For those who don't practice monogamy (solidgold? etc) How on earth do you not become jealous?

[poshsinglemum]

I am just curious as I am the most jealous insecure person ever and it's a horrid and unattractice trait. Is jealousy natural?

SGB: It's those who can't leave the monogamy-free alone, who either want to see them punished in some way, insist that free women must be chasing 'other men's husbands' or can't stop with the clammy-handed, gloopy-eyed 'But there must be something 'wrong' with you' ignorance.

Do you have actual personal experience of this- or is this another example of overreacting?

I have yet to find any woman who is being punished for being single/ non monogamous.

Is every single woman a threat to other women's husbands? Or just women who like to "put it about a bit"?

Do you want some ketchup for that big chip?

Have just read about 2/3rds of the thread, and then scrolled down to here....

Am with SGB on how depressing it is that this thread so rapidly became a "slag off anyone with a different opinion to your own" fest.....

Why does any chosen way of life have to be right or wrong, apart from in the context of the person themself? SGB may lead her life in a different way to mine, but hey, there we go. It sure as hell keeps the grey matter ticking over and you never know, we might even LEARN something from one another.

(She's totally spot on re: responsibilities, conscious choices etc, by the way......)

It's a bit like people aping their parents political leanings, because that is always the way it was. I find it bizarre that so many supposedly intelligent educated people just blindly vote for whatever party their folks voted for for decades, as though independent thought hadn't yet been invented.....

Where I think the issue arises is the nature of choice in a non-monogamistic lifestyle, and I'll make an analogy with homosexuality.

Most people would probably agree that homosexuality or heterosexuality is not a matter of choice. However, I think that largely, how one behaves in either case (monogamistially, non-monogamistically) is, largely, a matter of choice. And where choice comes into things, people have opinions what is better (breastfeeding, smoking).

Most people think monogamy is better ethically than non-monogamy, and I think there are lots of good reasons why this is the case, and it isn't about oppressing women

orangina - if you do read all the post you will see the person who is using the mosy vitriolic and emotionally charged language- inviting provocation- is in fact SGB.

You may also note that although she purports to have this live and let live attitude, she doesn't really. She is super-quick to draw far-reaching conclusions about people's roles in society, in a much more condemnatory fashion than any of the monogamy brigade.

Those people who are supporting monogamy here are trying to do so in a rational and non-personal way as far as possible. I think the only "personal" type of comment has been along the lines of maybe non-monogamists have never met anyone they really want to be with and vice versa.

No one has turned round and called them slags or slappers, or mingers or unable to hold on to a man, or selfish bitches who have no room in their lives for anyone.

That would be unacceptable.

Why then is it acceptable for SGB to say that women who prefer a different lifestyle to hers are somehow oppressed, owned, too thick to realise they are being done some kind of disservice by a patricarchal society, and a deserving of a whole host of other intelligence-insulting labels?

SGB, I don't give a gnat's testicle about how you live your life and I don't believe I've said anything to suggest that I do.

I think I respond to your posts mostly not because I disagree with the views you express (though I absolutely do, on this one) but because you have a habit of making pronouncements of your (almost certainly minority) opinions as if they are incontrovertible fact and follow them up with derision and contempt for anyone with another view.

Mmmmm not sure we are any closer to actually discussing a non- monogamous lifestyle ;-)

Why does monogamy need 'supporting', how does one disagree with non monogamy? They both just are, and you can live the one that suits - and you may change your mind at different points in your life, or you may not.

Minority view doesn't equate to wrong, and I am pretty sure agnostic is not the only person in the world to argue that marriage is a patriarchal construct which can oppress women. That also does not equate to all married women are oppressed

Sgb not agnostic....sorry

Mrshighwater absolutely. Several posts back I took SGB to task over her presentation of her opinion as some an irrefutable fact.

It's the language that is used-very emotional and written to provoke. Quite bullying and very bossy.

snow are you serious?

That's a whole thread on its own!

The virtues of monogamy.....well if that includes providing stability for any children and the same father around for most of their lives, then yes it is worth supporting as a lifestyle choice.

If there are no children and merely consenting adults, that is a different matter.

No one said that minority was wrong and majority equaleed right- dunno where you got that one from.

Likewise, I do think that SGB tars all women with the same brush, which is why those of us who can be arsed to take issue with her do so.

Some opinions ( which are presented as FACTS) are so sweeping and generalised , and written in such strong tones that they never cease to provoke a reaction- no doubt all intentional.

Caggaberoses: it's perfectly possible for a father to be 'around for most of his childrens' lives' without being in a monogamous relationship, or any kind of sexual/romantic relationship, with their mother(s).
And it's a fact that women have very often been punished for rejecting monogamy. By being killed, for instance.

Of course I am serious, and in the context of this thread, why would you think any different?

