I disagree with your point in that monogamous relationships by today's standard are better off. Before, definitive roles were implied. These roles made a balanced system that worked. Now that 'equality' is implaced in our modern culture, marriage and committed relationships are less common. This is supported by sheer statistics (50% of all marriages divorce). Marriage was a status security back in the day. Now women can get everything they need by themselves; they don't need "a man" in their lives to provide for them, if they choose not to.

 

I didn't say marriages today are more likely to succeed (the statistics clearly show otherwise). What I meant now is that due to the equality a marriage that is actually successful may well contain a much stronger bond than one in the past when, like you said, many women were not treated equally.

I choose "monogamy" (quotations intentional) because it makes me happy. Having a girl that I don't share, that makes me happy is my goal.

 

This reminds me-- what reasons do you guys have for not wanting to "share" your significant other? I could understand STDs and pregnancies, but those can be avoid if you're sexually responsible. Is the main reason just to make things harder on yourselves and therefore somehow make your marriage "better" if you can overcome even more challenges? Or is this just a jealousy thing?

 

I want to be married, and have kids and lead muggiw's definition of a "boring" life. I feel I'm kinky enough to keep the sex life strong, up until I'm in my mid-life. After that, it'll be an emotional thing, something that can only be maintained by YEARS of determination and love. Something that Muggiw, with his current life style will never understand. If I get what I want I'll be happy. I understand it will be excruciatingly difficult to achieve this.

 

to make my argument short (whether or not you disagree with me whatever) I want to be happy. Whatever makes me happy is what I do. I beleive that everyone else should follow the same creed. If it makes you happy - do it.

 

My main argument has always been-- your happiness goals have to be coherent with reality. Reality, in this context being, there's about a 13% chance that you're "qualified" to even make a marriage "work," and if you are, it'll be "boring" (again, "boring" is subjective). Even if you're in that 13%, you're still basically betting your long-term happiness and financial stability on a coin toss . Even if you, RPG, are in the "boring" category (which I don't think you are), this isn't a very smart or realistic "goal" to set for yourself. Obfuscator could go without sex for the rest of his life at any given time. Can you?

Ahh [bleep] it. I had a big response typed out, but I realized that nobody would care.

 

 

Needless to say... Sex =/= Happiness

 

That is why I think that you are wrong Muggi. I don't give two shits or a [bleep] about sex, and that is why I could be happy in a monogamous relationship.

Infrequent sex (or none at all) is just one of the "threats" which marriage poses to your happiness. It's an irrelevant issue if you're like obfuscator, but if you're a guy with a high sex drive like RPG then you're really pushing your luck by pursuing marriage. And that's not "being human" or "having faith"-- it's just being stupid.

 

Again, tell me what you're expecting your marriage to look like, and why you think it'll make you happy, and how you plan on achieving that. There's a big difference between being happy and merely being content/satisfied.

 

(Note: For the sake of avoiding future misunderstandings, I'm just going to start saying "marriage" now instead of "monogamy." This is because serial monogamy is still "monogamy" and is also an OK idea (just not really my cup of tea), as opposed to long-term traditional marriage. I think most people equate "monogamy" to eventual traditional marriage anyways)

I don't see why you think marriage would mean infrequent sex. By the time two people get married they should be well aware of each other's sex drives and if one didn't meet the standards enough to where it'd be a legitimate problem, then the relationship likely wouldn't make it to marriage. I'm sure there are married couple who have sex three times a day and married couples who have none at all.

A woman's sex drive gradually decreases over time once she's got a monogamous boyfriend. A man's stays the same.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4790313.stm

Quick question Muggi:

 

Looking at your posts, by the sounds of it you are into polyamory because of the sexual freedom it offers. What will you do once you reach the age when your sexual drive slows down? This will happen eventually.

You guys also might want to check out this video series on Youtube. More evidence suggesting that women need both a lover and a provider, and how one man can't be both simultaneously.

Quick question Muggi:

 

Looking at your posts, by the sounds of it you are into polyamory because of the sexual freedom it offers. What will you do once you reach the age when your sexual drive slows down? This will happen eventually.

 

That probably won't happen till I'm in my 50s or 60s. But, like Obfuscator, I too am capable of going without sex for as long as needed. You guys are forgetting that sex and love are completely separate things, and that I can still fall in love with any of my MLTRs or get those honeymoon feelings from their presence.

 

But to answer your question, I'd probably go with an OLTR. It's not something I'm interested in right now, but it sure as hell blows traditional monogamous marriage out of the water in virtually every aspect.

