Are human beings meant for monogamy or is it society trying to reform us?

[Ali]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Only you can answer that, as far as I am concerned.  If your answer is "there isn't only one right for me" then that's your answer.  It's no one else's business but yours and your partners'.

I would like to say though, that even though I am married and monogamous, I don't believe that one person can or should be expected to fulfill all of my needs or all of my partner's needs.  The idea of putting that on someone sounds suffocating for both of us.  That's why friends and family and separate interests are so important to me - for both of us.  I encourage him to have friendships and interests that have nothing to do with me, and I cultivate the same, because while he's my best friend, I certainly don't want him to be my only friend, nor do I desire to be his only friend.   I can't be everything that he needs, and I'm fine with that.

[Amicale]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Only you can answer that, as far as I am concerned.  If your answer is "there isn't only one right for me" then that's your answer.  It's no one else's business but yours and your partners'.

I would like to say though, that even though I am married and monogamous, I don't believe that one person can or should be expected to fulfill all of my needs or all of my partner's needs.  The idea of putting that on someone sounds suffocating for both of us.  That's why friends and family and separate interests are so important to me - for both of us.  I encourage him to have friendships and interests that have nothing to do with me, and I cultivate the same, because while he's my best friend, I certainly don't want him to be my only friend, nor do I desire to be his only friend.   I can't be everything that he needs, and I'm fine with that.

Awesome post, Ali. Same goes for me and my girlfriend -- we each have friends and interests that we get involved with totally seperately from one another. It lends a real sense of balance to life, and it helps each of us so that when it comes to our relationship, we end up having more to give one another.

[En_Route]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

I don't think it's necessary to subscribe to this extraordinary proposition in order to have an enduring marriage. In fact it is safer to assume that there is nobody out there who is "right"for you if by "right" you mean your perfect partner.

[The Magic Pudding]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Philosoraptor bites sometimes, it's in her nature I think.
If Philo takes a chunk out of you accept your error, slink away and perhaps live to tell your grand children of your error.
Old woman avatar doesn't equal old person.

[Amicale]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Philosoraptor bites sometimes, it's in her nature I think.
If Philo takes a chunk out of you accept your error, slink away and perhaps live to tell your grand children of your error.
Old woman avatar doesn't equal old person.

You mean you AREN'T currently wearing a large hat with a beautiful blue bow on it?? 

[DeterminedJuliet]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Philosoraptor bites sometimes, it's in her nature I think.
If Philo takes a chunk out of you accept your error, slink away and perhaps live to tell your grand children of your error.
Old woman avatar doesn't equal old person.

You mean you AREN'T currently wearing a large hat with a beautiful blue bow on it?? 

I don't know what TMP is talking about. I'm really a statue.

[Amicale]

Pytheas has explained what this topic is about quite well. No one is against marriage. I am certainly all for equal rights.
So there is no.need to get so upset Philosoraptor. I think some of you were born into a different time maybe  where marriage is expected at an early age.
Me, persnally, I don't see the point as feelings eventually fade or change.

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

Philosoraptor bites sometimes, it's in her nature I think.
If Philo takes a chunk out of you accept your error, slink away and perhaps live to tell your grand children of your error.
Old woman avatar doesn't equal old person.

You mean you AREN'T currently wearing a large hat with a beautiful blue bow on it?? 

I don't know what TMP is talking about. I'm really a statue.

And I'm really a hyper orange cat. I KNOW!

*purrs, stretches, licks a paw and meanders off before she derails the thread further*

[Sandra Craft]

Yeah, off to the awwww thread where you belong!

I've been with my girlfriend for over seven years. She's the love of my life and my best friend. I've never felt more comfortable with anyone than I do with her.

And that's pretty much the best of a relationship as far as I'm concerned -- sex can be enjoyed with just about anybody, but being completely comfortable with someone is a rare thing.  I've known my girlfriend for nearly 30 years and we've been close friends almost that entire time, friends-with-benefits for about 20 years.  During that time there've been involvements and romances with other people which interrupted the "with benefits" part of our friendship but never the friendship itself, largely because we're more comfortable and "at home" with each other than with anyone else either of us has ever known. 

