My case for non-monogamy

For the past 10 years or so, I've "fought the good battle" in online fora, advocating forms of non-monogamy - whether swinging, open relationships, or polyamory - against hordes of combatants conditioned in monogamous prejudice.

Much of the time, people aren't irked as much by my saying that non-monogamy works for those who choose it, but are bothered by my criticisms of monogamy. Their complaint is that I seem to imply that it's an inferior relationship choice.

That's because I think it is. Here's why.

Most people are sexual hypocrites. Most of us will, at some point, want to experience a relationship, or have sex with more than one person in our lives. However, if we have a partner, we don't want that partner to do the same. We have a double standard, but this double standard makes complete evolutionary sense. I want to be free to have sex with whomever I want because that benefits the reproduction of my genes. I don't want you to do the same because that harms the reproduction of my genes. If I'm male and you're female, then from an ancestral perspective, I risk expending energy raising a child that isn't mine. If I'm female and you're male, I don't want you to have relationships with others, because they will consume energy and resources you might have spent on me and our children.

To reconcile this innate hypocrisy, we have the following choices:
  1. Side with jealousy. The monogamous choice is to declare jealousy more justified than desire. Both partners are expected to agree to suppress any desires they might have for other people, now or in the future.
  2. Side with desire. The non-monogamous choice is to declare desire as more justified than jealousy. Both partners are expected to suppress their jealous tendencies, so that they might be able to enjoy experiences with other people.
  3. Cheat.
So far, so good. Most people don't like others to pick that third choice. But monogamy and consensual non-monogamy both sound valid, right? Yes, kind of. But there are further implications.


Monogamy encourages dishonesty; non-monogamy encourages communication.


Monogamy requires the partners to suppress desire, while encouraging mate-guarding behavior. Neither partner is motivated to be honest if they do experience desire. This hinders communication, and seeds the relationship with dishonesty; both partners are now motivated to be vigilant and suspicious of one another.

A non-monogamous relationship requires the partners to manage jealousy, while permitting desire. Jealousy is easiest to manage for partners who know each other very well, and learn about each other through communication. Non-monogamy encourages communication, and presents no reason for either partner to be dishonest about experiencing desire.


Monogamy is unstable; non-monogamy is self-stabilizing.


When one of the monogamous partners violates the spirit of the relationship, and performs an act with an outside person which is prohibited by the other, the outcome is frequently catastrophic. A partner who has suppressed their desires, only to find that their partner has not, will tend to explode with jealousy, frequently causing the relationship to end, or even a worse outcome. Monogamous relationships tend to break up over what, to non-monogamous people, would appear to be harmless expressions of desire.

When one of the non-monogamous partners violates the spirit of the relationship, this is generally by being more jealous and controlling than the partners intended. A lapse in managing one's jealousy is not catastrophic; the other partner simply reduces their non-monogamous behavior until the partner experiencing jealousy can bring their emotions into control. The two partners communicate, and identify the reason one of them felt neglected, or insecure. The relationship is strengthened, rather than ended.


Monogamy is coercion; non-monogamy is freedom.


The social compliance tools of monogamy consist of shaming, chastising, and punishment. Those who are passionate about monogamy attempt to coerce everyone into compliance by shaming and chastising people for being sexually open, and by calling for "cheaters" to be punished.

The social tools of non-monogamy are to encourage communication, responsibility, respect, and understanding of self and others. If someone hasn't yet been able to manage their jealousy, it means they need help and practice, not punishment.


The fear of STDs is overblown.


Most people will not blame their partner if he or she returns from work, or from a social visit, or from school, and brings home the flu. They will sympathize with the partner's misfortune, even though it may mean they will get the flu themselves, and suffer for a week before they improve.

At the same time, most people would consider it completely outrageous if their partner brings home gonorrhea. This is even though gonorrhea is cured with a single dose of antibiotics, and has symptoms in no way comparable to the flu.

There are other STDs besides gonorrhea, of course. But they tend to be either of minor consequence, or rare, or can be mitigated or avoided. The total risks we face from STDs are not enough to deprive ourselves from a whole spectrum of human experience.

Strict monogamy used to make sense when we did not have STD testing, cheap and reliable condoms, and modern medicine. Now that we have these advances, bearing the disadvantages of strict monogamy makes a lot less sense, and it is worthwhile to consider less strict relationship options.


Non-monogamy is a better default relationship option.