 

Which introduces another question: Why do you guys insist on a traditional monogamous marriage over something more realistic like the OLTR?

Which introduces another question: Why do you guys insist on a traditional monogamous marriage over something more realistic like the OLTR?

 

Sadly, men are much more needy and territorial than women. One of the challenges of our OLTR marriage would be that women I [bleep] would be cool with it, but men [that one of the women in the OLTR] [bleep]ed would not. Most of these men would very quickly fall head-over-heels in love with and start pressuring her hard to divorce me and marry them. It’s how men are these days. It’s normal and it happens in my MLTRs all the time.

 

This. You might think that OLTR's are drama-free, but the fact that you offer your spouse and yourself so much freedom means that there will be plenty of times when she realizes that she is being held back by you, especially if she's 15 years younger.

Which introduces another question: Why do you guys insist on a traditional monogamous marriage over something more realistic like the OLTR?

 

Sadly, men are much more needy and territorial than women. One of the challenges of our OLTR marriage would be that women I [bleep] would be cool with it, but men [that one of the women in the OLTR] [bleep]ed would not. Most of these men would very quickly fall head-over-heels in love with and start pressuring her hard to divorce me and marry them. It’s how men are these days. It’s normal and it happens in my MLTRs all the time.

 

This. You might think that OLTR's are drama-free, but the fact that you offer your spouse and yourself so much freedom means that there will be plenty of times when she realizes that she is being held back by you, especially if she's 15 years younger.

 

Pretty sure she'd be even more held back by the constraints of traditional monogamous marriage >_>

 

The drama issue is mitigated via soft nexting. But soft nexting becomes impossible when you're living with your significant other.

Quick question Muggi:

 

Looking at your posts, by the sounds of it you are into polyamory because of the sexual freedom it offers. What will you do once you reach the age when your sexual drive slows down? This will happen eventually.

 

That probably won't happen till I'm in my 50s or 60s.

It will decrease. You're now at the age where males want sex most. If anything, your sex drive right now above normal (which probably explains why you're putting so damn high in your relationship priorities), and it will start slowing down in a few years. Furthermore, you're male. Female sex drive generally goes significantly down much earlier than their 50s or 60s. If it takes two to tango, and you're 55, and you have difficulty attracting younger women whose sex drive matches yours, then choice is really an irrelevance. Unless you're gay, of course, which I'm guessing you're not.

 

But, like Obfuscator, I too am capable of going without sex for as long as needed. You guys are forgetting that sex and love are completely separate things, and that I can still fall in love with any of my MLTRs or get those honeymoon feelings from their presence.

You've made numerous references (you've even used one particular reference multiple times) on why sex is important to long-term relationships, and basically implied that sexual dissatisfaction is a key flaw in traditional marriage, hence why people affair. Yet I am to believe that the same person who claims that, can also be in a relationship where sex is out of the question? You're either very ambiguous, or you're holding a clearly untenable position.

Which introduces another question: Why do you guys insist on a traditional monogamous marriage over something more realistic like the OLTR?

 

Sadly, men are much more needy and territorial than women. One of the challenges of our OLTR marriage would be that women I [bleep] would be cool with it, but men [that one of the women in the OLTR] [bleep]ed would not. Most of these men would very quickly fall head-over-heels in love with and start pressuring her hard to divorce me and marry them. It’s how men are these days. It’s normal and it happens in my MLTRs all the time.

 

This. You might think that OLTR's are drama-free, but the fact that you offer your spouse and yourself so much freedom means that there will be plenty of times when she realizes that she is being held back by you, especially if she's 15 years younger.

 

Pretty sure she'd be even more held back by the constraints of traditional monogamous marriage >_>

It's not the severity of the constraints that matters here, it's the end result. The end result in this situation is a single 50 year-old back to square one, and a young hottie [bleep]ing a ripped dude half his age. The end result in a traditional marriage is similar.

 

The point I am trying to make is that an OLTR is also very likely to lead to a divorce. You might think that allowing her to see other people would stabilize the relationship, but it just offers more problems, more exactly, more contact with men that are "fresh" to her.

It will decrease. You're now at the age where males want sex most. If anything, your sex drive right now above normal (which probably explains why you're putting so damn high in your relationship priorities), and it will start slowing down in a few years. Furthermore, you're male. Female sex drive generally goes significantly down much earlier than their 50s or 60s. If it takes two to tango, and you're 55, and you have difficulty attracting younger women whose sex drive matches yours, then choice is really an irrelevance. Unless you're gay, of course, which I'm guessing you're not.

