I know the topic of monogamy comes up semi-regularly here, and I also know that nobody’s gonna change their minds on how they feel about it in general. That’s not my intent here - I’m just wondering about this one question.
I am a woman in a happy, healthy open marriage. I get why monogamy works for others and, again, I have no desire to “convert” anyone to sharing my preferences. Most people IRL have absolutely no idea that my husband and I are not monogamous, but at times (mostly online) I do get drawn into theoretical discussions about the merits of monogamy with people, basically because I just happen to find it an interesting subject.
As I said, for the most part I understand why some people prefer monogamous relationships, but there’s one thing that continues to come up in conversations like those that I can’t get my head around, which is the perception that someone who doesn’t desire a strictly monogamous relationship is somehow immature or emotionally stunted. I may not agree with other arguments against non-monogamy, but I at least understand them. This one is completely baffling to me. If you consider people in an open relationship immature or stunted, why?
Lots of people consider any lifestyle that falls off the beaten path as immature and a sign that you haven’t grown up.
Rent instead of own?
Own a condo instead of a house?
Not married?
No kids?
Non-monogamous?
etc.
Basically they view everyone on the exact same path towards a house they own with a white fence, 2 kids, 2 cars and a monogamous marriage. If you haven’t achieved that or don’t want that, they assume something is deeply wrong with you.
Having said that, my understanding is that an open relationship is hard for most people to pull off. If anything, the people who can pull it off are more secure and emotionally healthy than the people who cannot handle an open relationship because most people honestly can’t handle that.
I don’t think either monogamy or non are particularly mature; they’re different strokes for different people. I do think cheating is immature, but that applies whether we’re talking about relationships or cards, and if the rules of the game do not require monogamy then not being monogamous is not cheating.
We baptized my newest nephew two weeks ago; I am his godmother. At one point my other SiL asked me when am I planning on having children and spit at me that she thinks not having them is selfish. Me, I think I’ll stick to my policy of never, ever, drinking around my relatives, because if I ever let the filters down we could have WWIII starting without Trump’s intervention and I wouldn’t want him to get jealous. People have all kinds of ideas which don’t really make sense: why would it be more generous to have children as a single woman who keeps moving, than to not have them and help pay for my nephews’ educations? I don’t fit her narrow box of What People Should Be Like and her go-to insult is “selfish”, so that’s what I got.
I don’t want to derail the thread with examples from my own life (since none of those involve non-monogamy) but if you put one toe off the beaten path there will be a posse showing up to scold you for being unconventional.
If an open marriage works for you great. Unless someone else is involved with you/your partner(s) it’s none of their business.
One thing I DO correlate with non-monogamy is a higher threshold for risk in general. The non-monogamous people I know (mostly through atheist groups) seem more likely to change jobs out of the blue, move at a moment’s notice (including out of the country), start or stop school in a seemingly abrupt manner, and other things that would give a mild-mannered fellow like me pause.
My hypothesis is that the complications of non-monogamy don’t register as profoundly with people who are already used to lives that present challenges. I’m a milquetoast guy with limited social skills. I’ve been at the same job since 1994 (with an interruption for grad school). My idea of a wild time is a trip to see a bunch of rhinoceros encased in volcanic ash. I don’t want to try to deal with more than one partner at a time - I just don’t need the stress.
I think there are are probably as many reasons for polyamory as there are people practicing it, and some may come from a place maturity and some may not. There’s a woman I work with who is non-monogamous, and in her case, in the context of her whole personality, I think it’s likely rooted in a type of immaturity: she doesn’t want to be responsible for to to anything, and is uncomfortable with anyone else having any kind of emotional interdependence with others. She always has her walking shoes on, metaphorically: in any relationship–romantic or not–she’s always going to do exactly what she’s going to do, and the other person can go along or not: she refuses to care. This seems immature to me: she wants to be the perpetual child and everyone around her is the adult. Without even realizing it, she’s taking advantage of the fact that other people get invested in their relationship with her to give her the freedom not to be emotionally invested herself: if other people were like her, she’s be utterly alone and she’d hate that–she’s very social and very much wants to have relationships. She just relies on others to do the work. But I’m not going to extend that whole suite of motivations to everyone who is non-monogamous.
I also think it’s a little problematic to say things like “to pull non-monogamy off, you have to be even more mature than most”. The implication is that people in monogamous relationships are just too immature to handle the other way, and if they weren’t so childish and weak they’d adopt the non-monogamous lifestyle. I think that’s pretty insulting. There are a lot of reasons to be monogamous that are not rooted in a lack of maturity, and “pulling it off”–remaining monogamous–also takes a kind of maturity. Finally, I don’t know when one can decide that people living either lifestyle have “pulled it off”: it’s great if a relationships model has been stable for 5-10 years, but that’s not enough of a snapshot to suggest that it be used as a model for others: lots of relationships rumble along just fine for decades and then have to be radically redefined as people and circumstances change.
