A few days ago, I got into a
bit of a debate with a friend on the definition of "cheating". For the
most part, I totally agreed with her points, until she came to "Is it cheating if his wife knows about us and says it's okay? Yes. You are cheating."
Whoa! Huh?
(For my vanilla world readers, poly is very common in BDSM and it seems the debate of mono vs. poly is never-ending.)
2: to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice
3: to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting
I'm not going to rehash the whole debate, but one would assume that two married peoples are capable of having an open and frank conversation about something so potentially sensitive. One would HOPE that the feelings of your spouse would matter to you and that a joint decision could be reached between the two.
So the "knows about us and says it's okay" part is presumably truth.
I don't get how this is considered cheating at all.
BUT, that's not what we're going to talk about.
Inevitably, in these sorts of conversations, I always piss off a few ppl by pointing out biology, anthropology, psychology, zoology... (some other ologies) and the fact that humans are just another animal. (YEEPS!)
My point in bringing this up is that we (collectively) seem to hold ourselves above the rest of the animal kingdom. WHY? Why does humanity have to think they're so fucking special?
Cuz we love? Tell a dog lover that his dog doesn't really love him. Go ahead, do it.
Cuz we're socially dependent? Not so unique. Look at any pack or troop.
Cuz we build shit? Ants, bees, and termites build shit.... Fuck, they have organized social structures. Do they love? Hell. Maybe. I dunno. I've never been an ant.
The point to all this is that while monogamy is quite common in birds, it's not so common for mammals. In fact, only about 9% of mammals are monogamous. Only about a quarter of the primates (that's us) live monogamously.
Human incidence of social monogamy
"According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies from around the world noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry."
That's right. People paired up to protect their offspring from other men who would kill babies to ensure the longevity of their own seed... and because the mens didn't want other mens impregnating their womens while they were off impregnating other womens.
I get confused when people talk about "traditional marriage".
Whose tradition are you glorifying?
Monogamy didn't really take off in the Western world until the plow age. People worked hard for their land, needed to breed a work force to maintain it, and wanted to keep it in the family. Marriage at that point was only for the upper classes. Women were traded for money and livestock and property. Love was not involved in marriage. Love was for commoners (who were not allowed to marry). Love was for mistresses. Love in marriage has only been socially appropriate since the 17th-18th centuries.
Marriage as a "holy union" only came about somewhere around the 5th century, but it didn't become one of the Seven Sacraments until 1215. Still, it wasn't until the 16th century that weddings had to be preformed publicly by a priest. So... if you said you spoke vows with your hunny down by the creek, the world viewed you as married. (Does "Oh God! Oh God! Yes! Yes! ..... I love you", count as vows? Hehehe I guess I've been married a few times!) (source)
(And, tho this is a totally DIFFERENT argument, up until about the 12th century, the Catholic Church preformed male-bonding ceremonies... that's right, gay marriages. Google that shit!)
So considering that our idea of "traditional marriage" is only about 250 years old, and that this idea started drastically evolving in about the 1950's, this "tradition" only lasted about 190 years. Even if you're one of those ones who thinks that the earth is only a few thousand years old (NUTS!), the tradition that you cling to is relatively brief and new and dying.
I am just trying to state some facts here. I'm not trying to tell you what is right or wrong, what you should or shouldn't be, or what is better or worse. In fact, I'm not even a poly person.
Hell, it might not even have anything to do with who I am tomorrow. ~shrug~
I just get agitated by people who cling to falsehoods and hold them up to measure the "wrongs" of others.
If you don't like it, mind your own fucking business.
Whoa! Huh?
(For my vanilla world readers, poly is very common in BDSM and it seems the debate of mono vs. poly is never-ending.)
Cheat
1: to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud2: to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice
3: to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting
I'm not going to rehash the whole debate, but one would assume that two married peoples are capable of having an open and frank conversation about something so potentially sensitive. One would HOPE that the feelings of your spouse would matter to you and that a joint decision could be reached between the two.