Millions upon millions of people would find themselves better served by a more open relationship style, but are shamed and coerced into monogamy from a young age, because that's the only relationship type that's widely considered "respectable". This represents oppression of a large group of people who aren't naturally monogamous, and would not have chosen that relationship type, if they thought they genuinely had a choice. After feeling like they were deprived this choice, millions of people resort to cheating.

People should instead be taught about the reality of human desire, and guided into some form of almost-but-not-quite-monogamous relationship, where you might not go around having sex with everyone, but you recognize the possibility that you and your partner may at some point develop feelings and desires for other people. When that happens, the partners should expect to help each other understand and experience those emotions, hopefully emerging with a stronger and richer relationship. This prospect may seem difficult to people raised with monogamous expectations, but would be much easier if social pressure for monogamy was not embedded into every part of our social fabric.


You don't have to jump into it right now.


Non-monogamy is something I would like the general social climate to become friendlier with, in the long term. It's something I would recommend exploring for people who are currently single, not necessarily for people who are perfectly happy in their relationships. If it works, why fix it?

But if at some point the traditional choice does not work so well, then awareness that these concepts even exist, and work for others, might help.

Comments

Boris Kolar said…
Personally, I'm very happy with monogamy - works great for me and my wife. I find it easy to dismiss naughty thoughts before they can even be described as "desire". After 4.3 years of marriage, some of my feelings are just as intense as when we started dating.

But if you act on your desires, how do you manage to suppress them once they grow stronger? What happens when some girl gives you more pleasure than your wife? I assume it's also possible for your wife to find someone gives her more pleasure than you? Isn't suppression of feelings (possibly much stronger feelings in your case) inevitable, if you want a stable relationship?
denis bider said…
Boris, that sounds great, I'm happy for you. :-)

The idea I'm trying to convey is not so much that people should constantly be looking to get laid outside of marriage. (Though there are couples who do that, and that's great for them.)

The idea I'm trying to convey is more so that a handful of years are short compared to a lifetime, and that it's fairly likely that, at some point, one or the other partner is going to want to explore, in some way or another. I'm arguing that:

(1) People should not be giving out promises that they're never going to want to explore. For 30 years down the road, no one can promise that.

(2) People should not be holding their partner to such promises.

The idea I'm trying to convey is that a desire to explore, if/when it does develop, should be met with an attempt to understand and discuss, not with an explosion of anger.

Boris: But if you act on your desires, how do you manage to suppress them once they grow stronger?

Why suppress? Feelings are good.

Boris: What happens when some girl gives you more pleasure than your wife?

This is temporary. If it does happen, it tends to be limited to pleasure in a particular scenario, not total pleasure in life.

There is such a thing as NRE ("New Relationship Energy") - falling in love with another partner - which tends to make your feelings for the new person much stronger than your feelings for your existing partner(s). This is okay, as long as you and your partners understand you're NRE-ing. You need to ensure you accommodate your existing partner(s) during this time, and not to make any rash decisions that you're likely to regret when NRE is over.

Boris: I assume it's also possible for your wife to find someone gives her more pleasure than you?

I think that's a mirror version of the above question, so, see above.

Boris: Isn't suppression of feelings (possibly much stronger feelings in your case) inevitable, if you want a stable relationship?

No, just make sure not to destroy everything around you while you feel exuberantly.
Mandy said…
Thank you for sharing your ideas. I found them helpful in understanding what doesn't feel right about institutional marriage... after 18 years of being married. Inherently the dynamics feel so dishonest...I really could identify and recognise so much of what you say. I have decided to look for a more honest way to live, not because I want more or better sex, but because I wish to deepen my relationships through more honesty and grow as a person through interacting with more integrity. Articles like this help bring mental clarity to what many of us feel. I know through talking to my friends that I am certainly not alone.
denis bider said…
Hey Mandy,

thank you for your comment!

I agree, it definitely isn't mainly about sex. My main issue with monogamy is that it stimulates a nature of relationship that's inherently adversarial. Each partner either tries to clip the other's wings, or guilts themselves into internalizing the wing-clipping because it's expected, or the partner is doing it also.

It's a whole lot of sadness that's just plain unnecessary if you don't start out trying to clip anyone's wings.

I wish you a lot of luck with your search!

Popular posts from this blog

When monospace fonts aren't: The Unicode character width nightmare

"Unreachable" beauty standards

Is the internet ready for DMARC with p=reject?