quote:

ORIGINAL: Lady Alaria

You're normal. Monogamy is beaten into our brains from birth on(in most cases). Poly people are still sexual outlaws. But I have never understood the concept of monogamy, or where it springs from. I tend to think of it in the same terms I think of sexual guilt/shame. An unhealthy, unnatural control mechanism created by a social structure trying to make itself work. More judao-christian patriarchal irrationality.

quote:



I am worried about hijacking the thread, but your comments on monogamy and being unsure where it comes from reminds me of a few things I read about it.

Karl Marx made a good case for the reason for monogamy in a capitalistic society, that reason being that since babies generally come from women, and prior to the advent of DNA testing, men needed to know that the children they would leave their capital two were of their own blood.  Many other writers in the Second Wave of Feminism piggybacked on that to explore why monogamy was expected, and a few reasons why the institution was normative in most human societies seem to be based on the following.

1)  Men needed to know the children they are caring for are their own.  It is a guy thing, apparently, because I have not seen much written sociologically about the DNA structure aiding or negating the bonding between an adult male and a minor child.

2)  A woman during pregnancy and after giving birth tended to require a great deal of care and protection early on in our species history.  In other words, women tended to buy into the system for their (and their children's) own protection.

However, human societies have evolved to the point where a man can get a DNA test to ensure his seed is carried on, if he is that sort of (mindless, self-absorbed idiot) person.  A woman without a man, as one of the major Feminist writers of the sixties observed, is like a fish without a bicycle.

Our society has also evolved to where a woman can most likely do just as well as anybody else whether or not she has a man hogging the remote control.

So what we are left with is a monogamous system originally instituted for the care and protection of children and the proper assignment of assets to one's heirs.  This system fostered for millenia in our species, and 40 years ago a bunch of people stood up and went "gee, people have been screwing other people in record numbers despite being married (for life) to one person" and asked "what's up with this whole monogamy thing?"  The most credible answers that I studied back then, seem to hinge around the idea that it is a socialized construct that people in the modern world are living in that was acculturated into them from birth on.

And yet the system has changed, at least in the United States, and monogamy is no longer the panacea it once seemed to be.

Polygamous people are sexual outlaws, but I imagine this is largely due to their sexuality being considered taboo by centuries of socialization burned into people's brains, and not because there is anything particularly wrong or unworkable about it.  People who have polygamous relationships (except the 10000 or so in Utah) tend to make other people uncomfortable.

This is one of the main reasons why I personally dont support or deride monogamy.  If it works for people, go for it.  If it doesnt, go for that.  Assuming the human animal evolved from monkeys to discover how to nuke Japan, our species' sexuality is not based in monogamy, and our attempts to inflict monogamy on each other tend to be something I find rather amusing.

On the other hand, I tend to be serially monogamous because I feel better with one relationship going on at one time, but as usual, this is just me and I could be wrong. 

Sinergy


_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to Lady Alaria)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slavemaia

quote:

. Sex for me is primarily in my head more than the physical parts, so i've never truly been able to understand the term "play without sex".

quote:

So you are saying no type of intercourse, oral sex, or fingering of any type? 
 
DG

quote:

ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: behindmirrors

My Dom is the only male I will be with in any sexual way in our relationship. Period.
Since I am bisexual, though, he has given me more or less free reign to find a girl to play with- as long as I tell him first and obtain his permission. Thus far, I have not played with anyone else. He is also looking to arrange this for me at some point, since he knows I miss being with a girl sometimes, and, well, he just simply finds it hot.
Do I consider our relationship monogamous? Yes. I do, at least for now. It is the only serious and committed relationship I have and will have. I'm not sure if my view of that will change or not when I actually do find myself playing with another girl, but I guess an update will be necessary when it happens.

behindmirrors.

