Aww, Shut Up.

[talktooloose]

Ultimately, my experience of posting in gay_sex_tips yesterday was frustrating.

My motivation was to highlight a point that people seemed to find obscure. I was noting that when there is a default societal position--in this case that monogamy is the only way and that all non-monogamy is cheating and evil--then there is not really a good environment in which couples can have adult discussions about it.

I argued that, in that environment, when someone "cheats," at least some of the blame might fall on the partner who said, "And of course, you would never be such a scumbag as to break my heart in pieces by sleeping with someone else, would you, sweetie?"

It is damned hard for someone to even voice a doubt when they are in a milieu where the norm is not to be questioned.

Predictably, I suppose, the discussion largely devolved into a see-saw debate about the joys of monogamy versus the glories of polyamory (and the stultified repression of monogamy versus the callous self-involvement of polyamory), both sides producing snide champions.

That wasn't my point. Either I expressed it badly or people are too dedicated to trumpeting their personal agenda to really listen.

Frustrating.

Comments

[snowmit.livejournal.com]

Second one.

I will say more about this later.

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

I look forward to it.

[briseur.livejournal.com]

Would love to read that missive

*HUGS*

[scottybear.livejournal.com]

Yeah... I have been in those sorts of situations before... more and more of the crowd I hang out with are totally cool... gay/bi/str8/whatever... BDSM friendly (maybe not into it, but friendly)... etc. I am just having increasingly less and less tolerance for people who just are not willing to be open-minded. Maybe that particular "thing" is not for them, but there is no reason to attack/denigrate it, if it is working for the person describing it.

BTW... I never did see your descriptions of the scenes we did... which you had said you were going to post.

Re: *HUGS*

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

You missed it, dude!

Here 'tis! (http://talktooloose.livejournal.com/155123.html)

Sorry, everyone else; it's highly filtered.

[karenkay.livejournal.com]

I read it and I think you articulated the point quite clearly. So clearly, in fact, I thought that it needs to be posted more widely. It was very well done.

[allenec.livejournal.com]

I noticed this when I was going through the comments too... I thought your post was well-written, and not preachy or closed-minded or anything, but people seemed to think that you were trying to get a "down with monogomy" thread going or something. I almost posted in response to somebody who said that people who are in monogomous relationships haven't got any reasons besides societal pressures/fear of judgement, but I figured it wasn't really worth it to fuel the fire! :p Don't worry though, people are gonna spew their closed-minded opinions whether you give them much incentive or not..

[mofic.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised you're frustrated. I just read it and found it quite interesting and illuminating of a variety of viewpoints. I thought you expressed yourself very well and that most of the responders understood your point.

I didn't see it devolving into Polyamory vs. Monogamy in the vast majority of the posts. I thought they were kind of thoughtful considerations of the issues. Actually, one of the things I really like about queer relationships is that we are so much more likely to discuss this stuff rather than just assume monogamy. I think few straight couples even talk about whether or not monogamy is a good thing - it's just assumed that if you're involved with someone you're supposed to be monogamous and if you have sex outside of the relationship it's cheating.

Like you, I don't know if monogamy is natural or not. There's so much pressure in society to view monogamy as the ideal form of sexual expression, that it's impossible to tease out what's natural and what's social pressure. Still, sex outside of presumed sexually exclusive relationships is extremely common.

I also don't think that the question of whether or not it's natural really matters. Lots of things that are worthwhile to do aren't natural, in the sense that they are created by people making decisions as opposed to just doing what they feel like. Also, evolution moves slowly and human social development and intellectual development move rapidly, so there's often a mismatch. Many of our activities are ones not natural to our species (Reading is always my favorite example of an unnatural act). I think it's good to understand evolutionary functions of human behavior as well as we can, but I don't let it be determinative in making decisions. For an example other than reading, I vaccinate my kids even though the natural thing is for humans to get diseases and cull the herd. Not my part of the herd. But I digress.

Having been involved in both sexually exclusive and sexually non-exclusive relationships, and having given a lot of thought to this, I've come to prefer sexually exclusive relationships for what I think are very practical and down-to-earth reasons unrelated to romance or to what's natural. I figure by this point I know myself and I know what works and doesn't work for me.

OTOH, I'm very much against the idea of committing to monogamy at the onset of a relationship. That's just not for me, and I don't do it. I do feel monogamy is limiting, and I think it's a limit I'm willing to agree to and in fact want to agree to at a certain level of commitment, because of what I get from it. But that level of commitment takes time and getting to know each other and depth of feeling. I do realize, though, that that makes me vulnerable to what the "deal breaker" guy in your thread wasn't - I could get to a point where I want that kind of commitment and my lover doesn't.

Still, I don't see that as qualitatively different from any other problems that couples can have as they get to a point where they want to make a commitment - one wants kids and the other doesn't, one wants to live in the city and one in the country, etc. Depending on how strongly each feels and how important the issue is to them as a couple, they either come to some sort of agreement or they break up (or, in some cases, they agree to disagree but stay together - some issues don't led themselves to that).

Anyway, interesting stuff. Thanks for posting the link.

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

You're quite right, actually. I think I was more triggered by the people who misunderstood me and not sufficiently appreciative of the ones who said good things. I've continued to reply to comments and the discussion is evolving well now between a few individuals.

Still, I don't see that as qualitatively different from any other problem...

