Is a monogamous relationship/marriage realistic?

Lol, everytime I say that out loud, it's like an abracadabra for the world to cough up some hot man that goes sweeping me off my feet. It's fail safe. I bet if I sad it now, my doorbell would ring within 10 minutes.

 

Yeah after i typed that my phone started ringing beside me, but i was very very good and just looked at it and did not pick up.

 

haha.. ok doorbell didn't ring, but didn't say it out loud either.. I don't want to push my luck. I spent the whole weekend not answering textmessages.
My trick is to turn off sound and vibration, so the only way to tell is to look at the phone. That way I don't have to think about it.

 

I agree Saty. Monogamy is out of fashion, or it's simply too difficult for many people to adhere to or their attention span is so miniscule and their sense of personal dignity is absent so they cheat. I also like to believe that monogamy is possible.

 

.. or they step out of the monogamous part of society and has polygamous/polyamorous relationships instead, or join the queer movement and start reevaluating the way we view relationships and stop piedestalling the sexual relationships... or.. or.. oh well, there are heaps of alternatives. Somehow it would just be better if people who can't do monogamy didn't.
I suppose that it's such a fundamental part of our social structures that it might take a couple of hundred years more before people can choose what relationships to have, instead of hurting people.

Most often, people cheat because it gives them a sense of control over themself. Either that or for reasons of nostalgia.. It's not good, either way.. But I think much of it would go away if it wasn't such a taboo...

 

lol..

u did set her up like she was turning tricks

 

I agree Scylla, just don't partner with someone that wants monogamy when the individual isn't able or willing to be monogamous.

 

It certainly seems socially constructed with the origins likely being forged out of ancient property relations. Men wanted to ensure that the children they supported sprang from their loins, which created the need to control female sexuality through the advent of monogamy as an idea and marriage as as institution.

Think about this, though.

The primary (physical) impetus for sex is the achievement of an orgasm; a big reason why we keep coming back for more. If you compare the act and consequences of the male and female orgasm, you'll see that only one of them has reproductive value. When a man ejaculates inside of a woman, there is a chance every single time that she'll get pregnant. No so, however, if she cums and he does not. The evolutionary biologist (or psychologist) might argue that the reason why female orgasms are more elusive is because they serve no purpose beyond pleasure.

But if a women can orgasm without the risk of pregnancy, it also frees them from the mechanics of reproductive fitness. The problem, of course, is when her male partner orgasms as well and possibly locks her in a state of pregnancy for nine months.

 

Over the past couple of years I've been questioning the whole marriage or even long term relationship thing as well. Seeing how some friends marriages and / or relationships are I've been thinking more and more is it all really realistic. I honestly don't think marriage or monogamy for that matter is realistic. Its highly unrealistic, imo, to say or think that you're only meant to be with one person for the rest of your life.

When we're single, we date a whole hell of a lot of people so how is it realistic to say or think that you'd want to be with one person for the rest of your life. Lots of things happen .. people change, the person you met and fell in love with and married may be a completely different person in a months, years or 10 years time and same goes for yourself. I just don't think its realistic that we all are meant for one person to be tied down to for the rest of our lives.

I think we've been brainwashed by society and religion to think that the "right" thing is to get married, be monogamous and be with one person forever. Anything other than that is seen as wrong and immoral.

 

From what I remember of a human sexuality film in my child psychology class, the female orgasm does have reproductive value. The contractions of the vagina help sperm to get to the uterus. The video footage they showed of a female orgasm actually showed the cervix moving to collect semen. Obviously, the female orgasm is not necessary to achieve fertilization.

 

Truer word was never spoken.

 

WINNAR! :smt045

 

Agree, in lack of knowledge enough to argue otherwhise. There is the whole twist when we go from having Gaia-style goddesses, before the mans part of the fertilization was re-evaluated, to becoming the thought that the man was the sole reason for it. Planting of seeds etc.
I think we have to reevaluate much of what we know about proto-cultures anyway, looking at most research it assumes the men hunted and the women didn't, this however is falls. Both females and males hunted. We have constructed ideas about how the human society has been based on our own society, often to use it as an argument to strengthen our own theories. "We live in a patriarchy, so therefore we have always done"...

(All fluids from the male reproductive organ during intercourse contains sperm. The orgasm is also not necessary for the man to ejaculate.

Males can also orgasm without ejaculation, for that matter, but since sperm is evident in all liquids/fluids whatevers that isn't really important here. )

The female orgasm isn't more elusive than the male. Thats a common missconception. It's actually equally easy to achieve, with the added little thing of multiples.
The reason why it's harder to achieve is 1: guilt and 2: our sexual behavioral pattern are shaped after male fantasies and male pleasure. Damn it, even lesbian sex is shaped after male fantasies.

Hmm, might this be the reason guys thinks its ok for girls to sleep with other girls, but not with other men? Very non scientific idea here but hmm hmm.

