HumanisTim

Given:
(1) There are no double standards in the relationship (i.e., if I can sleep with other people, you can too)
(2) All sex outside the central relationship is safe sex with two independant disease and/or birth prevention methods in place
(3) There's no lying or sneaking
(4) "Sex" and "love" have very little to do with each other (<-yes, that's debatable, I know)


If it's something both people agree to, I see nothing wrong with it. In a case where someone is doing those things behind their partners back. I think its wrong cause it can cause emotional harm to another person.

Jamie_L

I don't assuem it in general, but I have seen it in practice. I have seen in my own and other relationships an inability to maintain the same level of emotional intimacy with one or more partners when more than one partner is involved.

That has no bearing on what goes on in the rest of the population of course. However, it does lead me to be suspicious of claims that ANY person is capable of maintaining a level of intimacy desired by one partner when other sexual partners are involved.

Jamie

brighid

I don’t know how it is for other people, but when I was dating multiple men I found it very emotionally draining and these were semi-romantic, non-sexual relationships and all parties were aware that I was seeing other men. Naturally, as I got to know each one better emotions developed and it was very difficult to have strong emotional feelings for multiple partners. I sure as the heck wasn’t going to become more intimately involved with any of them until certain decisions could be made like who would make the final cut. I eventually chose one and because the emotional connection began to grow stronger I felt it was only fair to devote my energies to that relationship exclusively in order to determine any future possibilities. That particular relationship did not work out into any long-term commitment but I hated the idea of not knowing because I didn’t give my best effort to that situation.

I certainly believe it is possible and even likely to love more then one romantic partner. I simply don’t see it as a healthy or generally feasible means of achieving happiness. Relationships, especially intimate and loving relationships take A LOT of work and I simply cannot even imagine attempting to maintain the integrity of my marriage AND be involved in another “love” relationship, especially one of a sexual nature. Couple that with the duties of caring for a family and a home, as well as a full-time job … I just don’t where people who have affairs actually find the time OR energy to do such things. I am sleep deprived as it is and I only one child, two dogs, one husband and a home.

I personally love many people, but I only have one intimate love relationship and that is with my husband. He deserves all the time, energy and devotion I can give to our commitment to one another. He also deserves respect by protecting the trust and integrity of our relationship by remaining faithful to that commitment. I deserve that as well.

I realize that other people have different needs, more time and more energy and perhaps some couples are capable of maintaining polyamorous relationships but I do not think the majority of those in our human community can. I also feel the fantasy of multiple partners is much different then the reality of it. I have always adhered to “serial monogamy.” I have loved more then one man in my life and lusted after, pursued and had others but never multiple sexual partners during the same relationship. To me, it is destructive in the emotional sense and in the physical sense or at the very least very risky and I have yet to find that the benefits outweigh the risks. More power to those who can actually maintain such relationships without compromising the safety, trust or integrity of their relationships.

Brighid

Monkeybot

I agree completely. I don't see much wrong with having multiple partners (sequentially or simultaneously ) per se, but I do see dishonesty and sneaking around as Bad Things (tm). Your partner may have different goals for the relationship in mind and it's important to at least approach being on the same page about things.

It may not be rational that some people prefer monogamous relationships -- but the fact remains that those people are out there, and in large numbers. Whether it is biological, social, or a genuinely from the heart desire for monogamy, the fact remains that these feelings still exist - and they exist in a lot of people. It may not be fair to other lifestyles (open relationships, polyamoury) but monogamy seems to be the default expectation when it comes to relationships. IMO, if you are planning on deviating from this, more power to you, but you shouldn't assume that your partner shares your willingess to do so.

In my personal experience I tend to prefer monogamy. I don't like sharing (in this aspect of life anyway) and I get jealous easily. And, I think it's only fair to give what I would expect of my partner. However, it isn't really the possibility of him sleeping with other women that scares me the most - it's the potential for betrayal and dishonesty that do.

It's kind of like money -- if he were to tell me that he needed money and wanted to borrow, I'd be willing to deal with that, however cautiously. But I would MUCH MUCH prefer that to learning, six months later, that he had stolen my PIN and been taking money from my bank account.

