Do you consider yourself *naturally* monogamous?

[NineOfClubs]

Well, the question emphasized the word "naturally".

And naturally we aren't at all monogamous.

If we had been for thousands of years, we wouldn't be even here talking about it.

 

[NineOfClubs]

Some people are naturally monogamous. See the thing is some people attach emotion and feeling to sexual acts. It isn't JUST to have an orgasm. So two people can love each other a lot and only want to be with that person and not really care about doing it with other people. Maybe you don't because it isn't natural (but neither is the internet yet you use that every day).

Wake up.

You can believe whatever notion of Hollywood romance you want.

But if men didn't want sex at any cost (especially cavemen) we wouldn't be here.

 

[NineOfClubs]

So you compare yourself to a cave man? Cave men also used to shit in holes what's your fucking point? If cave men were gay we wouldn't be here either. I mean just because cave men do it doesn't mean it is impossible to be naturally monogamous. Using your argument about the cave men and procreation, it isn't natural to be gay. Cave men weren't gay because we wouldn't be here. If you can't be naturally monogamous then you can't naturally be gay.

Where to start?

I'm sure cavemen were fucking other men, and women, and maybe animals.

All I'm saying is it's natural for men to want sex, lots of it, with multiple partners.

If you want to stifle yourself, hold back, deny your heritage--fine

Do it.

As long as it makes you happy.

But don't try to tell everyone else what's "natural".

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Where to start?

I'm sure cavemen were fucking other men, and women, and maybe animals.

All I'm saying is it's natural for men to want sex, lots of it, with multiple partners.

If you want to stifle yourself, hold back, deny your heritage--fine

Do it.

As long as it makes you happy.

But don't try to tell everyone else what's "natural".

KOOL

no ya no can fuck da grand canyon
' hurt ma head again! '

 

[unloadonme]

An easy one. Yes.

 

[NineOfClubs]

I am sure there were some cavemen who were fucking just one person. At least ONE CAVE MAN.

Besides I am not saying it is natural for you. I am saying I can be naturally monogamous. I think it depends on a lot of things. Your emotional state, maybe your astrological sign. I am a Scorpio so I am supposed to be really sexual yet 'mate for life'. Let me guess you are some fire sign? Like Aries, Sagittarius, Leo?

No, Air. Gemini.

Maybe it means I think things through.....

Sure, maybe there were a few cavemen fucking other cavemen. But, even so, if they didn't bring home some fresh game to eat--we wouldn't be here today.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Well that's good for cavemen. If I wanted to act like them I would start cannibalizing my dead family and maybe sacrifice children to some deity. But I don't. So just because most of them fucked like animals do, doesn't mean I have to, doesn't mean it is wrong or unnatural not to just because cavemen didn't do it. At least a few cavemen I am sure were monogamous just like a few cavemen I am sure were gay. So with that theory:

some gay cavemen supports that being gay is natural
some monogamous cavemen supports that being monogamous is natural (for some people)

he no say ya got do anything but give a view

why people go think they got do what people write? when it just a chattys of cock ans stuff?

cave peoples no da newspapers with peronsals columns back then just hard ons ans females goin think fly swatin ma butt



so Female what ya think of cave big cave man joe in ya lastest porn movie?
' What?! ' ha

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

What's natural for one man may not be natural for another

word MAN not natural any more is Woman

world tie sex to at monogamous and string other thing tie to

but world not bunch apes happy just not knowins they happy

gone turn inta barkin humans with pile of junk in heads countrys fit cap of it

if humans not treat like cattle fa tiny few has manageable size of human populations with less bullshit figure out before they go POOF gone dead now and end of story fa them

how ( sex ) play out for any one is natural if humans was like animals not of modern world

so while media ans relgions ans them phds stuck on old news ans Business wanna stuff their own butts more money no can take with um when go do da Time die now

ans specials for ( GAY ) what still link ta old world ways COUGHS what handy fa lot of COCKS

is maybe stop worry about word monogamus ans sort out seperate emotion < what no country planet do shit about >from COOR SEX < what got more ways of translate around world then grains of sand

try fucking and jump hurdles same time it very difficut but make for fun viewing at olympics

 

[G-Lexington]

I don't know what one is supposed to take away from this thread, but I'll assume it's "75% of gay men are either deluded or fucking liars".

Lex

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

way lot way male societys run world work aint different animal kingdom cause they monogamous ta da group< list string titles fa male groups<ans not nice include Cultures bullshit institutions

if humans this ( individual ) planet no in da big shit is now

right enough thinkin want ma hardon back HEY DUDES salmon fishing here we goooooooo

not finds river so dos

has goodins

 

[MMMonsterBoy]

I couldn't picture myself cheating. If my pretendboyfriend felt as though he needed room to explore, then I'd rather he'd tell me to my face instead of going behind my back. I would do the same.

 

[saymyname]

I think monogamy is a social construction... mostly backed up by fear.

I consider myself naturally NON-monogamous.

 

[saymyname]

Dude...what does that mean?

That usually when people are monogamous, they are doing it out of fear: fear of losing that person, fear of that person meeting someone else, fear based in insecurity, fear based on the idea that your partner will find someone better, fear of being alone, etc. Basically, I think that if you really love and trust your partner, you wouldn't feel threatened by the idea of each other having sexual partners besides yourselves. If you knew that would make your partner and yourself more happy, then you would want what makes each person more happy.

Basic ideas coming from a great book called The Ethical Slut.

 

[MercuryJones]

That usually when people are monogamous, they are doing it out of fear...

Sounds like a load of BS.

