Monogamy

I disagree. I think marriage is a institution of women initiated by them onto men because marriage is a important institutional relationship concept when it concerns the protection of offspring.

Women always have the most to benefit from the institution of marriage more so than men do. In marriage men have the most to risk and lose whereas women have the most to gain.

I’m almost positive a herd of wildebeest do not have marriages, but they protect their offspring quite well.

i think men have stake in this…

my rationale

  1. i’d be polygamist if i could and have it be socially acceptable (more babies)
  2. so would other men, namely more powerful ones than me
  3. someone else would win in the war for multiple wives

the invention of monogomy in some ways gives me more men better odds of producing offspring

monogomy is progressive (yes i just compared women as a whole to a resource for men to use)

Most men would be the alpha male in the lion pride if they could.

That said, a free love institution would potentially produce more offspring for more partners than monogamy would.

Women are realists, not idealists. Women are not idealistic enough to dream-up the institution of Marriage via Religion. It clearly was created by Man, also indicated by the gender of ‘God’, as male. Women buy into religion, by the millions and billions, yes. But I sincerely doubt women are ‘responsible’ for it.

In fact, men probably created religion…in fact Man did create religion, to control the populace, society, and masses. The masses need their “useful fictions” to believe in. And that is what religions and religioners provide for them, the “useful fictions”.

What would people do if they didn’t fully put stock in the fact that becoming a corporate wage slave, and buying the newest model Prius, gives meaning and fulfillment in life??? They’d probably go crazy and suicide, that’s what. People enjoy superficiality and frivolous things.

Those who don’t are the “philosophers”. They are those who have “woken up” from the materialistic and consumerist dream, or nightmare, depending on how you look at it. :banana-dance:

Proof?

Look at how weddings require a man to buy the woman a “rock”, a huge diamond. What’s up with that?

I’d tell you, but I don’t want to spoil the surprise.

Anon said,

Does a successful monogamous relationship really involve a turning inward? How so? Does a successful monogamous relationship not pit two people with shared, combined goals against whatever(?) in the broader world? My husband and I certainly found that to be true when we fought City Hall and won. We’re still very much involved in our lives and the life of our community. I don’t understand what you mean.

When you say, “… active participation could, in theory, involve sexual intimacy with more than one person…” are you saying that votes can be bought with sex? I suppose they can, but not in my life-style–nor would I say in my husband’s. Is any vote so important?

Yes, monogamous relationships can be seen as essentially selfish. I’m not able to share my ‘selfness’ indiscriminately’–not if it’s my true selfness. It’s just too hard to do, even the first time. But is a monogamous relationship ‘hoarding and controlling of intimacy?’ or is it, rather, a cherishing–a keeping safe–of another’s shared self-ness?

I mean that the time you spend with your spouse is time you didn’t spend with someone else. I mean that sex with only your spouse means not having sex with anyone else. I mean it in a very literal sense.

Votes? Huh? If you’re making a joke I don’t get it. :slight_smile:

What do you mean by “true selfness”?

I seem to remember that the diamond ring thing began after it became uncustomary for men to legally have to pay monetary compensation for a broken vow of engagement, or whatever the antiquated legalese was for the situation.

Go on. :smiley:

http://boredplace.com/bored-pictures/lucky-man-marries-thai-twins-simultaneosly

Antiquated? It seemed too work out well for this guy monogomy not included.

Er… Relevance…?

But I hope they’ll all be very happy with one-another. =D> :-k

[quote=“anon”]

I’ve done my best to explain it. ^^

I hope this makes sense and all my quotes are in the correct places. Otherwise, suffer! My husband and I have spent the last 3 days cooking a complete Thanksgiving meal–except for the turkey. It’s 1:15 Thankgiving am and I’m tired.

Have a lovely Thanksgiving, everyone. Eat butter now and save the pork fat for Christmas and New Years Day–Hoppin’ John day.

So my em-pha-sis may not have been on the right sy-lab-le and my caramels may have been at the top instead of the bottom. Meh!

Once in awhile after a heated discussion I have asked my husband to go find another woman and leave me alone, his reply: Now why would I do that to some poor innocent woman. :smiley:

Assumes he would be naive enough to think that, he, with his discernment would chose an innocent woman, but I can see the merit in the phrase, he clearly does not suggest that you are innocent by implication though: I’d deny him sex for a month. :slight_smile:

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Nahh, when he says something like that it makes me laugh and whatever anger there was between us is gone. That is one way he tells me he loves me. Its a marriage language between two people that truly know each other and can safely be themselves.

You sound blessed. :slight_smile:

Hmm, perhaps but I do think it was more of a destiny thing. See we met on a blind date. When I laid eyes on him I knew him immediately. I had had dreams about him shaven bearded, happy angry etc. I knew him from only my dreams throughout childhood(I was 18 when we finally met). He always chased after redheads. I was raised in Arizona , he was raised in Oregon. When we met that night we fought as only two people who trust each other could fight. Our lives together was more meant to be than a blessing. Really ,trouble has followed us all over this country but, we still love and laugh because we know each other and trust each other as the closest of friends , two people becoming one.

It sounds like a poem, and in regard to that it sounds like serendipity; congratulations, if only everyone was so lucky. :slight_smile:

I’m a cynic about many things, but love, well I am a romantic.

Luck is the right word, but it still takes love patience a sense of humor and alot of work. Ours is not unique i think many people find the one but they just don’t realize it. Like I said we fight , we are opposites in many ways, oh heck in most ways. we are both very stubborn though ,we both have tempers, and we both love to laugh. Perhaps most people think their opposite won’t work? What is a coin without both halves? If you look for someone who is like you then you are two halves of the same side of a coin, you cannot make one coin. Does that make sense?