I would rather live with non-monogamy than live with a lying, cheating spouse. I suspect there are alot of people who would. Not many would admit it, I think.
In my life I have a married friend who has a sugar-daddy on the side. This is her third, he buys her things she would never be able to have, otherwise. I worry for her. She is always sneaking around. Getting caught would mean divorce. I want her to be happy. but she is using these men, exposing her self to possible disease and humiliation. She doesn’t care. It is an addiction, imo.
I agree with this completely. There are immature people in any kind of relationship, and I certainly never meant to imply that monogamous relationships are indicative of a lack of maturity any more than non-monogamous ones are.
I tried to find some examples of people declaring non-monogamy immature, and one of the first I came across happened to be a post from this message board. Here are a couple of articles that mention that stereotype(though not necessarily in agreement with it): here, here, and here. I’m pleasantly surprised that there have been so many responses so far that don’t make that immediate connection, but it has definitely been my experience that a lot of people have that perception.
I don’t believe that non-monogamous people are more immature than monogamous. That said, I’ve run into more than a few immature people who have been adamantly non-monogamous, and I suspect my experience with these kinds of people are not unusual. Hence, the association.
Let’s talk about immaturity. What makes someone immature? I consider my 16 month old daughter a text book case of immaturity, so we can use her as a yardstick. Here are classic signs she exibits:
Her attachment to new things is sudden and intense. Anything that will neatly fit in her hand, is kind of cutesy looking, and is novel, she will grab and hold on to it like her life depends on it. She becomes Gollum: such a thing becomes her Precious that she loves with a fiery intensity. The second she becomes distracted with something else, though…well, what only minutes ago was Precious becomes boring and forgettable. She will make that new thing her Precious.
Her emotions rule her actions; there is not intellectual override, no voice in her head telling her that just because she wants to do something doesn’t mean she should. So if she feels like playing in the potted plant (even though her parents have told her no), she will act on that feeling as if it’s a mandate. If she had the cognitive ability to rationalize her behavior, she’d probably argue that her urge to play in the potted plant is 100% natural, so acting on this feeling is okay because it’s her just her being herself.
She doesn’t concern herself about others when deciding how to act because she hasn’t yet developed a lot of empathy. When she decides to throw food on the floor for the upteenth time, the fact that she’s making a mess that someone else is going to have to clean up doesn’t bother her. Perhaps she tells herself that Mommy and Daddy actually like cleaning it up, because they keep doing it, right? But more likely is that she just doesn’t see the annoyances she causes, because it takes a certain amount of self-awareness to see that. Self-awareness that she lacks. She is also, quite frankly, self-centered.
So these are 3 examples of toddleresque immaturity that seem to also be key traits in some of the immature polyamorous people I’ve known. But they are also traits I’ve seen in people who cheat in monogamous relationships. It’s not a concidence that all of these people were in dysfunctional relationships where there a lack of trust and security. It’s probably the case that the dysfunctional relationships are the only ones people hear about, so their perceptions are skewed toward the negative.
One problem I have with open relationships is that they seem so unfair. Any GF I’ve ever had, if she wants another partner, all she has to do is snap her fingers and the guys come running. Me, OTOH… Well, let’s just say, it takes more effort. An effort I’d imagine would become even more difficult if I were to be upfront with my potential partners and tell them I’m in an open relationship.
So yeah, lots of fun for her, not so much for me.
That said, my views on casual sex have changed. I used to be totally fine with it. Sex with someone who you have a deep emotion connection to is just SO much better. The difference is like between night and day.
Having sex with someone sans that emotional connection, or trust, or respect, is like masturbation. It feels great when it’s happening. But when you are done, MAN are you done! Shit gets awkward, and you just want that other person outta there!
So to me, I associate casual sex with youth. Which one might equate with “immature”. But I don’t judge. What people do in their own personal lives is none of my business.
There is very definitely a type of “non-monogamous relationship” where one partner wants to run around and the other is clearly uncomfortable with it but feels like they have to accept it because they are emotionally/practically dependent or because they feel emotionally/practically responsible for the other person. In those cases, the person that runs around is sorta being the boy in the Giving Tree: asking for way, way too much and then feeling entitled because the other person didn’t say no. That’s immature behavior.
My apologies. I didn’t mean to imply by my post that I feel successful monogamy is immature by way of successful polyamory being mature. But, I suppose that it can be interpreted that way. I feel that successful monogamy requires maturity as well.
Arguably unfair in much the same way to require a class of people who could easily gain a certain benefit, not to gain that benefit, just because the other class of people can’t as easily gain it.
I can imagine goods for which it might make sense to make such a restriction but a case has to be made individually.
