muggiwhplar

What about serial monogamy? Meaning remaining committed to one person at a time, but only for about 3 years

The complex was proposed by Freud, and most of his theories are considered nuts these days. His explanation for the M/W-complex doesn't really make any sense, but I think the description accurately describes the way a lot of men in modern society view women.

I'm not going to dabble in this convo too much, but this part here especially is a bit of a flag. 90% of the women I know as "friends" (If I can call them that anymore) have no self control anymore, the second they get into that sexual high, they don't give a damn about anyone and everyone they could potentially hurt, they just turn into an instant [bleep] and bam, changed. Probably one of the biggest reasons why I'm single for so long, is most girls I've met, turned into this with a HUGE cheating history, and as much as I hate being single, and as much as I hate not having sex at 21 BECAUSE IT'S WHO I AM, I'm not even remotely getting involved with a [bleep]. who knows who they've slept with. Anyway I'm done with my ramble of incoherent stuff. Ever heard of the Madonna-Whore Complex? >_>

Yes, the duel arena example was technically comparing apples to oranges; I only mentioned it because it was the first personal example that came to mind of experiencing what I was discussing-- which is that people do things they wouldn't normally do if their emotions are strong enough. I never said Randox would sleep with him the same day she met him (though it's a possibility). I just said she'd think differently than the way she's thinking now. Whether or not she'd actually sleep with him is also a matter of her own self-regulation. Some people have higher self-regulation, some people have lower. But self-regulation is a finite resource and it can be depleted gradually over time.

(You're a girl, if I recall correctly?) I think it's important for you to realize that you're saying this now while you're in unemotional logic-mode. If you crossed paths with the man of your dreams and he triggered all kinds of emotion/arousal in you, you'd think differently in the heat of the moment when he's with you. It's like how everybody says "I would never do this, this, and that!" or "I know better than to do this, this, and that!" But then, in the heat of the moment when their emotions are running high, they do things they claim to not ordinarily do. That's one way that people usually cheat. Here's a fun experiment that I just made up for you to get a taste of what I'm talking about: If you're a member, get on RS and go to the duel arena. Make a list of logical, personal rules for you to follow. For example, "I will never double anybody's stake"; or "I will never stake somebody with higher stats than me" Then go stake and see how quickly you feel the urge to start breaking your own rules. If you lose a stake, you'll want that money back and feel the urge to break your rules. If you win a stake, you'll want more money and feel the urge to break your rules. If nobody wants to stake you, you'll get bored and feel the urge to break your rules just to stop the boredom. Like I said earlier-- we're emotional creatures capable of reasoning. Not the other way around. I think that for males it was just a numbers game. Mate with hundreds of girls per year, then find out later what your "return on investment" is. Since women get pregnant and can't fend for themselves, they were serial monogamists. Either way-- their "devotion" to one man ended after a few years and they'd move on to another. They wouldn't remain with one man for the rest of their lives. Also, we're omnivores/hunter-gatherers. Men hunted, women gathered. I don't think we ate 90% meat-- I'm sure it was much, much less than that. Dolphins aren't monogamous and they have sex for pleasure... just like humans! :P

No...no they couldn't. They really could, as proven by the fact colloquially (as in slang/everyday/informal) you barely see affect, always effect and no-one ever really trips up over it not making sense. Case and point: It took several days for anyone to even notice I'd used the wrong one, so the clearly all understood what was meant and read effect with the meaning of affect. Then why are you always derailing threads by correcting people's grammatical usage when everybody else understands what they're saying?

Correct word is AFFECT. It is NOT EFFECT. Sorry couldn't resist. :P =D>

Yeah... use either polypore or storm at DKS. Polypore more or less the same damage output as fire surge, at a fraction of the price Storm is about double the damage output of fire surge, at the same price

I don't think I said anywhere that we should never try to resist our biological impulses. In some circumstances, it's usually good to resist our biology-- like when we resist eating junk food. Other times, it's not a good idea-- like when you have to go to the bathroom. As far as urges like sex with strangers go, I'm saying the natural urge you get-- whether you act on it or not-- is going to make you suffer in modern society if you're in a closed relationship when you experience the urge since you lose no matter how you choose to behave.

[hide][/hide] :thumbsup: lmao

I haven't given much thought to homosexuality. I do have several gay friends and a gay cousin-- all of which struggled to "come out." In ancient Greece (or was it Rome... :huh:), grown men would have sex with younger men for whatever reason. Homosexuality wasn't really taboo or anything to be considered odd back then-- it was pretty normal. It was only taboo for a younger man lower in the hierarchy to "be the man" with higher-status man.