 

Well my brother's 40 years old and his sex drive is still high as ever, so I expect mine to be similar. And I plan on dating younger women as long as my sex drive remains high.

 

You've made numerous references (you've even used one particular reference multiple times) on why sex is important to long-term relationships, and basically implied that sexual dissatisfaction is a key flaw in traditional marriage, hence why people affair. Yet I am to believe that the same person who claims that, can also be in a relationship where sex is out of the question? You're either very ambiguous, or you're holding a clearly untenable position.

 

There's a difference between being single and going w/o sex and being in a relationship and going w/o sex.

 

 

I'm beginning to realize that most people in this thread just want to "settle down" and become that boring couple that gets home from work, watches TV, then falls asleep every night. But I think they're overestimating how happy that lifestyle will make them. Oh well. Only time will tell :P

They'll have things like kids to keep them busy.

It's not the severity of the constraints that matters here, it's the end result. The end result in this situation is a single 50 year-old back to square one, and a young hottie [bleep]ing a ripped dude half his age. The end result in a traditional marriage is similar.

 

The point I am trying to make is that an OLTR is also very likely to lead to a divorce. You might think that allowing her to see other people would stabilize the relationship, but it just offers more problems, more exactly, more contact with men that are "fresh" to her.

 

"Square one." I see where you're coming from now. It's this fear of "square one" that drives many people to get into committed relationships in the first place-- the comfort and safety of a relationship, even if it's not what they expected-- is better than being alone in the world and having to keep dating strangers-- something which most people will admit that they suck at. Point being, if I was in an OLTR, it'd be after decades of dating different women and forming relationships with them. I wouldn't be back to square one. I'd be back to doing something that I know I enjoy. Like I've alluded to before-- too many people get married and stay in shitty relationships out of fear, not love.

 

If she gets together with the young hottie, one of two things will happen: she'll eventually get bored of him and dump him (or stay together unhappily); or she'll eventually get tired of him cheating on her and dump him (or stay together happily). But that's sorta irrelevant since it's her life, not yours :P

 

Divorce is just a minor inconvenience thanks to the pre-nup and no co-ownership of assets. This really should be a no-brainer for anybody getting married, regardless of the arrangement.

They'll have things like kids to keep them busy.

 

Oh, they'll be busy alright! Food for thought:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YGLW3SELyc

They'll have things like kids to keep them busy.

 

Oh, they'll be busy alright! Food for thought:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YGLW3SELyc

 

 

I never defined having children as a good/bad thing. It is just another factor that you seem to be overlooking. Whether it makes you happy or not, it requires a hell of a lot more time and effort than not having kids.

It will decrease. You're now at the age where males want sex most. If anything, your sex drive right now above normal (which probably explains why you're putting so damn high in your relationship priorities), and it will start slowing down in a few years. Furthermore, you're male. Female sex drive generally goes significantly down much earlier than their 50s or 60s. If it takes two to tango, and you're 55, and you have difficulty attracting younger women whose sex drive matches yours, then choice is really an irrelevance. Unless you're gay, of course, which I'm guessing you're not.

 

Well my brother's 40 years old and his sex drive is still high as ever, so I expect mine to be similar. And I plan on dating younger women as long as my sex drive remains high.

Then I suspect he's either underplaying the sex drive he had in his late teens/early 20s, or overestimating his sex drive now. Perhaps not consciously, we all overplay things we perceive as "good" or "positive". But the physiology simply doesn't add up. You're not maturing any more. Humans aren't designed to live until 40, let alone be having sex and babies then, without artificially enhancing our quality of life.

 

There's a difference between being single and going w/o sex and being in a relationship and going w/o sex.

So then why does it matter that women lose their sex drive in monogamous relationships? Why are you placing so much emphasis on this sex thing, then when someone holds you to closer inspection, say "well sex doesn't really matter so long as you're together anyway"?

 

I'm beginning to realize that most people in this thread just want to "settle down" and become that boring couple that gets home from work, watches TV, then falls asleep every night. But I think they're overestimating how happy that lifestyle will make them. Oh well. Only time will tell :P

I could easily level that accusation at you. You're 22 years old. It's hardly a case study in itself for proving one lifestyle is better than any other, let alone better for everyone, which by arguing against those who have chosen to "settle down", you're effectively saying.

Then I suspect he's either underplaying the sex drive he had in his late teens/early 20s, or overestimating his sex drive now. Perhaps not consciously, we all overplay things we perceive as "good" or "positive". But the physiology simply doesn't add up. You're not maturing any more. Humans aren't designed to live until 40, let alone be having sex and babies then, without artificially enhancing our quality of life.