In the past few years, we've been it for each other as far as either emotional or sexual relationships were concerned, and since it looks likely to stay this way she recently suggested that we might as well go ahead and call each other girlfriends in the fullest sense since that's what it's developed into.  It took me awhile to get used to the idea but I have to admit I like it.  Since same-sex marriages are now being allowed in CA again (for who knows how long), maybe some day we'll go that route, but I doubt we'll ever close the relationship.  Monogamous relationships with other people in both our lives have come and gone, but the non-monogamous relationship we have with each other is still standing, it's what works for us. 

And as far as the law is concerned, I really don't see any reason except for religious ones for marriage to be restricted to couples.  Perhaps fundies were right in seeing legalizing same-sex marriage as a slippery slope to allowing other forms of marriage between and among consenting adults, but is this really something to fear?  I haven't heard any arguement against legalized non-monogamy that either doesn't also apply to monogamous couples, or seem to be anything more than the idea of non-monogamy simply being outside many peoples comfort zone.  And that's fine, nobody's saying "non-monogamy for all", but some of us are questioning the need for the "monogamy for all" rule.

[philosoraptor]

What is the actual experience of being married?  It's different for every couple.
In the same breath you condemn marriage as bigoted, but say you've performed several marriage ceremonies?  at I care very much about everyone having equal rights, I resent the implication that my choice to get married makes me a bigot.

Read me  carefully so that we may have a meaningful exchange

I am not against the coupling of two individuals, on the contrary it is one of the objectives in living I agree upon.

I am very much for equal rights too, but also increased sense of responsibility, and SELF-AUTHORITY

There are broadly 2 levels in a join, marriage, civil union or whatever the label:

1) The sentimental one   2) The legal one

The STATE (and not the church) is to provide authority and protection for level 2
The persons involved, the individuals,  I say, should provide authority and self-protection for  level 1

There are plenty of examples of fixed marriages, trap marriages, arranged marriages, sponsored marriages that need NOT be

Love, passion and true inter-personal connection shuns, shyies away from "officiality"

I have no doubt that  many of you are happily joined in a "marriage".
All I am saying is that your match, and no-one's match can be or should be  attributed to the contract you chose to perform.
Each wedding anniversary should have the power of a renewal contract, and justify yearly marital celebrations (or none at all)

Tank already said it, but the onus is on you to make sure you articulate yourself clearly.  I gather that English is not your first language, which perhaps is part of the problem, but your posts kind of read like Virginia Woolfe discovers the internet.  You jump from thought to thought, and half the information is nonsensical or irrelevant.  Typing in all caps is the internet equivalent of shouting at someone.  When you type something like this:

"THE NEED TO DECLARE AND BROADCAST YOUR PAIR-BONDING
IN A PSYCHOSEXUAL CONTEXT TO THE SURROUNDING SOCIETY
IS DIVISIVE AND BIGOT-FORMING"

It reads as though you are not only shouting at me, but specifically singling me out and calling me a bigot.  Based on other people's responses to your post, I don't think I'm the only person who read your initial post as an over the top attack on marriage and married people.  If I am reading your second posting correctly, I don't think you and I are actually in disagreement, which makes your first post seem all the more strange.  I'm an existentialist-responsibility and self-authority are at the core of what I believe.  I don't think anywhere, in any of my posts, did I imply that I believe everyone should get married or that married couples are superior to unmarried couples, etc...  or anything else to imply that I think people should just go along with what society expects of them.  Marriage can be as sacred or as profane as you make it, even without religion involved.

Also, I'm not an old fuddy duddy anymore than you're a pink pony, sweetdeath.  If you Google Madalyn Murray O'Hair, it'll probably make more sense to you.  Even if I was 60 or 80 or 100, what the fuck difference does it make in regards to what I said?  Your comments here and elsewhere make you seem like you've got a lot of hate and prejudice: blacks and Hispanics are considered "infestations", married people are silly bigots, and then this comment from the masculine/feminine thread: "I think hetero people just WANT Gay couples to be a stereotype, so they can pick them.out easier. *eye roll*".  I've read an awful lot about what you think about people who aren't like you, and here's what I think: I think you either have a serious chip on your shoulder, or you do a poor job of articulating yourself, possibly both.  But you make an awful lot of statements that look/sound like inflammatory, blanket generalizations.

