Monogamy or Polygamy?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Where do you stand? Which one, if either, do you adhere to when it comes to romantic relationships? Does one work better than the other? Are either of them merely social constructs? Do they serve a social function or are they merely personal preferences? Any 'correct' way?

Personally, I have been polygamous but am currently the oppose and normally am in serious relationships. My belief is that monogamy largely stems from ideas about the nuclear family which was largely a social unit which served the capitalistic mode of production - my own views about monogamy stem from my working-class roots, in which families stayed together and bred future workers etc. I have, on the one hand, a strong family ethic and a desire for loyalty and respect in relationships but, on the other, a belief in sexual freedom. These ideas are in conflict with one another - one aspect of my relational conduct comes from my working class heritage, especially from my grandparents who served in WWII and were at the mercy of the emphasis on the nuclear family model post-WWII (they stayed together until they died). The other aspect results from changes brought about through movements and subcultures which have challenged these cultural norms, from then up until now.

These things chane, of course, due to changes is production and the relative changes in human-relations, but the historical seeds still remain. We don't need to create families to send down the mines now in (most of) the western world and there is a lot more freedom in the context of interpersonal relationships.

Anyway, I'm too tired to really explain my point but thought it would be interesting to see how leftists view this question

[Art Vandelay]

I'm a walking contradiction when it comes to this topic.

[The Feral Underclass]

Do you mean polyamory?

[Art Vandelay]

Do you mean polyamory?

I'm going to assume he did. At least that's how I read it and what I assumed he meant after reading the description. Just to be clear, given my response, I didn't catch the mistake.

[rylasasin]

Neither. Free love.

Love should be something that is made and shared with many, not bound and kept in a closet between one or even several people.

[Sabot Cat]

I am monogamous, but I support making polygamy legal. This is much like how I am a teetotaler, but support the legal consumption of alcohol (and would support the legalization of other prohibited substances as well). So with that, I'm not exactly sure how to respond to the poll.

[Oenomaus]

I don't really have the time for multiple partners, and my partner would prefer it if I were monogamous. She is, as far as I am concerned, free to sleep with whoever she pleases, but she is happier being monogamous. As far as I am concerned, viewing either sort of relationship as more "correct" or "progressive" is daft and dangerous - the last thing we need is some self-appointed committee dictating the new "progressive" morality. It's for the people involved to work out among themselves.

The traditional family unit is, I think, a necessary part of the structure of capitalism (the base), but it is not equal to monogamy - forced and unpaid domestic labour by women, forced sex and birth, and violent rearing of children are much more important, it seems to me. Capitalism can make do with extended families, polygamous families and so on.

[Rugged Collectivist]

Personally I can do either.

[Quail]

I think, from the perspective of love, and sharing connections (sexual or otherwise) with people, monogamy is somewhat limited. Committing to one person for the rest of your life is... kind of idealistic, in my opinion, given the rates of divorce and infidelity. Besides, it is far from impossible to feel for more than one person at once, in which case your monogamous relationship is built on hiding and denying your feelings which doesn't seem healthy to me. From a more, I guess, "political" perspective, I think that monogamy (certainly traditional marriage and the nuclear family) has roots in the idea of controlling women's sexuality and passing on property. Additionally, more traditional arrangements can create financial dependence so that even people who are unhappy in their relationship aren't free to pursue something that does make them happy.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Polyamory or even free love is something to aspire to, but I don't think I am romantically wired to be able to do that. Too many jealousy/sensitivity issues. I say either is fine.

[Skyhilist]

It depends on who I'm with... I certainly wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings who I care about.

[Sea]

Why should I have to "adhere" to anything?

[thriller]

I have been trying the polygamy lately. While it has it's advantages it also leaves something lacking from more committed relationships in my experience. I am not saying this for everyone, just my own romantic needs you could say. Polygamy really helps to cut down on jealousy that seems to spring up during monogamy, yet for me I can't seem to develop romance in a non-sexual way when I am polygamous. Usually it seems we are both there for sex and a deeper connection is brushed to the side. I am the type of person who seems to look for a deeper connection and understanding, rather than just physical pleasure only. Of course this all about me :lol: Free love for all is what I say.

[human strike]

I'd like to be able to do polyamory but I'm just not emotionally suited to it and I don't think I ever could be tbh. I've tried to adjust to it in the past but it really didn't work.

[DasFapital]

Whatever arrangements people can make work out for themselves

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Why should I have to "adhere" to anything?

so edgy

[Dagoth Ur]

Engels said that monogamy overtaking polygamy worldwide was a progression and I agree. Polygamy, while it can center around a female hub, is almost always an entirely patriarchal event. It's not about loving more people, but about having the most wives and treating them as objects to be appraised. This is the main reason I'm adamantly against polygamy. Not to mention that the system leads to more hurt feelings than monogamy does. Jealousy of unfaithful lovers, jealously of men with too many wives when you have nothing, jealousy of the "head" wife, etc.

Now of course I reject the 'gamy aspect entirely. But these same principals apply without legal recognition of the unions, so the field isn't really changed that much.

[helot]

I've never been in a polyamorous relationship and i'm not sure how i'd find it. I pass no judgement due to lack of experience.


I will say though i can't be arsed with serial monogamy. Yeah i am in a monogamous relationship (de facto, we've both said to each other can start relationships with others which so far hasn't happened) but if it ends im not going to bother. I'm not much of a sexual person tbh and serial monogamy seems like the dumbass' version of polyamory but only with one at a time.

[Dagoth Ur]

Serial monogamy leads to hurt feelings too much as well. I've been on that train and its only logical destination is to just fuck everyone you can. These type of people are also often jealous but will cheat on you. Fun times.

Every relationship is different but I think having a monogamous core is essential.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

As far as I'm concerned, putting the question in these terms really means not grappling with the "core" issues, which have less to do with an individual preference, and more to do with heteropatriarchy, "sex" as a social phenomenon, etc.
For one, when is a relationship monogamous? Is it a question of sexual practice? What delineates the sexual from social life generally?
Yeah. As far as I'm concerned, this question already assumes too many answers.

[Dagoth Ur]

It doesn't really assume much more than what our present social system is set up as. These are all terms we understand. I get where you're coming from but this is the place we are and we haven't overcome even the most rudimentary aspects of patriarchy, so you're kinda putting the cart in front of the horse.