 

Probably underplaying the sex drive in his youth, assuming you're correct. Regardless, his sex drive is still high.

 

There's a difference between being single and going w/o sex and being in a relationship and going w/o sex.

So then why does it matter that women lose their sex drive in monogamous relationships? Why are you placing so much emphasis on this sex thing, then when someone holds you to closer inspection, say "well sex doesn't really matter so long as you're together anyway"?

 

If you're not having sex while single, you can still have sex whenever you want with whoever you want. If you're in a relationship, and your significant other won't let you have sex with her, then you're stuck using your hand or going to bed with blue balls. The issue is sexual freedom, in addition to sex itself.

 

I'm beginning to realize that most people in this thread just want to "settle down" and become that boring couple that gets home from work, watches TV, then falls asleep every night. But I think they're overestimating how happy that lifestyle will make them. Oh well. Only time will tell :P

I could easily level that accusation at you. You're 22 years old. It's hardly a case study in itself for proving one lifestyle is better than any other, let alone better for everyone, which by arguing against those who have chosen to "settle down", you're effectively saying.

 

Except my MLTRs and FB relationships are already in their "end-game" status, whereas you won't get into marriage "end-game" until you're married and living together, most likely with kids. In other words, I'm already happily living out my relationship goals. You guys aren't.

 

Another question: why are you guys so afraid of living "my" lifestyle for at least a few months? You'd meet tons of new women, and then if you still want to "settle down," then you'd at least have a much better chance of settling down with the "best" one, since you'd be dating many girls in a short period of time, rather than dating them one at a time and wasting your time on the ones who don't live up to your expectations.

I see no problem with that. I'm a "prefer the journey" kind of guy.

 

Also, just to clear up. You said going without sex and being single, then you said "while single, you can still have sex whenever you want." So... you're not going without sex then, are you? You have no sexual freedom whatsoever if you lack any opportunity to express that freedom.

"Square one." I see where you're coming from now. It's this fear of "square one" that drives many people to get into committed relationships in the first place-- the comfort and safety of a relationship, even if it's not what they expected-- is better than being alone in the world and having to keep dating strangers-- something which most people will admit that they suck at. Point being, if I was in an OLTR, it'd be after decades of dating different women and forming relationships with them. I wouldn't be back to square one. I'd be back to doing something that I know I enjoy. Like I've alluded to before-- too many people get married and stay in shitty relationships out of fear, not love.

You're overestimating the future sex drive of your FB's. As Ginger_Warrior has said, female sex drive goes down much faster than male sex drive. By the time you reach a divorce, many women will have already lost their libido and would not be willing to go on a sex-filled romp. Also, they might not enjoy being in a monogamous marriage, but they are willing to withstand it for the sake of stability.

 

Another question: why are you guys so afraid of living "my" lifestyle for at least a few months? You'd meet tons of new women, and then if you still want to "settle down," then you'd at least have a much better chance of settling down with the "best" one, since you'd be dating many girls in a short period of time, rather than dating them one at a time and wasting your time on the ones who don't live up to your expectations.

In case you haven't noticed, I am focusing on polyamorous relationships past the early adulthood years, when polyamory starts becoming harder to maintain as a lifestyle. I am not saying that polyamory is a bad thing for a couple of months or even a couple of years, but by the time you reach the age when most women have already had children, polyamory becomes unrealistic.

That's why I've said that I'm not really looking for an OLTR right now. And I've also said that no system is perfect; just a better alternative to traditional marriage.

I see no problem with that. I'm a "prefer the journey" kind of guy.

 

Also, just to clear up. You said going without sex and being single, then you said "while single, you can still have sex whenever you want." So... you're not going without sex then, are you? You have no sexual freedom whatsoever if you lack any opportunity to express that freedom.

 

There's a sense of happiness/freedom that arises from knowing you can do something if you want to do it, even if you don't actually want to do it. If that makes sense >_> lol

I see no problem with that. I'm a "prefer the journey" kind of guy.

 

Also, just to clear up. You said going without sex and being single, then you said "while single, you can still have sex whenever you want." So... you're not going without sex then, are you? You have no sexual freedom whatsoever if you lack any opportunity to express that freedom.

 

There's a sense of happiness/freedom that arises from knowing you can do something if you want to do it, even if you don't actually want to do it. If that makes sense >_> lol

 

But in the end, you're still left with either your hand or blue balls.