If someone is biologically wired for pedophilia, would you still say it's beyond their control? Sorry, kind of a non sequitur...but I'm curious to see what you think. Good question! Idk if pedophilia is a nature or nurture thing (without researching it, I'd guess it's probably more on the nurture side though), if that's what you're asking, but regardless of the cause I'll give my thoughts anyway I'd say their happiness and well-being that stems from such a "condition" is beyond their control. Whether or not they act on it depends on how strong the condition is influencing them, or how much logic they're using to predict the consequences of their actions. Like in the cheating example, regardless of which path they choose, they're going to be suffering either way. If they choose to molest a child, they'll get short-term gratification but then probably get arrested or whatever for doing so. If they resist their urge, then they're just stuck trying to resist the urge for as long as they can manage. It's a lose-lose situation for them. When it comes to "disorders" like that, I've always wondered how they're still here in our society, hundreds of thousands of years later. Calling it "bad" or "abnormal" is subjective-- for example, a cold-blooded murdering psychopath is generally a threat to modern society, but thousands of years ago, they would excel as hunters/killers/predators.

They're closely related, indeed. It's just that people forget that we're pretty much using the same biological hardware we used hundreds of thousands of years ago before we civilization and morality existed. As a rule of thumb, primarily following your logic tends to lead to long term happiness, whereas primarily following your emotions tends to lead to short-term gratification.

Survival is biological. Logic is what gives us the power to predict future consequences. But sometimes we'll predict the future consequences, know what's "right" and what's "wrong" and do the wrong thing anyway simply because it'll make us feel good.

We're emotional creatures capable of reasoning. Not the other way around. What if our sex lives are more or less the same as animals? What's wrong with that? Why does that bother you? Because your beliefs have been shaped by society? Our reasoning is what takes us to a level beyond "mere animals." But when our emotions want to kick in (whether we want them to or not), they easily override all of our rationality.

Yup, me too :D You're exactly right. And that's pretty much the only downside of open relationships :) It's all a matter of changing yourself, which really isn't that hard. It's better to have the problem stem from yourself where you can influence it and control it, rather than have the problem coming from the other person whom you cannot change or control. I'll take minor occasional jealousy instead of the rules and restrictions of a closed relationship any day of the week!

Okay. Here's where we disagree-- and this is a big point. I'm not judging closed relationships based on "stupid" peoples' decisions-- I'm basing it off the way we are biologically wired. It's something beyond our control. The generally accepted divorce rate in the US is 50%. Thus, many assume they have a 50-50 chance at a "successful" marriage. Wrong. This means they have a 50% chance of a marriage that doesn't end in divorce. Just because two people haven't gotten divorced, it doesn't mean that their marriage is still a success. I consider a marriage/long-term monogamous relationship a failure if any of the following occur: 1) divorce/breakup 2) one person cheats 3) one person is unhappy with the arrangement (if one person has the urge to cheat, but doesn't cheat, they're probably going to fall into this category) Now, based on that article, which basically says that every man needs sexual variety, there's going to be a LOT of men who fall into either category #2 or #3-- just because that's how their emotions are influencing them. It has nothing to do with their logical mind, morals, or social conditioning. It's all about their biology and emotions, whether people like it or not. The problem is-- most people only consider a relationship/marriage a failure if #1 occurs. People usually disregard #2 and #3. When you factor in those two additional factors, the chance of a marriage "failing" becomes closer to about 90%. There's exceptions to every rule, and maybe you're in that lucky 10% (but you're probably not). But I would rather stick with casual relationships/open relationships that have a 0% chance of failure, than a closed relationship where the odds are against me, and even if I come out "victorious," I'm not any happier than I would have been if I remained single or in non-exclusive relationships. Also keep in mind that men weren't designed to be monogamous-- but one of the main reasons they enter relationships is because they get consistent sex. But sex with the same partner gets less exciting as time goes on. Also, as women age, their sex drive decreases while the man's stays more or less the same. When the man starts missing out on sex, things start going south. One of the main reasons women enter relationships is for security. Unlike men, they're actually wired to be serial monogamists... they'll be paired to one guy long enough to have a kid and raise it, but after that they'll move on to another man. In modern society, women get BORED of their man after a few years. It's not anybody's fault. It's just the way it is. Yes, there are men that say they prefer monogamy-- and most do, at the beginning of it. But how many of them still prefer monogamy and want to stay with their partner 10+ years later? I don't think those generalizations and overarching statements are really a matter of opinion anymore. There's scientific research all over the place that supports what I'm saying. I never see any research that says that humans are designed to be monogamous forever.

