylee]

Sorry you are going through a rough time - i don't think its gender specific though, i just think some people are c*cks. I've yet to get to the point of believing they all are though.

Ain't that the truth

[angloconvoy]

I've had bad times when I've felt like everyone was a ****, but then people can prove you wrong. Not to forget, even the best of people can do the worst of things (and of course vice versa). I remember the London bombings, one guy saved a few people's lives so the press proclaimed him a hero, then it came out he had a conviction for rape, so he was, of course, villified. People are extremely complicated, and that's the problem and the joy at the same time.

And since its kind of relevant, my date this weekend went very well, I seem to have met a girl who is not only attractive but who is very fun and intelligent. Meaning she speaks three languages and loves video games.

[Shanti418]

Damn, what a hell of a lot of stuff to respond to. You have no idea how happy I am that this thread has turned into a topic of conversation.

I don't think humans are quite that simple (stupid brain) but i think to dismiss monogomy as nothing more than a construct is a bit... glib i guess.

Oh, glib for sure, sir. Partly drunk, partly just to start some fireworks.

But it holds some truth, though.

In my opinion, the biggest things holding up monogamy as a social paradigm are:

1. Human jealousy. I agree that this is a large sticky problem. When people open themselves up to be loved, they also open themselves up to be hurt. It's natural to be scared to lose something as important to you as the one you love. However, the question is, "Is jealousy intrinsic to a relationship?" I believe that it's not. If I found a girl that totally blew me away sexually, that means nothing to me relationship wise because I've learned that the emotional, loving, supportive aspects my girlfriend give me far outweigh sexual pleasure in the long term.

Sprunk, I'm ALL for the "we're so deep in socialization we don't know what the hell is going on," defense, but I've taken the blue pill: I'm outside the socialization box: I see the strings and I'm not impressed. If I could go back and NOT know, if I could just feel stirrings of rightness and correctness and naturalness when it comes to having sex with one person out of tradition, that would be great. Ignorance is bliss, as they say. And I'm not saying monogamy is a bad thing, or that love and sex CAN'T have a relationship: I'm just saying that, in this ever increasing liberal world of openly gap people and interracial marriages, where social taboos are falling left and right, does monogamy still really need to be a social paradigm, a situation in which virtually all couples find themselves?


2. Patriarchy. If men didn't feel posessive of their woman's sexuality, they wouldn't have a problem sharing it as much. If women's self conception weren't distorted by the goddess/whore dynamic so rampant in Western culture, they wouldn't feel so torn and unsure about trying things sexually that they really want to but are afraid of what their husband might think. If women didn't feel like sex and their sexuality is their big gambling chip, their ace in the hole when it comes to landing a promotion, finding a decent man to have kids with, etc. etc, it would be a different situation. Societally, they hold the cards when it comes to people having sex, and I'm sure many women feel that the fact that their husband can have sex with them is something that has utility. Many a woman has used sex in a relationship as incentive, or lack therof as punishment.


Right. That was a bunch of stuff that may not all make sense, nor completly say what I'm looking to say, but to summarize that point: If society was less judgemental of female sexuality, females would be a lot more open to exploring and enjoying their sexuality.

So... after all that's said and done... has Shanti come to any conclusions about how he wants to handle this issue in his current and possibly future relationships...?

Well, in THIS relationship I've said that being open to non monogamous sexual encounters (swingerish, not open relationship/polyamory) is important to me. As important to me and as deal breaking to me as wanting or not wanting to have kids might be for someone else. That's the only way I can handle it: Be honest about what I want and need, and see where the cards fall. So now she has a question in front of her. I don't see her answering it anytime soon, and I think I'm going to lay off it based on an epiphany I had a few days ago that the best way to stave off human jealousy is to offer her a commitment more than just boyfriend/girlfriend, but that seems directly contradictory to what I said preceeding this last couple sentances.

Yeah, I don't know if that's quite coming through in my posts, but I believe that pretty firmly. I honestly think it's commitment that makes the difference. When you're firmly committed to each other then the sex reflects that level of emotional intimacy.

I agree that sex can get better with emotional intimacy and commitment. I'm not sure about f***ing, though. And even as the sex gets better through emotional intimacy and commitment, it is precisely that emotional intimacy and commitment that should hypothetically release one from monogamy if one so chooses, in a perverse Marxist sort of way.

Sex can be better in a relationship because you KNOW this girl, and she KNOWS you, and to have a level of acceptance where this girl (okay, it's going to get a bit graphic here) lets you be inside her, lets you into her feminity and body, is bad ass. And as you grow together, you begin to know her body, and familiarity with the playing field is always going to help.
But f***** can be good in and out of a relationship because this is about two people who want to orgasm like a starving man wants to eat. This is about physical attractivenss and animal lust. This is about primal, base acceptance.


Can there not be a level of trust between two people where you can be sure the other person won't leave you for a slightly better piece of ass?

[Best First]

not if your as pretty as i am...

[angloconvoy]

Here's a fun update on my situation. Crashed and burned already. With the best ever "you're really great" putdown. Like really, full of "I feel really great when you email me, I have a great time when I'm with you", a topping of I broke up with my long distance boyfriend a month ago and a side of "you never know what might happen in the future". Follwed with fun mixed messages like, let's go on holiday together next year. Seriously, I give up.

[Metal Vendetta]

Ah man sorry to hear that. That sucks.

[angloconvoy]

Ah, I was drunk and emotional. We all know I'm not really clever enough to give up. I got another mixed-message email about how great I am today, she'll break.