# Monogamy is for idiots **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 12, 2010, 9:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375 "2010-07-12T09:16:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/81 "2010-07-13T15:21:01Z")
> [@AHunter3](#): > > I haven’t chimed in in here before because it felt like we’d already done this, why bother? (And because you were doing such a great job, I didn’t even need to hand you a shovel) Riiiight, because I’ve been so completely pwned in this thread. :rolleyes: > [@AHunter3](#): > > The pair of us (from my OP other thread, **Herself** of course) actually had a conversation sort of like this before we ever met face to face, even: > > \ I’m assuming you met online. How long had you been communicating when you had the above conversation? > [@AHunter3](#): > > I think you believe in built-in differences between the sexes and that you know what those differences are. Not everyone shares those beliefs. I don’t. > > As Elizabeth Janeway once said: \ That’s a pretty natural statement to come from a feminist mostly preoccupied with the notion that men only want to keep women out of positions of power. The Economist, meanwhile, says, > [@](#): > > IN THE 1970s there was a fad for giving dolls to baby boys and fire-engines to baby girls. The idea was that differences in behaviour between the sexes were solely the result of upbringing: culture turned women into ironers, knitters and chatterboxes, and men into hammerers, drillers and silent types. Switching toys would put an end to sexual sorting. Today, it is clear why it did not. When boys and girls are born, they are already different, and they favour different toys from the beginning. > > That boys and girls—and men and women—are programmed by evolution to behave differently from one another is now widely accepted. The more micro you go, the less this view holds, but on the macro scale we’re talking about here, I think it absolutely holds - and I still believe that more men are likely to want multiple sex partners than women. We can even debate whether the differences between the sexes are cultural or biological, but really, the reason doesn’t matter; the reality is, men and women do behave differently. > [@AHunter3](#): > > I think in a mono relationship, or in this one at any rate (your mileage may vary), we each needed the other person to be everything an ideal partner should be. And we just weren’t. And we came to take each other for granted and became casually dismissive of each other’s feelings. Too much proximity & familiarity, not enough variety. (The missing other variety included not just other sexual rels but networks of community and friends, by the way). FOR ME, the possibility of a new romance is part of what lights up my day. With that off the table, I became old and dull and as if I had retired from life. I was boring. How many years of that 12 years passed before you realized it wasn’t right for you? If you didn’t have any other relationships the entire 12 years, I guess that means that there was a period when you did think Herself and only Herself was right for you? I think YWTF touched on this already but…I don’t read anything in that paragraph that suggests poly is the answer to your dreams - I see it as, you were in a relationship with someone that simply wasn’t right for you. In fact, it seems to me that even poly isn’t going to work for you - if you’re always going to be pre-occupied with new romances, you’re always going to be bored no matter how many people you hook up with. You’ll never learn to appreciate the person in front of you. This is why some people (myself included, BTW) think that poly people tend to take the lazy way through relationships. I mean, think about the main stereotype of the young immature jock in university - a string of never-ending conquests, a bunch of women on the go, one after another, never being serious with any of them. What makes your approach any different? Most people (myself included) believe that as people mature they learn how to have deeper, more meaningful relationships with one person at a time. > [@](#): > > You go on to ask questions about what I think of as community responsibilities rather than love-relationship responsibilities. I’m not sure there was actually an answer in there. Are ‘community responsibilities’ the norm for most poly folk? Actually, what about _ **you** _? Do you follow this view? Do you expect women you hook up with to be partially responsible to the ‘community’ you belong to? What would you do if two women got pregnant? How familiar are you with modern poly thinking, for that matter? I mean, you’ve been completely out of the poly scene for over a decade, right? ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/82 "2010-07-13T19:44:49Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > The Economist, meanwhile, says, Oh, right, because handing out some toys will COMPLETELY FUCKING CANCEL OUT THE EFFECTS OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE REST OF CULTURE. Retard. ---
**Author:** ![Hamadryad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6de8d8/32.png) [@Hamadryad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamadryad)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/83 "2010-07-13T20:26:44Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > This is why some people (myself included, BTW) think that poly people tend to take the lazy way through relationships. And plenty of other people think you’re wrong. I think that your concern-trolling for pregnant women involved in these situations is reprehensible… but I’m sure people think I’m wrong. I consider myself poly even though I haven’t had an “outside” relationship in years and years. My husband and I have been married for almost 18 years and still not only love, but like the hell out of each other. How’s your relationship? ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/84 "2010-07-13T21:05:47Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > Oh, right, because handing out some toys will COMPLETELY FUCKING CANCEL OUT THE EFFECTS OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE REST OF CULTURE. > > Retard. Right, because baby boys and girls in the 70s were soooo under the influence by the entirety of culture. :rolleyes: Retard yourself. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/85 "2010-07-13T21:07:43Z")
> [@Hamadryad](#): > > And plenty of other people think you’re wrong. I think that your concern-trolling for pregnant women involved in these situations is reprehensible… but I’m sure people think I’m wrong. > I consider myself poly even though I haven’t had an “outside” relationship in years and years. My husband and I have been married for almost 18 years and still not only love, but like the hell out of each other. How’s your relationship? Damn good, and our relationship doesn’t need qualifiers like ‘and I haven’t slept with anyone outside my marriage for years and years’. Notice, no one has _yet_ to answer my questions. You all wouldn’t be side-stepping them on purpose would you? ---