I don't really think it's fair to judge closed relationships based on some stupid peoples' decisions. Yes there are plenty of people who enter into a relationship because they like the idea of it or because they just want to be loved. And yes there are loads of people who get married when their relationship already has problems, or because they're gold diggers, or just because they got pregnant, or because they think it will be convenient, etc. But there are also plenty of men and women who enter into marriage or a closed relationship simply because they truly love the other person. I think the horrible divorce rates are just due to people making poor decisions or getting married for the wrong reasons. And that's the fault of the people - not the cultural idea of closed relationships. You may not like closed relationships and that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't mean that they're a bad thing culturally or that all men secretly despise them. The world is full of people who make horrible decisions every day in all aspects of life, but that doesn't mean closed relationships are bad or doomed to fail. I do respect your opinion and I know we'll just have to agree to disagree.. but I just feel like the article in particular uses a lot of generalizations and overarching statements (or imply them) like "Monogamy is bad for all men," "Men are not designed to be monogamous," "Closed relationships aren't realistic" etc. It's fine for you to have that opinion but to me it has been sounding like you (and the article) have been stating them more as facts, and I don't think that's quite fair, especially when there are men in this thread saying that they prefer monogamy. We can't judge the entire human race or each gender. There are men who prefer monogamy and women who prefer open relationships. Ultimately, I don't think we can make assumptions about the entire race and say "Open relationships are better and how it was meant to be for humans." With something like this, the most important factor is going to be personality, and humans differ so greatly in this area. So I think whether monogamy or an open relationship is the right choice for a person is going to come down to their personality and values rather than how it was "meant to be" or whatever is most natural. You're in a closed relationship right now, if I recall correctly? Can I ask how long you two have been together?

More or less. I don't expect anyone to switch to open relationships, even though I think they're better than closed ones. But I feel like there's a stigma attached to open relationships, and my goal here was to hopefully make people more open-minded about non-monogamous relationships and consider that monogamy might not always be the best path to take. Also note that most of the problems posted on this thread are something along the lines of, "I like this girl. How do I get her to like me?" or "How do I get my girlfriend to keep liking me/like me like she used to?" These are questions that would no longer exist if everyone had the "abundance mentality" and carefreeness that goes hand-in-hand with open relationships.

I'm glad we both arrived at the same conclusion :)

I well understand this - so when the article said "cheating" it mean within closed relationships - which we're both against, yet you're praising the article for telling the divine truth. I don't know what you mean by this. I should be happy at my cheating partner? I should be happy that a deared one betrayed me and ruined their word of honor? Or do you mean "Yay I'm single, lets [bleep] 10 other girls"? Because I gladly support that kind of attitude: getting over it. But it doesn't mean the cheater is going isn't going to be hated. Then I suppose this goes back to whether or not you think the article is true or not. Because if it is, then that basically means that every man and woman have the urge to cheat. Whether or not they act on it is another story, but the fact remains that it's still there in their minds. I feel that the article gives a valid explanation for cheating and human emotions, however that does not necessarily justify cheating. As far as the connection between sex and love goes, I disagree. The article also states that sex and love are two completely different things. Whether or not you agree with that conclusion is up to you, though. I agree with you on everything else you said. Basically the article is stating that love and sex are separate things. But you don't agree with that. So I mean this is kind of a stalemate here unless you become a proactive skeptic about this rather than a defensive skeptic. Meaning, instead of doubting what the article is saying and dismissing it-- you should try it out for yourself and see if it's actually true or not and base your opinion on that. What if you didn't have a choice and your wife's sex drive plummeted after a few years into the relationship, while yours remained high? That's what's happening in a lot of these monogamous relationships and it puts men in a really awkward predicament... basically a lose-lose situation. I disagree about courtships, from a biological perspective. In our modern day and age, yeah, there's definitely a courting procedure before sex. But before human beings formed civilizations, men just had sex with every woman they were attracted to. Women were the ones who were picky-- they're the ones stuck with a bun in the oven for 9 months and need protection :P Men aren't designed to be monogamous; women are designed to be monogamous, but only for 2-3 years at a time-- not forever. I do like your point about how it's unnatural to have sex w/o considering reproduction, though. I honestly had never considered that before. I don't think that sex's sole purpose must be reproduction in the case of humans though. It can be just for fun. I believe that things would be better for the individual if we were all in open relationships, but not necessarily for society as a whole. If EVERYBODY was in open relationships, it could be worse off for society as a whole, but society has changed so much compared to when monogamy was first introduced, so it's hard to tell what would happen. But either way, since monogamy has become so deeply ingrained within our culture, I think it's safe to say that monogamy's going to remain "normal" for quite some time. Thus, open relationships are a good alternative for those "bold" enough to try them out. We'll probably have to agree to disagree here as usual, then :P Though I figure I might as well give my two cents as to why I prefer casual relationships over one closed, committed one. I'll try to keep this concise as possible... Again, I'm not writing this to change your mind; rather, I'm writing this to offer a perspective that I feel most readers on this thread have never considered. Why I Prefer Casual Relationships to Closed Committed Relationships, In a Nutshell: Last summer, I was at the happiest Id ever been, despite not much changing in my life externallyall the happiness came from within. Realizing this, I took advantage of this and wrote a note to myself, in case my happiness was ever jeopardized. The note basically said, Muggi, you are extremely happy right now, yet you dont have a lot of things. You dont have a well-paying job, you cant bench press double your bodyweight, you dont have any sexual or romantic partners, etc Yet youre still happier than anyone else you know. However, at some point, you may feel like you need something you dont have, and your happiness will suffer. Just remember that it is possible to be happy without it. I basically just realized that I was extremely happy with the few things that I did have-- and, more importantly, that I didn't need a lot of things to maintain that happiness. To be more specific, I didn't need a close relationship with a girl who loved me... because I loved myself. And my parents love me. And my closest friends love me. And that's really all I need. I feel like most people these days form closed relationships because they want to feel loved by another person, and they don't want that person to "love" anybody else. However, as the relationship progresses and infatuation subsides, emotions/hormones shift, and people get married-- they stay together more for logistical purposes, rather than for love. Divorces are messy-- financially, legally, emotionally-- even worse when kids are involved. That's just something I'd like to avoid at all costs lol ...Hope my perspective was insightful to some of you. I'm sure most people won't take it to heart, though. I don't really expect them to. Oh well-- their loss IMO :P Nope