Gallimore

Up to 37% of men and 22% of women admit to having affairs. Judging from the posts here, I’m beginning to suspect there’s a philosophical divide between men and women. While men are aware that there is a distinction between love and sex (emotional relationship vs. sexual relationship), women are uncomfortable separating these two. There’s much emphasis on “emotion” by women here, it seems, as the true nature of physical pleasure. Men might agree, but their rationale seems to recognize the ambiguity of the word. Perhaps they think emotion (in this particular case) squares with lust. Women think it’s closely connected to romance, desire (if it’s more “respectable” than lust), and love. Simply stated, for men, it’s not serious. For women, it is.

For men, “sleeping around” means noncommitment. For women, it means serial commitment. This brings to mind about an episode I saw recently on TV, probably JKX. A judge (comically) proclaims the husband should be allowed to commit at least one affair. The wife objects, “That’s unfair. I should be able to have one affair, too.” The judge replies, “Well, that would complicate matters. Women tend to be involved emotionally.”

Perhaps while men thrive to have some kind of sexual adventure, women thrive for something deeply (emotionally) meaningful. My ex-girlfriend used to flirt countless guys (including my friends), which made me excessively jealous. While I flirted with girls, she wasn’t jealous. I’m beginning to see why. When she flirted with guys, she would want to know their names, their contact information, where they came from. When I flirted with girls, I only wanted them to open their legs. I would forget about them immediately. She wouldn't.

In that sense, then, polygamous relationships CAN be healthy, once we impose the distinction between the emotional and sexual. For me, sex can be a form of recreation, no different than surfing or skiing. There are inherent risks, but with caution and right mental attitude, all will be well.

And fun.

brighid

Gallimore,

You must understand that sex is MUCH more risky for women because of unwanted pregnancy and the financial, physical and social dangers that poses to women and therefore inherently more "emotional". In an evolutionary sense that makes us much more vulnerable and couple that with the task of raising and caring for a child ... it makes us a bit more choosey and invested emotionally in sexual relationships simply by the fact of our reproductive nature.

I think some women place more emphasis on the emotional aspect of sexual intimacy, but hang around here long enough and you will also come to learn that infidel women don't have qualms about purely lustful, sexual gratification between two or more consenting adults. In my case, my husband is actually more "emotional" about fidelity then I am.

The sexual nature of long-term, committed relationships is entirely different then ones that are mutually engaged in for nothing more then sexual gratification. In the context of this thread and the questions posited by the intial poster the emotional differentiation and WHY men and women find it wrong to sleep around through deceptive means is very relevant- both have agreed that it is the DECEPTION, not the sexual act that is at the heart of the matter.

If a man and a woman agree on a specific relationship - monogamous or polyamorous - any breech of that agreement is immoral. If one must deceive sexual partners into believing they are the only "one" then it is the deception that is immoral, although the intimacy of the sexual embrace often times deepens the wound of that deception.

Sex is a wonderful, beautiful thing that should be fully enjoyed but responsibly. In a day and age where one sexual encounter can lead to a slow and painful death it certainly doesn't seem to make sense to increase those chances unnecessarily by engaging in risky, sexual behavior.

As a woman, mother and wife the emotional nature of my family is multi-dimensional but the binding factor to all of it is trust. If the trust is broken because of any sort of infidelity, sexual, emotional or otherwise the family structure breaks down or crumbles completely. Therefore monogamy is essential to my familial harmony and continuity.

I don't believe anyone has stated that polyamorous relationships aren't feasible or even possibly healthy, but that nature and our culture make it much more difficult to sustain multiple, healthy sexual relationships.

Brighid

Monkeybot

Gallimore,

What brighid said. I think there are different factors at play, such as:

a) The different levels of security brighid mentioned. Women have to deal with the threat of pregnancy in a sexual relationship (even if they are using birth control -- this has been known to fail!)

b) The different levels of, ahem, finesse required to please men and women. If I am taking a chance with some random stranger I want to be sure he's not just going to fumble around down there

c) The fact that there are still derogatory terms like "slut" attached to promiscuous women, while it reflects well on a man's virility to be able to attain multiple partners*. While I know that attitudes are changing and women are becoming more liberated, these attitudes have not completely vanished yet -- either from the minds of people judging "slutty" women's behaviour, or from the minds of some women themselves. That's an important factor to consider.

These attitudes are not necessarily correct but they do exist and they may explain the disparity you notice, or some of it anyway.