People have different inclinations, experiences and desires.

There's no need to put down the motivations of others who feel differently than you. That's a sign of your own insecurity.

 

[sabot3ur]

so far I have been. I do what feels right to me, I could see myself being non-monogamous just as well but it hasn't seemed to appeal to me at all.

 

[G-Lexington]

>>>That usually when people are monogamous, they are doing it out of fear: fear of losing that person, fear of that person meeting someone else, fear based in insecurity, fear based on the idea that your partner will find someone better, fear of being alone, etc.

This.

There's nothing wrong with being more interested in your partner than other people. But then why make it a condition of your relationship? "While you are with me, you have sex with me and only me, or else I walk". Why make that condition? Fear. We fear that they'll have sex with somebody else...and we'll be found wanting. That they'll decide that sex with them is superior than sex with us, and that they'll pull up camp and leave. If the relationship is completely secure, they'll think "No matter how good the sex is with somebody else, he loves ME, and he'll always be with ME."

>>>Newsflash people: Refusing to be monogamous doesn't necessarily make you better than anyone, more in touch with your biology, so much happier than everyone else, etc. etc

I don't agree. I think those in truly open and loving relationships ARE superior to those of us who are not. I don't think most people have it in them to be in open relationships. It takes an extremely secure and confident person to be in one...and I am not one. Again, I don't have any issue being in a monogamous relationship. But I do think those in truly open and loving relationships are superior to me in that regard.

The key bits there, though, are "truly open and loving relationships". Simply saying you're in an open relationship, or even being in one, doesn't put you in that category if you're still feeling the petty jealousy, fear, and one-ups-manship.

Lex

 

[hylas]

I don't think I would call it being 'naturally' monogamous--but I know that is how I choose to behave in my relationship. That concept is obviously foreign and scares the hell out of some guys...but oh well, live your lives and I'll live mine.
(...)
It's amazing how people try to make assumptions and express disapproval about others' lifestyles. If monogamy isn't your thing, don't do it. But don't belittle or try to make a lie out of us who are capable of doing so.

It's funny - I always see people doing that in these discussions, but it's always the people who are so adamantly for non-monogamy doing it to those who prefer monogamy.

uh, guys... i agree that some of the pro-non-monogamy people in this discussion come across as a little smug and annoying. but there are also a lot of judgemental implications from the monogamous camp here. eg users who answer along the lines of "im a monogamous person, i would never cheat", thereby implying hat all non-monogamous people are cheaters. or the above quote, where the phrasing implies that monogamous people are somehow better, because they are "capable of" monogamy and not "scared". even as lip-service is being payed to "tolerance" ("but oh well, live your lives and I'll live mine."), there is clearly a judgemental undertone.

seriously, why all the judgment? i think the op made a very good choice by asking wether monogamy is "natural for you", thereby making it a subjective matter. because thats what it ultimately is, subjective, and everybody has to figure out for themselves what works for them and their beloved ones.

as for this:

And then the non-monogamous folks bitch about being judged. Talk about irony.

oh please. our entire fucking society is built around monogamy. like 90% of all pop music, film and tv is either about monogamous love, or at least casually features a subplot about monogamous love. most people are, or at least claim to be, monogamous. if you live alternative forms of relationships and sexuality, you are being judged all around. i guess some non-monogamous people are less than gracious about that, but we do have reason to be bitchy.

 

[saymyname]

I suppose...but it seems like your ideas are based on the platform that relationships function as a way to cope with fear, and that's not really the case.

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think they function as a way to cope with fear, but rather the model of monogamy is resting on the foundation of fear.

I wasn't judging anyone or putting down monogamous relationships, just pointing out where I think that drive and desire is motivated from.

Monogamy is basically an extension of our historically over possessive culture. I think it's an extension of patriarchy, stemmed in marriage, and is also related to our cultural fondness of the concept of private property. I'm just not into the idea or concept of owning another persons body and what they want to do with it. If I'm going to love someone, I'm going to trust that he can have sex with other people and still choose to be with me and trust me, and vice versa. I think monogamy is limiting.

 

[saymyname]

I mean, you could make an opposing argument that anyone who feels naturally monogamous is "superior" in that they're more loyal, are better able to commit, aren't so easily compelled by their sex drive, etc.

No... you couldn't. Because non-monog people can still be loyal and committed, and we obviously aren't the kind of people who see the sex drive as something to be "controlled," as if it's a bad thing. Again, if two people are together and they really love each other, trust each other, and aren't afraid of losing each other and know that they're together because they want to be and not because they haven't met someone better, how in the world does loyalty and commitment have anything to do with if they see other people? I mean, the entire concept is just based in fear and the model of a starvation and scarcity economy. Being non-monogamous doesn't mean you aren't loyal or in love with your partner. If you really loved someone, you wouldn't feel at all threatened by the idea of that person sharing the love you get to enjoy all the time with another person for a brief period.

Does a mother with one child love her one child more than a mother with 3 children? Does the mother with 3 children have to divide the amount of love she has between 3 children, thus making her love each child less? Please.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

all ya can says is long ya happys ans shares ya happpys with world around ya

but if 100 guys all marry eachother ta make da one ring no all come ta me if ya got problems with all ya husbands
ans which one he?
' 22 '
okay ans ya upset cause?



we go home now
' sure '
how crossword doin?
' 4 across 5 letter '
Beach
' cool '
Bye everyoneeeeee was funnnnnn
" BIIII EEEEEEE "
Put ya cock down or ya get um goins
' nah it fa what thinkin when get ya home '
Arh dat so sweet