As for virtues you mentioned children get loving stable environments in all sorts of setups.

Of course, the other category of people that get similar tedious pestering by idiots are the celibate/asexual.
They are constantly told to seek counselling, asked what terrible thing happened to make them this way, patronozed, belittled and not believed when they say that it's their choice.

When something, some lifestyle, some worldview, is being pushed this hard then it's got to be because it benefits some people at the expense of others. If it was that inherently wonderful, you wouldn't need the propaganda and the enforcement methods.

I just can't get my head around why anyone is so upset by the sexual (or not) activities of consenting adults.

Surely knowing that a person is a non-coerced consenting adult is enough to just say 'Hey, whatever floats your boat'.

Personally, I have always been rather attracted to the idea of the whole sister wife set up. But I am not sure I could get past the jealousy and DH thinks the last thing he needs is another wife, especially one of my choosing.

But the more I think about it the more I think the most sensible arrangement for pooling resources and raising children is for women to live together and for men to come and go when they are needed and wanted.

As for expecting women to police the behaviour of married men on the prowl. FFS are men really that helpless and pathetic? If I caught my DH cheating it would all be on him, the OW made me no promises and therefore she hasn't broken any.

"And it's a fact that women have very often been punished for rejecting monogamy. By being killed, for instance."

Do elaborate-are you talking jealous husbands or being stoned to death in the middle east?

You are bound to defend your position re. your son and his father. Not all children's fathers keep in contact once the relationship with the mother has ended- if it was ever there in the first place. Some children have nothing but a string of "fathers"- their mother's ever-changing boyfriends.

I'm in a monogamous relationship and I like it. It works for both of us. That is not to say my way is any better than anyone else's. I think that's the point.

SGB, monogamy is not being pushed in the way you suggest.

If someone pushes very hard against a brick wall, that person might have the impression that the wall was pushing back. That person might wonder what the wall had against him/her that it was pushing so hard. The wall would not care. The wall is just being a wall.

The only pushing I see is on behalf of the anti-monogamists.

Cabbageroses: Both. Some abusive men use imaginedbreaches of monogamy or their alleged fear of 'their' woman having sex with other men in order to justify abusive, controlling behaviour, and when a man kills his former or current partner, there is often speculation that she might have been seeing, or contemplating having sex with, another men and again this is often presented as some sort of justification.
MsHighwater: Yeah right. That's why there aren't all those endless books, articles, products about Keeping Your Marriage Alive, and why people who are open about their rejection of monogamy aren't pressured by people they have just started to date to get therapy or change their behaviour, etc, etc.

SGB, the voice of personal prejudice experience?

Oh come on, SGB- if you do your research, I think you may well find that there is evidence of women physically attacking men for the reasons you state.

It's a pretty poor argument against monogamy to come up with violence against women as the reason to shun it.

"Crimes of passion" have always existed and whilst no one is condoning men behaving that way- violence is never right- it's not a reason to say monogamy is not worth having. Plain daft. You are getting desperate it seems!

I wonder why SGB you cannot simply say that non-monogamy suits you? Full stop. Instead, you try to justify it by venturing into pseudo-sociological and political reasoning. And-try to make your opinion sound like fact.

Cabbageroses, I am certainly not going to deny that women engage in physical assault and/or criminal damage when their partners breach monogamy and, equally, consider it a justification. That women kill their partners less often out of sexual jealousy is more to do with women in general being less likely to be physically violent to a male partner than men are to be violent to a female partner.
And you are missing the point - it's not that the violent enforcement of monogamy makes it inherently a bad thing, it's that the need some people see to use violence to enforce monogamy indicates very clearly that monogamy simpy isn't for everyone, yet a percentage of people wnat to make it compulsory. Some people don't like or have any wish to engage in monogamous relationships, yet some other people find this incredibly threatening, hence all the whining, dumbfuck questioning and, indeed, the violence.
Not everyone wants to conduct their sex life the way you want to conduct yours. GET THE FUCK OVER IT.

If you don't mind me saying SGB, you come across to me as if you haven't got over it. You come across as incredibly aggressive about your lifestyle, and as long as you're not choosing to sleep with my DH, no-one really cares. Why so angry?

Now , now. Why the outburst? Is it all getting a bit much?

Interestingly, I have never unlike you- made this thread about me. I have been having a jolly good debate and playing devil's advocate a lot of the time. I have never, ever said what suits me- was simply arguing another point of view.

perhaps you had better leave the thread if it's upsetting you.

And to be honest Rita, if SGB was considering sleeping with your DH, your issue would still be with him and not her.

In the hypothetical situation were that to be the case, if SGB knew my DH was married, or suspected but didn't ask, she would be acting unethically. It's a bit like buying stolen goods. The seller is obviously culpable, but the buyer isn't in the clear at all.

Actually I always think SGB talks much sense.