Because I believe monogamy is better. Thought so. Do you consider it to be better for basically the same reasons that Duff said? Similar ones. My biggest issue with your claims is that you say there is no connection between sex and love; yet it's well known that the hormonal changes involved in love are often triggered by sex. In short, you cannot love one person while having sex with many as much as you can while having an exclusive sexual relationship with them. I've seen plenty of anecdotal evidence of "honest, open relationships" going south because one of the partners has fallen in love with the lover. Well, think about how most relationships start out with dating, followed by sex. In some instances, the sex doesn't come till as long as marriage. But for most people who choose open relationships, they have sex basically as soon as they meet, and then get to know each other afterwards-- the total opposite of the usual way. Seems more "natural" too, IMO. As far as the anecdotal evidence goes, you're right that happens sometimes and that's one of the flaws of that particular "model" of open relationships. But for the record, I think it's better to just have casual relationships with everyone rather than a committed one, even if it's in an open relationship... basically because like you pointed out, regardless of if the relationship's open or closed, the fact that it's a relationship gives it certain "weaknesses." Hope that makes sense >_> I'm having a hard time putting my thoughts on that into words. EDIT: 4 more replies while I was typing this one. FFFFUUUUUU--

Because I believe monogamy is better. Thought so. Do you consider it to be better for basically the same reasons that Duff said?

You didn't. And that's why I was asking. I'm glad you finally clarified your stance, though :) Thanks I already know why you (and me, and everybody else) dislikes cheaters. There's no need to discuss that any further. No, that's how you're viewing this. Yes, within the context of the closed relationship, this biological phenomena is considered cheating. But within the context of the open relationship, this same phenomena is considered normal. Hope you understand that. Anyways, if you wanna keep debating/discussing this w/ me that's fine, I enjoy doing this. I do wish, however, that you'd quit sounding so irritable in your posts here >_> You also never answered my question as to why you would choose to hate cheaters instead of being happy.

Yeah that's the normal response from everyone I discuss this with. And I disagree with it :P I think you're confusing sex and intimacy here again. The two are two completely different things that have nothing to do w/ each other. As a mild example to give you a frame of reference, think of a time where you've been in love with a girl. During that time, were you not attracted by ANY other girls, regardless of how beautiful they were? She's allowed to see men on the side too. Like I said, though-- sex and intimacy don't have anything to do with each other. I don't see how it's selfish, considering both partners mutually benefit from the arrangement; women benefit from this as much as men do. Women also cheat as much as men do and have the same sexual urges as men... I feel like you're viewing men as unfaithful people and women as victims of men's sexual desires. Yeah-- but hopefully you realize that just because it makes you uncomfortable, that doesn't mean it's a bad idea or worse than monogamy. Does this mean you would be prefer a monogamous relationship w/o any sex to an honest open relationship?