If this happens and your views change, yes, please update  (either way)  
 
DG

quote:

ORIGINAL: behindmirrors

Alright, so, I was intending on updating this sooner, but, well...I didn't quite get around to it. Anyhow, I was asked to update when my Dom had me play with another girl, and on the 21st of December, I got my chance as a reward he gave me for my hard work and obedience as his slave.
I still consider us monogamous, if nothing else but that he is the only committed relationship-partner that I have. Perhaps in the sexual sense, we are no longer completely monogamous (well, at least I'm not- he didn't play with her), but to both of us, it is more defined by a long-term committment and an understanding between both partners of what that means to them.
My guess is that in small steps, we will eventually branch out to playing with other partners and couples sexually, though always being careful about who we choose and having negotiated heavily with all partners first (he waited, negotiated, and made sure things were okay for several months, working both me and the other girl up to it and making sure everything was safe first before this happened).
So, my opinion hasn't completely changed, and I won't be going poly anytime soon, but my horizons have been broadened, and I like that.
And, thus we end my dragging up an old thread to follow through on a request.

behindmirrors.

Oh thanks for the update behindmirrors.  So many times i had hoped to get back to this thread and respond to some more posts but so much else is going on (both here and in RL), that i guess it kind of got put on the back burner 

But i do appreciate your update.  i can't help to add that i hope you at least keep us informed on how things end up progressing along your journey 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Celeste43

No play, no sex, no emotional intimacy with others.

However I'm not sure that someone who goes with their partner to a club to session on the cross there and asks a fireplay expert to do something to her is by definition poly. It doesn't seem to me any different than setting up a tennis game with a friend because your partner prefers golf. Sessioning in private does seem different to me but doing something in public with your partner there to give you any needed aftercare and possible get pointers in safely doing the previously unknown play doesn't threaten your intimacy.

However it isn't an option for me because he's said it isn't.

All of these posts have given me quite a different outlook on what monogamy could possibly mean to a prospective partner.  From now on, i'll have to make sure i get clarification on that before i get involved 

quote:

ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl
Oh thanks for the update behindmirrors.  So many times i had hoped to get back to this thread and respond to some more posts but so much else is going on (both here and in RL), that i guess it kind of got put on the back burner 
 
i see what you mean about still being monogamous with your partner.  i have read all of the posts here and what i am seeing is that 1)  monogamy seems to have more to do with commitment, than actual physical acts.  In other words, although play with other partners may be involved, there is a sense of monogamy to the primary partner.  This could be based more on an emotional commitment than physical it seems.   And 2)  really, the only real distinction i am seeing is between monos and polys...and even though polys are not monos, they are committed within their primary relationships.  Again, this sounds like more of an emotional based committment than physical. 
 
But i do appreciate your update.  i can't help to add that i hope you at least keep us informed on how things end up progressing along your journey 
 
DG

quote:

ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl

i did a search and know this has been discussed before but there are also new members who have joined since then so i am looking for a broad spectrum of opinions.  If you are tired of the topic, please spare me the critque and pass it by.  If you've responded to prior threads on this, still feel the same and would like to just copy and paste your response here, that would be appreciated too.
 
i am monogamous but i realized early on that there seems to be quite a diversity in the definition of monogamy within D/s relationships.   One of the earliest doms i communicated with told me that he and his main partner were monogamous but that he could play with others....as long as he did not have sex with them.  It obviously did not mean the same to me.
 
So what does monogamy mean in your partnership? 
What is the extent that others can be involved but you are still considered monogamous?
If you do consider your relationship monogamous but do include others, would there be a limit as to how far that can go before you feel the 'monogamy line' has been crossed?
 
This is in no way intended to compare that one's idea of monogamy is any better than anyone else's....or what monogamy should mean.  i am just trying to get a feel of what it means to you and your partner.
 
Thanks,
DG

quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

For me, monogamy means monogamous in all ways....physical, emotional, mental.  No need for others in any way or form.  Like I said though, I think it's difficult to find in the lifestyle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

Yep, monogamy as in the vanilla-marriage sort where neither partner strays from the committment.  I'm an old-fashioned girl.  In other words, I would not be pleased with an open relationship or poly situation.  I know that stuff is beyond me.  I am impressed with people who have the courage to go there, but for me, I'd always be waiting for the rejection.