NYT story: Talking to My Fiancé About My New Girlfriend

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:When we have some innovation that allows for kids to be raised without serious parental commitment from 2 parents and when we are so rich that everyone can live comfortably for their entire life and save for retirement without sharing any household expenses, then people can just live from the seat of their pants and do whatever feels good in the moment. Until that day, throwing out marriage as the fundamental family structure is a horrendous idea.


+1 I read the article and thought - holy crap I hope these people never, ever procreate. Just go get sterilized and then you can live a life of freewheeling unattachment.


Very often these types of people will abort their kids, so no worries there.



Guarantee she ditches the guy and moves in with the other woman. The fiancé will be kept around long just enough to serve her purpose.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:A lot of ignorance and judgment on this thread.

1. I read the STD article looking for some indication that a rise in polyamory, or even promiscuity (no, the former doesn't imply the latter) is contributing to higher STD rates. The article gave a number of reasons for rising rates, but polyamory wasn't one of them. I get it, it was posted by someone who considers polyamory sleazy. So I'll post this article instead: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/201401/sexually-transmitted-infections-in-polyamorous-relationships. For those who prefer science to prejudice, polyamorous people are much less likely to contract STIs than "monogamous" cheaters.

2. Polyamory is not about having whatever you want. It requires emotional stability, maturity, honesty, and open communication. It's the opposite of "freewheeling unattachment." Polyamorous people are just as committed to their partners and families as monogamous people. It is possible to be fully committed to more than one romantic partner. We all accept that it's possible to have committed relationships with more than one close friend, more than one sibling, more than one child, etc. Why not with more than one romantic partner? Maybe you think romantic relationships are different, but why is that, other than the fact that's it's what we were raised to believe?

3. Polyamory is not about having a lot of sex with different people. It's about relationships. When I tell people I'm polyamorous they usually make incorrect assumptions about me and I explain that I spend a million times more energy on hard emotional labor than on sexyfuntime. Personally I don't do casual sex. At all. Not for moral reasons, but because I simply don't enjoy it. I need an emotional connection. Some types of non-monogamy are more focused on sex, but so are plenty of single people who don't identify as non-monogamous (not to mention plenty of unethically non-monogamous people who cheat on their partners).

4. Sure, there are people who practice polyamory for unhealthy reasons or in unhealthy ways. There are plenty of monogamous marriages that are dysfunctional as well. Human relationships of any kind are sometimes dysfunctional. People who lack emotional stability and/or maturity are prone to dysfunctional relationships no matter whether they're monogamous or polyamorous.

I'm not proselytizing for polyamory. I get that it's not for a lot of people, and that's fine. I don't think it's better or somehow more "evolved" than monogamy. It's just an alternative relationship orientation that fits for some of us. You might disagree with my choices, but I am neither stupid nor delusional.


This is the part about poly that seems exhausting, and not worth it. Isn't the whole point the sexyfuntimes? I get that monogamy is tough and who doesn't want a roll in the hay with someone new. My spouse and I just have a don't ask don't tell, who needs more "emotional labor" in a marriage?
post reply Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)
Message Quick Reply
Go to: