Will this one-by-one system forever be our main thing or do you think we will break monogamy and maybe “team up” as groups or something?
And yeah polygamy is a thing but do you think it will catch on to “the upper class”?
By monogamy do you mean having one partner, and only one partner, for life? That isn’t the norm. It’s very rare, at least in the western world.
Serial monogamy is the norm, and seems to make the most sense for most people.
Polygamy and polyamory only work for a small subset of people. I don’t see those types of relationships ever becoming mainstream.
Know the difference between polygamy and polyamory. Polygamy isn’t that uncommon but is often used to serve patriarchal hierarchies. Polyamory is much closer to “do whatever” (though that’s not strictly true).
I’m trans and let me tell you so many of us are polyamorous. In my personal experience it has to do with spending so much time fighting against society to claim our identity that we end up questioning a lot of social norms. I think that more people than we realize could live very happily being poly, and if we had better poly representation more people would know how to approach it in a healthy way. But it doesn’t serve the hierarchies we live under to let people love freely in that way, so it gets othered in media and by governments.
Also the “groups” you’re talking about teaming up in are typically called polycules. There are a lot of forms they can take it is an umbrella term.
I think that as people are made more aware of the harm caused by some aspects of society we’ll be better at questioning things like monogamy as a whole. It isn’t an overnight thing. Also, often even in the poly community it is considered an unstable way to raise children (I don’t agree with this but it is a common enough sentiment). I don’t think polyamory will overtake monogamy certainly not any time in my life but I hope it becomes more common.
I think monogamous people could all do with a dose of the lessons and the vocabulary the polyamory community has developed over the years. Even if they never have more than one partner it helps to have the words to talk about things and the awareness of when you might be treating your partner unfairly out of emotional reflexes.
Polyamory has taught me more about healthy relationships in 3 years than 14 years in a monogamous marriage did.
I think polyamory is an immutable part of someone’s sexual orientation as much as the gender preference spectrum (homo/heterosexual) and the intensity/situationalness (ace/gray-ace/demi). I think some people just naturally see sex and intimate relationships as something they can do openly with multiple people and some people just don’t. I think it will become more acceptable for the people who see sex that way to find each other and express their love that way, the same as with all the other sexual relationships between consenting adults are becoming more acceptable. But the same way it would be silly to say we’ll all be homosexual eventually I don’t think we’ll all be poly someday either.
This is how I see it. It’s probably a fairly fluid part of someones sexual identity, but it is identity nonetheless. Though I would argue most people aren’t poly, as there’s a pretty big difference between having multiple sexual partners and multiple romantic partners, as well as between one person with multiple partners and several people all in a relationship together.
The main problem with polyamory is the jealousy. I have experienced jealousy maybe three to five times in life, because I was an only child and I have a very laid back temperament. I think if we start prioritizing quality of life more as a society, parents will be free to raise their children well with less insecurities, and maybe that would result in more people gravitating towards polyamory. But it’s really not for everyone. Poly is hard work.
OK now keep up with me:
- Luxury
- Gay
- Space
- Communism
You forgot “fully automatic”
If we ever achieve long-term life extension, I could see monogamy being tossed. Being with a single partner for life can serve well if it’s the ideal of both parties in the relationship. But extend that lifespan to multiple times the current one, and I can see it getting pretty iffy.
Here in the Pacific Northwest, the vast majority of people under 50 seem to be in polyamorous relationships. I’m fairly new to poly, but I’ve done a lot of reading and therapy, and it’s working out pretty well for me.
I do tend to be people’s anchor partner, so I’ve admittedly never experienced the pain that comes from being a secondary when you wish you were a primary. My anchor partner tends more towards relationship anarchy and doesn’t like hierarchical relationships, but i made it clear that my expectation is to be the priority in her life. We’ve made it work, although it takes a lot of communication.
PNW poly gang!
Poly can be such a wild learning curve and so much personal growth. There can be a lot of heartbreak in being poly (my polycule split in half a while back, I’ve gone from 5 to 2 partners this year, my anchor of several years broke up with me over text recently I’m pretty devastated over that one), but so much love too it is all worth it imo. And not having to rely on one person for everything is great for everyone’s mental health. Breakups are a lot easier to manage because you don’t have to seek romantic/physical comfort from strangers or the other side of the breakup, there are other partners around to help comfort you.
And yeah, so much communication, and introspection, and evaluating social norms to figure out what parts are toxic. You really have to learn about your partners and be really clear with boundaries for everything to work well.
It seems like one of my partners is about to be broken up with and I’m bracing to be there for them if/when it happens. I’m going to sardonically laugh my ass off if it happens next week because it’ll be nearly a year to the day that my wife and I broke up, and days before our anniversary. It was definitely surreal last year breaking up with my wife and celebrating my first anniversary with this partner 2 days later.
One of my breakups happened during my most recent tranniversary party, their nesting partner broke up with me the next day, and my (at the time) anchor partner broke up with both of them like a week later. Going to be a little weird next tranniversary is also going to be a ‘polycule implosion’ anniversary. Going in sardonically sounds like a good idea
We have already seen a huge change as it’s much more acceptable to be in more relationships and getting a divorce. If people start to live a lot longer you will see people changing relationships more. With AI there is already worry about people getting into romantic relationships with AI partners.
All forms of relationships will fluctuate as legal options throughout time. Polygamy is no different. Polygamy used to be common in certain parts of the developed world and is still common in places like the Middle East. Heterosexual monogamy is just the thing that it happens won’t fluctuate, this is as it’s like an axis mundi of relationships. That said, everything you describe is inevitable as a phase.
That said, I don’t consider a relationship invalid or “less valid” no matter how many people are involved, their genders, their race, their creed, their medical history, how close they are, etc.
we’re heading toward monogamy at the main relationship status. Biologicaly it the best model for offspring survival
source, the Bible 😱
Polygamy is great- source: the quran.
Not all of us with different opinion than yours are religious.
Monogamy prevent killing of rival’s baby and protect kids Thoses studies might be biased by moral ground But the correlation between testes size and polygamous relationship is well studied. Right now, Humans fall in the midrange: not as promiscuious as a chimp but not monogamous. But seing how tiny your balls are compared to your dad, we’re certainly heading to full monogamous territory😱
I dont care about teste size.
We have other ways of preventing infanticide.
Not being religious doesn’t mean you don’t have cultural biases rooted in religion.
Linking random articles doesn’t make an argument stronger, just appear stronger.
You really think that we’re at the point as a species where we need to structure our society by comparing it to what chimps do?
But it takes a village to raise a child
I think you are talking about marriage and family, more than just sex, right? Because sex-wise, you can do what you want already.
Polygamy no. I don’t think that’s what most people want, the sister wives thing. That’s a system used when men are scarce and you are trying to increase the population quickly, neither of those conditions exist now, and polygamist systems are often dead patriarchal and nasty.
Polyamory? The make your own family, whatever configuration, more than 2 people? I think we are closer to that, yes. In a time when you are trying to decrease birth rates, yes families with more than just a couple might become popular. More parents to love and care for each child would be handy.
Polyandry, two or more husbands? That would work in a world where there were more men than women - but most of those places in the world right now are not places where a woman would have the freedom to do that.
I see a future where you’ll need a contract to have a child and it will include support for 21 years between both DNA donors. Most people will lack the financial availability and would not qualify for parenthood. Illegal pregnancies would result in 21 years minimal prison sentence for both DNA donors.
With that, two person contracts will replace the religious concept of marriage. It will require an equal support for both partners financially. The contract would allow separation for domestic violence or failure to produce a human child. No Divorce would be authorized under any other circumstances. No new contracts would be authorized for a new partner if a DNA donor child is under the age of 21.
So yes, if you enter into a contract to produce a child, your stuck with that choice for 21 years.
Currently in most of the Western world we have very stringent standards that have to be met in order to adopt a child (and quite rightly too in my view). But in order to conceive a child naturally? Nothing, nada, zilch. Full blown neo-nazi? Meth addict? Huge track record of violence? Rapist? Paedophile? All of the above? Find a partner of the opposite sex and you’re good to go! This is a massive inconsistency that I can see we will have to face up to sooner or later, maybe not to the extent you propose, but some sort of minimum standard needs to be put in place for being able to reproduce, for the sake of those children that will otherwise be brought up in horrific, abusive nightmare environments if nothing else.
as long as religion exists polygamy will never be mainstream
I mean, mormons are a thing (in the US at least idk how far they’ve spread) and polygamy isn’t that uncommon in patriarchal religions. Polyamory on the other hand tends to be more about personal freedoms and flies in the face of a lot of hierarchies.
Why do you feel this way? The examples of polygamy that I can think of were popularized through religion not in spite of it.
Examples: Islam, Mormonism,
early Judaism and to some degree Christianity permitted it as well.
PolygamyPolygyny, in particular, is a largely religious institution. In no small part that’s due to the fact thatpolygamypolygyny is inherently patriarchal, and nearly all modern religions are too, so it makes sense that it would be found predominantly in religious communities and histories.Polyamory, however, is neither patriarchal or matriarchal. It is freedom for everyone involved to have relationships in any capacity they want, including women and other non-male gendered people to be with whoever they want. Patriarchal societies will never accept something that gives women that type of freedom and power over their own lives.
Edit: I got some terminology wrong and thought polygamy was one man multiple women, but the term just refers to having multiple spouses. Polygyny is one man multiple women. Which def means I took the conversation down a weird hole.