It's not what you say, it's how you say it.  Example:

"People who diss marriage are probably just angry because they're so pathetic, they couldn't find anyone to marry them if they wanted to."

versus

"I think some unmarried people might talk down on marriage because they are afraid they won't ever experience that level of commitment with another person, and they want to hide that insecurity and pain from other people."

Both of those statements express similar sentiments, but one of them reads quite a bit more offensively than the other.  And for the record, I don't believe that particular sentiment, I'm just using it to make my point.  That first statement, on top of being nasty, is a blanket generalization.  The second is more of an observation that doesn't necessarily assert that all people in that particular group think/behave the same way, but that some of them might.

[Crow]

Philosoraptor bites sometimes, it's in her nature I think.
If Philo takes a chunk out of you accept your error, slink away and perhaps live to tell your grand children of your error.

That's an understatement and a half.

[Sweetdeath]

Philo has a right to her opinions. That doesn't bother me in any way.

[Tank]

Philo has a right to her opinions. That doesn't bother me in any way.

Well it should, because she's spot on with her observations about your gross generalisation and overt prejudices. Your racist comments were very unpleasant. Your ageism is silly as you'll be old one day.  If you can't accept reasoned and reasonable criticism you'll never 'grow' as a person. You'll just get more and more insular and isolated. I wouldn't want that to happen. (hugs)

[pytheas]

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

the answer could be you shouldn't because we cannot recognise the absolute "right" in functional exclusivity

however we do get along with the "appropriate" one, the "compatible" one

and of them for each of us, in the billions that exist, a small group of our very own village people lurk unoticed and dispersed on the planet

to keep learning
to keep searching
and to keep
loving
on higher succesive planes if we can at our bestest

[Whitney]

There are billions of people on earth. Why exactly should I believe only one is 'right' for me?

These days, marriage is a contract that doesn't end until legal action is taken to end it.  It does not necessary imply forever.  I know our vows didn't say anything about till death even if we plan to try to stay together than long.

If a couple plans to stay together for a while then legal marriage comes along with other legal things that make it a good option.  But I also don't think society really cares much about who is married anymore (other than the conservatives who protest too much about the 'sanctity' of marriage which statistically their own people have single handedly destroyed if it was ever there to begin with)

For your viewing enjoyment.  Tim Minchin...if I didnt have you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KynIKjRwqDI

[pytheas]

articulate yourself clearly.  
"THE NEED TO DECLARE AND BROADCAST YOUR PAIR-BONDING
IN A PSYCHOSEXUAL CONTEXT TO THE SURROUNDING SOCIETY
IS DIVISIVE AND BIGOT-FORMING"
It reads as though you are not only shouting at me, but specifically singling me out and calling me a bigot.

we declare our goods at customs, police auhtority institution
broadcasts occur from media that trendset, "inform" with intent, from institutions with agentas
psychosexual context of pair bonding is the plane of sentiment, mental connection and spiritual meaning in connection, as opposed to legalities, law-binding contracts and finacial arrangements
surrounding society is the personal society we get to interact, enjoy or be oppresed in

the institutional act conveing more than legalities, assuming more importance in sentiment than a law about dog littering, the institutional act that is linked and represents in our minds, unfortunately, marriage

divides constructing moral hardware and commandments, creating support and sustainment for possessiveness and jealousy

and is bigot forming as it nurtures and develops attitudes of sick fellow-human abuse within partnerships, in susceptible individuals


james bond prefers "married" women, as in another part of the world of institutionalised marriage, if she was not a virgin or sipmly didnt evidently bleed for the hungry eyes of the gossiping mob to feast on, she can be banished or put to death

our personal story of reflecting or not grasping monogamy, great or not so bright,  is linked to society's more crude authoritative tries to reform us
through
institutional marriage

happily married?
pray to O FORTUNA
and work to keep it that way

any additional emotional investment is faulty