I think in theory it’s great but it never seems to work. In theory I would like a nice sister wife to have a friend to chat with and complain about my husband with and help with cooking and stuff that my husband is terrible at.

In practice I would probably get irritated by her the same way I get irritated by my husband and because the structure is not traditional I would then feel more free to just eject her from the house than I do my husband.

What if she eject you from the house? Would you wander around looking to be a sister-wife someplace else?

Anonymous wrote:I could love more than one person romantically but I would not and have not ever had a sexual relationship with more than one person at a time. For me that is a step too far, especially when you consider the STD aspect of it for which there is no 100% effective preventative.

There is difference between loving someone and being in love. I have two guy friends I love who are like brothers to me and have been for eons. If I were single I could see myself being romantically attracted to them. But I’m in love with my husband and I’m extremely content. I never think about STD issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP to this thread (and OP of the modern monogamy one). I’m romantically involved with two men with their knowledge and consent, and feel zero shame or guilt about it.

Are you okay with each of them having multiple partners

With BF, yes for sure. With DH, in theory yes as well but he hasn’t put it into practice (his choice) so I can’t say with absolute certainty.

I think in theory it’s great but it never seems to work. In theory I would like a nice sister wife to have a friend to chat with and complain about my husband with and help with cooking and stuff that my husband is terrible at.

In practice I would probably get irritated by her the same way I get irritated by my husband and because the structure is not traditional I would then feel more free to just eject her from the house than I do my husband.

Anonymous wrote:Monogamy is largely a Christian thing. The Romans first imposed monogamy in their social construct so men wouldn’t be off looking for more wives and would be at home paying taxes and waiting for war. Christianity turned it into the moral issue it is today.

Correct. Monogamy effectively pairs up women and men. Societies which are non monogamous tend to have large numbers of young men without access to wives / sexual partners; which we know from history is always extremely destabilizing for any culture. This construct for paved the way for the enlightenment and centuries of progress.

Furthermore, evidence tells us that polygamist societies have much worse outcomes for women and especially children, in terms of abuse and neglect.

Anonymous wrote:NP to this thread (and OP of the modern monogamy one). I’m romantically involved with two men with their knowledge and consent, and feel zero shame or guilt about it.

Are you okay with each of them having multiple partners

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I'm not a troll. There have been times in my life when I've felt very close to more than one romantic partner at the same time. I also once had a partner who refused to be exclusive with me even though it seemed like we were in love with each other, and I was very upset with that person and broke it off, hurting the person. I wonder if that was a mistake on my part.

You are a troll. Stop.

No, YOU are the troll, PP. you need to stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Monogamy is largely a Christian thing. The Romans first imposed monogamy in their social construct so men wouldn’t be off looking for more wives and would be at home paying taxes and waiting for war. Christianity turned it into the moral issue it is today.

Sure.

I know so many couples at this point who tried "nonmonogamy" with their partners and even though they liked it in theory, as soon as their partners had sex with someone else, they couldn't stomach having sex with them anymore. It was chemical, it was a primal response to nonmonogamy.

How do you explain the many non-monogamous cultures in the world, then? They’re having a “primal response” because decades of culture have told them to. Monogamy is not natural or unnatural, moral or immoral, it’s just culture.

I’m monogamous and happy that way, but I’m not blind that I was taught to be monogamous, not born with some primal monogamous instinct.

Sexual desire, for me, is very one pointed and monogamous. So at least let's acknowledge that that is true for some people, at a primal level. And I'm willing to acknowledge that some people don't have that same primal response. At the cultural level, sure -- culture evens out whatever normal variation there might be and creates a societal standard.

NP to this thread (and OP of the modern monogamy one). I’m romantically involved with two men with their knowledge and consent, and feel zero shame or guilt about it.

I could love more than one person romantically but I would not and have not ever had a sexual relationship with more than one person at a time. For me that is a step too far, especially when you consider the STD aspect of it for which there is no 100% effective preventative.

Anonymous wrote:Another troll post, this sub is overrun with them...

I’ve been saying that!

Real love is family love NOT romantic love.
What you are calling love is actually LUST.
Multiple partners gets you the love/lust bug for life.
But do that nasty. You being so hip cool and trendy.

When we have sex I often fantasize it being with someone else, always celebrities and athletes. So I enjoy multiple partners without cheating.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I'm not a troll. There have been times in my life when I've felt very close to more than one romantic partner at the same time. I also once had a partner who refused to be exclusive with me even though it seemed like we were in love with each other, and I was very upset with that person and broke it off, hurting the person. I wonder if that was a mistake on my part.

You are a troll. Stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Monogamy is largely a Christian thing. The Romans first imposed monogamy in their social construct so men wouldn’t be off looking for more wives and would be at home paying taxes and waiting for war. Christianity turned it into the moral issue it is today.

Sure.

I know so many couples at this point who tried "nonmonogamy" with their partners and even though they liked it in theory, as soon as their partners had sex with someone else, they couldn't stomach having sex with them anymore. It was chemical, it was a primal response to nonmonogamy.

How do you explain the many non-monogamous cultures in the world, then? They’re having a “primal response” because decades of culture have told them to. Monogamy is not natural or unnatural, moral or immoral, it’s just culture.

I’m monogamous and happy that way, but I’m not blind that I was taught to be monogamous, not born with some primal monogamous instinct.