My guess is that people who would present this argument are either 1) the same people who use the “it’s for procreation!” argument against SSM, or 2) still firmly believe that marriage consists of a wife who is subservient to her husband.
Pretty much this. Regarding your first comment, if I’m honest, this is something that I struggle to understand as well. Example: my wife and I have a friend who is, IIRC, 25. A couple of years ago she was living with her parents, a single mother barely able to afford groceries for her son. So, she packed up and moved to a much bigger city to look for work. There she met a guy considerably older who had three kids from a couple different women. They got engaged and she ended up pregnant. They were living with his mother in a tiny house—they slept in cots in the dining room, two kids slept on couches. Now they live on mom’s property in a garage that’s been barely converted to be suitable for habitation: basically some cots and a space heater.
So she’s engaged to a guy twice her age that has a daughter her age. At first I found the entire situation a bit creepy, but couldn’t really put my finger on it—until I realized that they were simply living outside what we perceive as “normal.” Now, obviously their poverty has forced them to live in close quarters, but the kids are safe, clean, fed, educated, and unharmed. My friend and her fiancé are adults and are living the way they choose to do. Yeah, it isn’t for me but that doesn’t make them somehow deficient.
Another example: I have a 50 year old uncle who is, as we speak, in Laos picking up a bride. I don’t know all the details but AIUI he went over there after meeting two prospects online: one a 17 year old, the other in her mid-30’s. I’ve heard differing stories on which woman he “chose,” but apparently he is coming home with a wife. I was seriously creeped out at first, because a 17 year old girl isn’t even of legal age yet. However, if he’s coming home with the older woman well, who am I to judge and really, there’s nothing to judge—he’s been lonely for a very long time and I hope they’re happy. But a lot of family will be judgmental, because it seems creepy— the modern equivalent of a mail-order bride. However, the only basis of that judgment is the simple fact that it’s unconventional. There’s nothing wrong with him or their relationship. (Well, there’s lots of things wrong with him, the primary one being he’s a monumental asshole to most people. But as far this whole bride shopping thing there’s nothing wrong, assuming it’s all legit.)
Being in a polyamorous relationship would, as you say, require strong emotional security. I’m not sure if “mature” is the right synonym, but I don’t think that being poly is a sign of immaturity. As I’m composing this I’m discussing this with a friend of mine, who used to be in a poly relationship. She’s married to a woman, but would often find herself desiring a man and so would ask her wife for permission to sleep with an ex. Her wife would mull over the request for a day or two and then usually consent. To me, this is very mature. She says “poly is for strong and stable relationships. People who make those kind of remarkes [that it’s immature] just don’t understand the lifestyle.”
In discussing this with my wife (we’re both happily monogamous), she points out that that being in a poly relationship really has no bearing on maturity / immaturity. Whether or not one pays their bills, takes care of those who depend on them (like their kids), keeps their promises, and doesn’t act like a jerk are much more accurate indicators of maturity. She posits that what people do in between the sheets and who they do it with, as long they’re adults, have no bearing on maturity.
Maybe not “immature”. But certain seems like a relatively empty life to me. Coming home to your empty rented apartment. Occasionally bringing home someone who doesn’t give a crap enough to care if you never call them again.
I would opine from my experiences that any successful relationship requires maturity. What a successful open relationship requires is much more communication than a more traditional monogamous one.
Also, I suspect people who call open relationships immature are more than a bit jealous. Nobody hates on smokers more than a recently quit ex-smoker who is looking to justify their decision. I’d bet solid money that many of the people calling open relationships immature are trying to convince themselves as much as anybody else.
Most of the polyamorous women I’ve known complain that although they can have all the casual sex they want, far more easily than their poly male friends and partners, they have a hard time meeting poly guys who are open to another ongoing committed serious relationship. One of my girlfriends even says polyamory unfairly benefits guys because we can find multiple women who will be in ongoing romantic relationships with us whereas women, especially older women, find it much harder.
I don’t agree with her or you (these generalizations just don’t hold up) but I do think there are some gendered aspects and that polyamory isn’t a perfect mirror of situations and opportunities between the sexes.
Hmm. I do not actually think that a monogamous relationship is immature, but your reasoning could in fact skew that way just as easily:
Toddlers are possessive – anything that is in their reach is “MINE!”
Toddlers do best in a routine – same people, same activities, same schedule day in and day out
Toddlers don’t cope well with jealousy – they have difficulty with the concept that someone they love paying attention to someone (or something) else doesn’t mean that they are less loved or secure
Toddlers are dependent as heck. They rely on their caregiver to meet all of their physical and emotional needs.
You know that was just a list of random “non-conventional” things, not the description of a non-monogamous life though, right? My husband and I have a loving relationship, two awesome kids, secure jobs with pensions and benefits, a goofy dog, and a literal picket fence.