Comment on question for the culture
db2@lemmy.world 2 hours agoQuality shitpost reply, I think people forget what community they’re in here.
Comment on question for the culture
db2@lemmy.world 2 hours agoQuality shitpost reply, I think people forget what community they’re in here.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
sadly, not a shitpost, I see monogamy as unethical. relationships aren’t sports, aren’t property, you cannot “cheat” to win, it makes no sense.
lying is a problem.
if my partner came from a conference and told me she got railed by half the conference attendants I’ll be glad she enjoyed herself. and if she wouldn’t trust me to tell the truth it means there was no relationship to begin with as there’s no trust.
no idea why most people are obsessed with controlling their partners genitals.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 hour ago
How is consensual monogamy unethical?
Like really, you seem to genuinely hold the opinion you do, please explain to me how two people mutually agreeing to trust, support, love and fuck just each other … how is that unethical?
Yes, of course historically the concept is full of examples of other practices that get attached to it that are definitely harmful and bad.
Yes, there absolutely are a good deal of people who force monogamy on others as a means of control, who are hypocrites that don’t even follow the same rules or standards they impose on others.
But how is it inherently unethical for a fair and mutual relationship between just two people to exist?
Some people are into open relationships, ENM, polycules, just being a single stud or unicorn, etc.
Some people, arguably most people, either strongly prefer or can only emotionally handle having a single serious romantic relationship with one other person at a time.
The entire thing about cheating in a monogamous relationship is that it is lying, it is a massive breach of trust and respect.
If everyone involved is informed and onboard with expanding the relationship, that’s one thing… cheating is another.
For quite a lot of people, its not primarily that they want to posses or control their partner’s genitals.
Its that they want to be able to very thoroughly trust and relate to a single other person, to be the sole person that their partner also sees that way.
For these kinds of people, if their partner asked to open up the relationship, and they weren’t comfortable with it, they’re totally able to just realize at that point that their partner doesn’t want what they want, and just end the monogamous relationship, let their now former partner go pursue what they want.
So… how is this unethical?
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
I appreciate you reply.
First of all, monogamy is based on old property laws, on normarivity, and enforced by states/religions. that alone should be a red flag (not inherently wrong though).
I just think that relationships are only the matter of the people within it.
Boundaries are okay, but shouldn’t be used to control people. I might have a boundary against eating pork, and it would be unethical and a severe breach of trust if my partner cooked pork and served it to me without telling me that it is pork. however, I can’t impose a boundary on them not eating pork. if I was severely allergic and it is a health concern, I can envision a “no pork at home” rule. but if my boundary is “You cannot have it” then that isn’t a boundary, that’s control. If my partner has bacon in a bruch with their friends, she isn’t breaking a boundary of mine I am not involved in there.
I hope that at least clarifies my view.
and that is besides the baggage that monogamous relationships come with pre build expectations and are assumed to be to “correct” form by states and society.
BTW, I also disagree with many issues that comes with ENM, and I personally side with relationship anarchy. which is an alternative poly philosophy. They do have some interest concepts, like the relationship smorgasbord, where partners get yo define what their relationship should be like, rather than accepting the societal standards.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 minutes ago
And I appreciate your reply, though I do disagree.
(and for what its worth, i didnt downvote you)
I follow your food allergy metaphor, but this makes sense analogously only if you essentially do not view sex as any more sacred, or complex and meaningful, than food… you view it only as basic human need that is not entwined with the very emotional structure of a relationship.
Say that you’re both ostensibly members of a religion that forbids eating pork, or you’re both fairly hardcore vegans, and you in particular are also allergic to pork.
If your partner goes out and eats pork, away from you, yes this is not literally directly harmful to you, but it betrays the values that you both ostensibly claim to believe in.
Furthering the analogy, the partner could just say they’re not a member of that religion, or they’re not a vegan, or they have different interpretations of the concepts of those… and then you could say:
‘well, the beliefs that I have are important to me, and I thought that you had those same beliefs, and that they were important to you to… so if you do not have those beliefs, we should probably not be a couple.’
So, you have clarified your line of thinking, your preference or worldview or what you want to call it, but you have not explained how the preference or worldview that I explained is unethical.
I don’t inherently think that ENM or poly or relationship anarchy are inherently impossible to do ethically… I think they are difficult to do ethically, without causing a ton of drama, a lot of emotional distress and complexity… but i do not think they are just de facto unethical in concept.
I do agree with you that monogamous relationships very often are problematic in that they come with baggage by way of people having unstated assumptions of what the roles and rules are.
But this can be solved with forthright communication and actually discussing with the partner what those roles and rules are or should be.
That goes the same for nonmonogamous relationships, they’re just inherently more complex as they involve more people.
Tons of people are, imo, not emotionally mature enough, not honest enough with themselves, do not have the communication skills required to be in any kind of a serious relationship, monogamous or otherwise.
quips@slrpnk.net 1 hour ago
Bro just loves to ragebait. You can be perfectly happy like that, doesn’t mean monogamy is unethical.
basxto@discuss.tchncs.de 1 hour ago
It doesn’t, but everybody is free to decide whether, how and when they wanna have sex with a person again. For example not having (unprotected penetrative) sex for one to four months could be a response to a partner having (unprotected penetrative) sex with somebody they didn’t know. That’s already a more open minded approach.
You cheat if you have an agreement and you break it. That’s pretty much it. That can also happen with poly.
You can have agreements to make it easier/safer to have unprotected or messy sex.
The main reasons are probably offsprings and STIs. One is how invested a person will or has to be if a pregnancy was to happen. The other is about condoms, prevention, testing and so forth. It’s also easier to judge if you only have to consider one or a low amount of people. (Not that I’ve ever had sex.)
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
If you have a relationship with someone who doesn’t care about STDs or pregnancy scares, then that’s on you, don’t have irresponsible partners. yhea, what they did is stupid and dangerous, but it only affects you if you concent to be with them. if they lie about it, that’s another problem, and I would consider it as them raping you as you did not have informed concent.
We use protection with strangers and test every 3 months.
byw, I talk about poly, but I personally only have bandwidth for one person, she has her dates, and I’m happy for her. and I have my heart open form other people if they appear magically in my house but I’m not actively looking for more partners. When she took a break from dating I jokes that were acidentally monogamous.
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 hours ago
Historically it’s because of heirloom. Therefore it’s often more accepted if men cheat, because you always knew who is the mom, but not who is the dad. That somehow carried on with peoples insecurities. On the other hand I can imagine that in some places the woman are happy if the guy would take care at least about one kid.
I’m also happy with my wife doing whatever, as long as she is doing it responsibly. And I know that she is.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Yhea, kind of bullshit society still bases relationships on medieval property right.
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 hour ago
A lot of “common agreements” are based on medical understanding… “If you don’t grow your own potatoes you have to die”