*Bill Clinton is probably a famous counterexample, but I believe that he was being taken to task for his infidelity and sexual harassment than for his actual promiscuity. We rarely see politicans being attacked over merely sleeping around before marriage.

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: Monkeybot ]</p>

Gallimore

“You must understand that sex is MUCH more risky for women because of unwanted pregnancy and the financial, physical and social dangers that poses to women and therefore inherently more "emotional". In an evolutionary sense that makes us much more vulnerable and couple that with the task of raising and caring for a child ... it makes us a bit more choosey and invested emotionally in sexual relationships simply by the fact of our reproductive nature. “

Makes sense to me.

“I think some women place more emphasis on the emotional aspect of sexual intimacy, but hang around here long enough and you will also come to learn that infidel women don't have qualms about purely lustful, sexual gratification between two or more consenting adults. In my case, my husband is actually more "emotional" about fidelity then I am.”

Agreed.

“The sexual nature of long-term, committed relationships is entirely different then ones that are mutually engaged in for nothing more then sexual gratification. In the context of this thread and the questions posited by the initial poster the emotional differentiation and WHY men and women find it wrong to sleep around through deceptive means is very relevant- both have agreed that it is the DECEPTION, not the sexual act that is at the heart of the matter.”

If I’m not mistaken, the initial question was why men and women find it wrong to sleep around (not necessarily through deception). Somewhere “sleeping around” was associated with deception. Anyway, it’s not important. I agree that deception is immoral.

“If a man and a woman agree on a specific relationship - monogamous or polyamorous - any breech of that agreement is immoral. If one must deceive sexual partners into believing they are the only "one" then it is the deception that is immoral, although the intimacy of the sexual embrace often times deepens the wound of that deception.”

Agreed.

“Sex is a wonderful, beautiful thing that should be fully enjoyed but responsibly. In a day and age where one sexual encounter can lead to a slow and painful death it certainly doesn't seem to make sense to increase those chances unnecessarily by engaging in risky, sexual behavior.”

Doesn’t seem logical to me. Skiing can lead to a painful death, so we shouldn’t increase those chances unnecessarily by engaging in this risky sport? I think every inherently risky recreation comes with stringent responsibility. The discouragement has less to do with the risk factor (unless one is paranoid and overeactive, which is understandable, some people actually rejoice in a life without adventure) than a kind of phobia (fear of the unknown?), a persistent, abnormal, and, in so many cases, irrational fear of a specific thing or situation that compels one to avoid it, despite the awareness and reassurance that it is not entirely dangerous. I believe it is this, the lack of awareness and the desire to be aware, that is the heart of the matter.

“As a woman, mother and wife the emotional nature of my family is multi-dimensional but the binding factor to all of it is trust. If the trust is broken because of any sort of infidelity, sexual, emotional or otherwise the family structure breaks down or crumbles completely. Therefore monogamy is essential to my familial harmony and continuity.”

Agreed with the trust part. But how is it relevant with monogamy? Are you suggesting that people who appreciate polygamy and other deviant sexual lifestyles don’t share your belief that trust is essential to familial harmony and continuity? What about Tim Green and his beloved family? What about the artist Bertuard and his two faithful nymphs?

“I don't believe anyone has stated that polygamous relationships aren't feasible or even possibly healthy, but that nature and our culture make it much more difficult to sustain multiple, healthy sexual relationships.”

Perhaps it’s rather difficult to understand (therefore difficult to sustain) multiple, healthy sexual relationship? I do however agree that our culture (not sure about nature) makes it difficult for people engage in this lifestyle.

Sorry if I've sidetracked the thread! Thanks and looking forward to more posts. Best - J.

Shadowy Man

Monkeybot:

I think men who sleep around are just as slutty as women who sleep around.

Gallimore

c) The fact that there are still derogatory terms like "slut" attached to promiscuous women, while it reflects well on a man's virility to be able to attain multiple partners*. While I know that attitudes are changing and women are becoming more liberated, these attitudes have not completely vanished yet -- either from the minds of people judging "slutty" women's behaviour, or from the minds of some women themselves. That's an important factor to consider.

Very true. Very important factor. There's a negative sanction against sexually promiscious women. The fact that people nowadays have become passive about is a good sign.