Not talking about being with one partner at a time. Talking about the idea of finding “the one” and being with them your whole life.

50% divorce rate. 97% of people (in the US) don’t wait till marriage, so most of us have multiple sexual partners prior to the one we stick with. Many have children with more than one partner.

How can anyone look at the world and think, yeah, there’s one that’s meant for everyone and just one?

Also hope I don’t come across disrespectful. If you do believe in monogamy, I am interested in hearing from you. I’m just buzzed and thinking about my own love life and being curt

Edit: Speaking to the idea that it’s the “natural order” or default. Not that it can’t work in individual circumstances, especially when we’ve been programmed for decades

  • Montagge@kbin.social
    29·
    1 year ago

    How so?
    If you date someone in Highschool, and then date someone in college after the highschool relationship ended how are you not monogamous?

    • DudePluto@lemm.eeOP
      717·
      1 year ago

      Oh the definition is fine, I just mean that it seems illogical to adhere to it dogmatically.

      Like, ok I’ll try to come up with the best summation but bear with me lol. Basically, let’s say you’re with your current partner. You’ve been into other people in the past. So, logically, you’ll probably be into other people - at some level - in the future, right? That seems like a natural development to me.

      So if it’s natural, why should we have the little fine print on all of our relationships that reads “If you’re into other people this contract is null and void?”

      Am I making sense? Lol. Like I just mean that it’s natural to be attracted, in some way, to more than one person so why do we default to holding ourselves and our partners to the unnatural? In that way, I’m monogamous with one person at a time seems logically inconsistent to me. It accepts the existence of plurality of attraction, yet denies its engagement

      • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
        191·
        1 year ago

        the little fine print on all of our relationships that reads “If you’re into other people this contract is null and void?”

        How do you define “being into them”? Looking and finding them attractive, or fucking them without your partner knowing?

        • DudePluto@lemm.eeOP
          512·
          1 year ago

          Being into them is being attracted to them which, on an instinctual level, is wanting to fuck them

          Edit: simplified, obviously, you can be attracted to someone in a more emotional way but some would argue that’s still wanting to partner with them in some way

          • SnakeRattleNRoll@lemmy.world
            171·
            1 year ago

            I think that’s more of an age thing. Im nearly 40 and in a damn near perfect marriage for 15 years now.

            We have friends that we absolutely find attractive. Frankly speaking, we all take care of ourselves and it shows.

            Im not looking to bang any of them, and my wife isnt either (granted, as she says, but we have a very strong relationship). We’re happy being friends, being comfortable going to the beach, hitting the gym together, etc. We’re all very happy in our monogamous relationships (minus one couple, because he fucked around and is now in the ‘finding out’ stage). Life isnt porn?

            It sounds like you’re more grappling with maturity, and maybe a bit of heartbreak.

          • Rocinante@lemmy.one
            9·
            1 year ago

            I’m confused. Are you saying people who are monogamous aren’t allowed to be attracted to other people by your definition? Or are you saying why are people choosing to be monogamous over having multiple partners at the same time?

          • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
            52·
            1 year ago

            Being into them is being attracted to them which, on an instinctual level, is wanting to fuck them

            So what? As you say, is instinctual. As long as you’re not drooling and you don’t act on it, it’s not a problem. And any person demanding otherwise is toxic and not worthy of your time.

            • DudePluto@lemm.eeOP
              36·
              1 year ago

              Why are you saying so what? You asked a question and I answered

              • elephantium@lemmy.world
                51·
                1 year ago

                Not really. You pretty much dodged the question.

                If I say I’m monogamous, when do you start calling me a liar?

                When you say “so and so is hot!” and I don’t argue?

                When I say “so and so is hot!”?

                When I bang so and so without breaking up with my current partner?

                I’ve read this entire thread, and I’m still not entirely sure where you’d draw that line.

              • Jax@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                1 year ago

                Have you heard of people that are asexual, or sapiosexual?

                Beyond that, you have to understand that it’s very easy to twist numbers in a manipulative way.

                For example, it’s not 97% of people everywhere don’t wait for marriage.

                It’s 97% of the people who answered whatever survey you’re referring to don’t wait.

                Where the fuck did they get these people from? College? Nightclubs? Any religious organization?

                Statistics are not fact. They are ways of organizing data that would otherwise be overwhelming and impossible to parse.

      • Montagge@kbin.social
        5·
        1 year ago

        Oh gotcha! I think a lot of people are too jealous to pull off being poly. It takes a certain mindset to do it in a healthy manner. I guess what my opinion on it is is that there’s nothing bad about it but most people are bad at it.
        I think I would struggle with it because I would feel the need to be there in all ways possible for all partners, but I don’t have the social energy to pull that off.