So the "knows about us and says it's okay" part is presumably truth.
I don't get how this is considered cheating at all.
BUT, that's not what we're going to talk about.
Inevitably, in these sorts of conversations, I always piss off a few ppl by pointing out biology, anthropology, psychology, zoology... (some other ologies) and the fact that humans are just another animal. (YEEPS!)
Human
"Humans (variously Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens sapiens) are primates of the family Hominidae, and the only extant species of the genus Homo. Humans are distinguished from other primates by their bipedal locomotion, and especially by their relatively larger brain with its particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, which enable high levels of abstract reasoning, language, problem solving, and culture through social learning." (thank you, Wiki)We... are a species of primate of the class of mammalia.
I fail to see how this prompts the peoples to grab their torches and pitchforks, but it almost always does.My point in bringing this up is that we (collectively) seem to hold ourselves above the rest of the animal kingdom. WHY? Why does humanity have to think they're so fucking special?
Cuz we love? Tell a dog lover that his dog doesn't really love him. Go ahead, do it.
Cuz we're socially dependent? Not so unique. Look at any pack or troop.
Cuz we build shit? Ants, bees, and termites build shit.... Fuck, they have organized social structures. Do they love? Hell. Maybe. I dunno. I've never been an ant.
The point to all this is that while monogamy is quite common in birds, it's not so common for mammals. In fact, only about 9% of mammals are monogamous. Only about a quarter of the primates (that's us) live monogamously.
Human incidence of social monogamy
"According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies from around the world noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry."
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK? MONOGAMY ISN'T EVEN THE SOCIAL NORM FOR HUMANS!!
There are two working theories on why humans evolved monogamy. 1) Infanticide, and 2) geographic distance between females.That's right. People paired up to protect their offspring from other men who would kill babies to ensure the longevity of their own seed... and because the mens didn't want other mens impregnating their womens while they were off impregnating other womens.
Noble, right?
So, since we've established that monogamy is not necessarily the "norm"...I get confused when people talk about "traditional marriage".
Whose tradition are you glorifying?
Monogamy didn't really take off in the Western world until the plow age. People worked hard for their land, needed to breed a work force to maintain it, and wanted to keep it in the family. Marriage at that point was only for the upper classes. Women were traded for money and livestock and property. Love was not involved in marriage. Love was for commoners (who were not allowed to marry). Love was for mistresses. Love in marriage has only been socially appropriate since the 17th-18th centuries.
Marriage as a "holy union" only came about somewhere around the 5th century, but it didn't become one of the Seven Sacraments until 1215. Still, it wasn't until the 16th century that weddings had to be preformed publicly by a priest. So... if you said you spoke vows with your hunny down by the creek, the world viewed you as married. (Does "Oh God! Oh God! Yes! Yes! ..... I love you", count as vows? Hehehe I guess I've been married a few times!) (source)
(And, tho this is a totally DIFFERENT argument, up until about the 12th century, the Catholic Church preformed male-bonding ceremonies... that's right, gay marriages. Google that shit!)
So considering that our idea of "traditional marriage" is only about 250 years old, and that this idea started drastically evolving in about the 1950's, this "tradition" only lasted about 190 years. Even if you're one of those ones who thinks that the earth is only a few thousand years old (NUTS!), the tradition that you cling to is relatively brief and new and dying.
I am just trying to state some facts here. I'm not trying to tell you what is right or wrong, what you should or shouldn't be, or what is better or worse. In fact, I'm not even a poly person.
OMG!! I'm a straight, mono-type person.
Cuz that's who I am. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with what you are, or who you should be, or who and how you should love.Hell, it might not even have anything to do with who I am tomorrow. ~shrug~
I just get agitated by people who cling to falsehoods and hold them up to measure the "wrongs" of others.
If you don't like it, mind your own fucking business.
Posts