As for sex for social bonding for females, I suppose that this might be the reason why humans quite easily can be stimulated sexually without penis in vagina..

 

In my opinion, monogamy is a choice. I was married an monogamous for 18 years before either the ex or myself strayed. We divorced and are friendly with each other. My thoughts are 1. it is easy to say leave if you want to cheat, but somthings it just happens, and you then need to decide if you want to stay and work on it or go. I know 2 couples who rebuilt their marraiges after infidelity, but it was not for me. Once I got divorced, I did the dating around for a good while. Now, I have been with my man for almost a year and I am monogamous by choice. At first, it was hard, but not now. He is worth the commitment.

 

But there is more than just the reproduction. The female orgasm helps to bond her to the man. Females historicly have needed the man not only to concieve, but to be able to raise the child to a point where it can fend for itself.

I do not believe humans biologically were mean to be with one mate forever. Some animals will remain with one mate forever, and if their mate dies, they will remain in solitude. That is clearly not us.

I believe we are more than likely like the animals who mate and stay with their mate until that child has grown to a specific point where it no longer takes 2 to raise it. Which is why it is get increasingly hard for people to stay with one person for more than about 7 years. Doesnt mean it is impossible, just means it is difficult.

And I have to say, I am not entirely sure this faerie tale that gets shoved down our throats about one man/one woman till you die is healthy or beneficial. Too many people feel like a failure in marriage.

 

How depressing...

 

Of course a monogamous relationship is achievable and realistic. There are examples everywhere. Just as there are examples of its failure everywhere. It depends on you, and your partner.

Perhaps so many people stray not because they are bad or because of a "lie" that we are supposed to have only one partner. Perhaps a lot of people just choose the wrong person. Perhaps a lot of people are brainwashed to think of a relationship in a certain way.

There are always a hundred different ways to look at things. We are not animals. We are humans. We have reasoning. If we stray it's because we choose to do so.

Sure marriage is a social construct, but so is everything.
CSBean - I would suggest you figure out what YOU want first. And if that is a life long monogamous relationship, then so be it. There will always be someone out there who will have the same values as you. The thing is, not to settle for something less than you want. And also to fully understand what a relationship involves.

As long as you and your partner are on the same page, then I think it should be fine. I don't think it has to be such a drama.

 

Well, I do believe, that God created one man and one woman and meant for them to be together for life. Adam & Eve, I believe were not a "fairy tale".

I'm not looking to discuss this in length, just stating my opinion and I wanted to share this piece of a popular poem.

 

I believe in monogamy, and think we're supposed to be monogamous. That's how nature, or God or whatever you wants to call it, meant for it to be. It's just our brain that gets in our way sometimes...Humans are awfully curious creatures...

The main goal of sex is not orgasm, but reproducing!

Human offspring have a long childhood, and they're born completely helpless. Also, we're capable of having very many children. In a natural, cave-man society, were pregnancy and breastfeeding is the only contraceptive, women will give birth every second year. That's very frequently for a primate. Our closest relatives, chimps,gorillas and orangutans only reproduce once every 5-7 year, even though their offspring is far less helpless than ours.
If we were living natural lives (cave man society) it would be almost impossible for a woman to take care of all her children by her own.

And the other people to help raise all the young ones, "have" to be blood-relatives. People who you're not related to have no true interest in seeing your children grow up. Proofs of that can be seen even in our modern world: it's usually someone from outside the family, like a babysitter or step-parent, who'll cause shaken baby syndrome. It's hardly ever a biological parent.

So who's a more logical choice to help the woman raise the children, but their father? Being around is not just beneficial to the woman, but also for the man: he can be sure it's actually his children, and he can make sure they grow up. There's no use for a man to have 500 children, if they're all dead. Then he's nothing but a dead end in evolution. The weakest link. Monogamy makes sure the offspring he's raising is his, and it ensures more of them to grow up.

 

I dont believe we arent supposed to be monogamous. Just that it isnt supposed to be for a life time. Like I said above, it is too easy for us to find different mates for it to be natural for us.

And I do believe this faerie tale does more harm than good to individual people. Just look on this board at how really bitter people can be when speaking about exes. I am not bitter about my ex at all. I dont feel my first marriage was a failure. We were together for a time, and then when it wasnt beneficial to both of us, we werent. He cheated on me reapeated. And I am still not bitter.

I believe there was a time when it was important IN SOCIETY for a man and a woman to get married and stay together forever. Women didnt have the earning power to really take care of themselves. And if you didnt have a husband in old age, you starved. So society had unwritten rule for people to stay together, and many did even if the marriage was bad.

It is just not the same today. Women can take care of themselves. They can even take care of their children. Societally, there isnt the stigma because of this.

And Tinkerbell, quit quoting the Bible at me. You know I am not Christian. I will ask you nicely once. If you chose to do it again, I am gonna treat you with the lack of respect you show me.