That's a big point for me. The separation of our world in "Sex"... and "Everything Else" is very unhealthy on many levels and, I believe, leads to a lot of violence and has a high price to pay in lost love.

UNRELATED NOTE: Did Yahoo deign to deliver my fic to you last night?

[mofic.livejournal.com]

That's a big point for me. The separation of our world in "Sex"... and "Everything Else" is very unhealthy on many levels and, I believe, leads to a lot of violence and has a high price to pay in lost love.

And lost learning opportunities. Surely what we learn about ourselves and each other through Sex applies to Everything Else and vice versa. By setting Sex up as this wholly different activity, we lose the opportunity for profiting from those life lessons.

UNRELATED NOTE: Did Yahoo deign to deliver my fic to you last night?

Yes! But I probably won't get to read it and comment until Shabbos.

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

It's actually a huge topic: controlling something as basic as sexuality gives people in power a huge way to control women, inheritance, community structure and a ready-made tool (shame) that can be used for a wide variety of insidious purposes.

A shabbes peak at DOB would be awesome. I would love to have the chapter posted before I leave for Turkey on Thursday, but I may be dreaming and I'm willing to accept reality (reality laughs: 'Oh, he's WILLING to accept me, is he? It's not a choice, you INSECT!')

[thespisgeoff.livejournal.com]

I think you made your point quite clearly, but that it's a hard point to hear if you've made up your mind one way or the other that there is One Right Way to Do Things. I'm always surprised at how preachy non-monogamists can be, and when you are used to hearing from those preachy bitches (as most gay_sex_tips posters are, it's easy to fall back on your default position of "That ain't the way it should be!"

I think that the intense back-and-forth that that post created more than proved your point, however. It is difficult to talk about without kneejerk reactions.

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

It's hard for me too to deliberately hear things that go against my ideas. It's a discipline I try to acheive, though.

I read your comment in e-mail initially and thus missed the luscious icon.

Wow, Here I Go Spouting Off....

[painglass.livejournal.com]

Its one of those "a little to late" things...but I totaly got what you were saying in that discussion. In fact, I e-mailed the link to my fiance and he too understood. But maybe that's from a position where we've both already had these discussions about what each of us would constitue cheating/sleeping around and what ios acceptable outside of our relationship. I think the problem is that people who are staunchly monogamists are HERE and polyamorists, inorder to defend their position against the monogamist world are staunchly HERE. Those of somewhere in between or simply discussing alternatives tend to raise the hackles of both sides because it their "fight" and we're switzerland, refusing to hang with either camp completely...even if we are in their camp temperaily, we're willing to discuss moving out, compromising, etc.

Wait, does any of the above make sense to you? Hope so.

Like my sexuality, I've learned over time I'm very open to many different forms and functions of relationships, but that if you don't talk to me about it and make assumptions and go on that, then I get pissed and upset. (See late fall relationship disaster). I'll admit that six years ago the idea of anything but perfect monogamy scared the shit out of me, but these days, having the option of discussing the ability to sleep with other people with my partner is a freeing and more emotionaly comfortable position to be in. Perfection over the long term is near impossible, in my opinion.

*hugs* Your post was awesome in my opinion, who else's matters? :P

Care about my opinions on this subject. Now!

[to-cry-about.livejournal.com]

Even when that discussion is handled in an "adult" manner, it's painful, as I know from experience. Third date or so with a girl, we were nuts about each other, then she breaks up with me via email(!), revealing that she has always had poly relationships and intends to continue doing so. My values about sex are a bit JPII-ish, minus the homophobia, and she correctly surmised that I would be Not Cool with a poly relationship. We discussed it, I plumped for monogamy, still hoping I could save things. I still feel bad that I didn't give it a go--I would be the worst polyamorist ever, but I really liked her and still miss her.

That thread is interesting (to me as an ethics student, anyway) because both sides agree that "honesty is good" and "dishonesty is bad" and yet they have wildy varying views on the example you provided. I do think it's too much to assign blame to the honest party in the relationship: yes, it's difficult to be honest in that circumstance, and it does, as you say, require being strong and self-aware. That doesn't remove the obligation--do it honestly or not at all. Being strong and self-aware is necessary to lead a moral life. We do not get to be right all the time, even if we have good intentions, or are understandably tempted, or afraid or in love.

It should not, today in North America, be the poly person's responsibility to make sure the discussion takes place, even against the odds. But the discussion has to happen before the poly person can be justified in having sex with other people, so if the topic can't be broached, that's a critical failure and the relationship deserves to die. I know that it's really hard to let someone go because you don't agree on abstract values that (you think) might not even end up being an issue. That doesn't make it right to abuse someone's trust.

It's also the monogamous person's responsibility as a rational person to not OMG FREAK OUT!!!! if someone else has different values.

[I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it's coming out, because I very much believe in forgiveness, but it can't, as it were, be legislated by the ethicists. Forgiveness is entirely the prerogative of the injured party, which is what makes it valuable. It is never deserved. (I'm distinguishing it from pardons, in which case the "guilty" party was actually innocent or had an acceptable justification.) ((Ironically, in the West I think Christianity is to blame for the wholesale cheapening of mercy: make it a requirement of the faith and eventually the culture gets a sense of entitlement. No go: moral systems should not be built with a self-destruct feature.)) I thought I would mention all that because it is OH GOD 5 am and I've been reading Mill and Kant all day and I noticed you were sort of coming down on moral absolutists in the thread.]