**Author:** ![Hamadryad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6de8d8/32.png) [@Hamadryad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamadryad)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/86 "2010-07-13T21:13:59Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Damn good, and our relationship doesn’t need qualifiers like ‘and I haven’t slept with anyone outside my marriage for years and years’. > > Notice, no one has _yet_ to answer my questions. You all wouldn’t be side-stepping them on purpose would you? My **relationship** didn’t need the qualifier; **I** did, you mook. I’m sure there are other qualifiers on your relationship… and anyone else’s. The fact that the qualifiers are different doesn’t necessarily make them better or worse, though. You don’t want to know why you might not be right; you just want everyone to know how right you are. Fine. You’re right. Does it feel good? I’m right too, and it doesn’t feel any different from when I’m right about anything else which is COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Weird\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@The\_Weird\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Weird_One)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/87 "2010-07-13T21:17:39Z")
In my experience, there are a lot of poly people who are immature about their romantic relationships, but no more so than there are monogamous people who are immature about their romantic relationships. I mean, really, how many monogamous people do we have on these boards posting about psycho exes, infidelity, relationships gone to shit, etc.? Also, what is equal is not necessarily fair. If, for instance, my husband wants to sleep with other women and I don’t mind him sleeping with other women, but he doesn’t want me to sleep with other men and I don’t want to sleep with other men, then it would be perfectly fair for him to be allowed to sleep around while I remained monogamous, even if that’s an unequal arrangement. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Weird\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@The\_Weird\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Weird_One)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/88 "2010-07-13T22:13:20Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Damn good, and our relationship doesn’t need qualifiers like ‘and I haven’t slept with anyone outside my marriage for years and years’. > > Notice, no one has _yet_ to answer my questions. You all wouldn’t be side-stepping them on purpose would you? The questions about what poly people do if two women in a relationship with the same man get pregnant? I can’t speak for others, but I haven’t attempted an answer because it’s going to entirely depend on that group of people and how their relationship is structured. Do they both consider that man to be their primary partner, or does one of the women have a different primary partner? Do they all live together? Are the pregnancies planned or unplanned? I can tell you a little about the poly family I shared a table with at a wedding reception recently. They consisted of a husband, his wife, his girlfriend, his two daughters by his wife, and a baby by his girlfriend whom they’d left at home with a babysitter. They all lived together and coparented. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/89 "2010-07-13T22:38:36Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I don’t know many monogamous relationships that start off with the guy saying, ‘I will almost certainly be having sex and possibly having a deep meaningful relationship with other women while I’m dating you’. You’re right . . . they don’t. But, they _all_, _ **every single one of them** _ still come with that exact same risk. What you’re kidding yourself about is that this possibility for an extra-relationship bond, physical or emotional, doesn’t exist in non-polyamorous relationships. In order to enter this debate fairly, you need to concede the following: a) All relationships carry the risk that a person in the relationship might sleep with someone else, or fall in love with someone else. b) In **AHunter3** ’s OP, he made it clear that his girlfriend said she’d leave him if he did so. c) **AHunter3** then remained faithful to her for 12 years, at which point the relationship seems to have fizzled for any number of reasons. d) Being polyamorous had nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship ending as presented in the OP. . . . I have a girlfriend I love very much. I don’t sleep with other people, because it would hurt her and our relationship. It has very little to do with any label I might or might not use to define my preferred relationship status. If I had full permission from my girlfriend to pursue different sorts of relationships with other people, maybe I would. And, frankly, I know plenty of supposedly monogamous people who have actually cheated on partners, you know, the real kind of cheating, where one person is lying about it to the other? Why you have such a hard-on for polyamory based on a thread about a monogamous relationship is beyond me. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/90 "2010-07-14T00:33:00Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > You’re right . . . they don’t. But, they _all_, _ **every single one of them** _ still come with that exact same risk. > > What you’re kidding yourself about is that this possibility for an extra-relationship bond, physical or emotional, doesn’t exist in non-polyamorous relationships. > > In order to enter this debate fairly, you need to concede the following: > > a) All relationships carry the risk that a person in the relationship might sleep with someone else, or fall in love with someone else. Possibility for extra-relationship bonds? Of course, the possibility certainly exisits for any couple. But poly relationships and mono relationships most certianly do \*not \*have the same risk of someone sleeping with someone else while in the relationship. Unless you believe that 100% of monogamous couples are automatically unfaithful, which I most certainly do not believe. Don’t project your inability to commit to one person (be it due to a need for constant new conquests, boredom with one person, or whatever) on the rest of us. > [@Eonwe](#): > > If I had full permission from my girlfriend to pursue different sorts of relationships with other people, maybe I would. I hope she doesn’t read these boards… But seriously, this I just don’t get. What, apart from the ability to have sex with new people, does she not provide to your relationship that you need? Is it just wanting to look at another pair of breasts or something? If you’re happy with her and the relationship…why would you consider wanting sex with someone else? And don’t say that ‘it’s not all about sex’, because if sex isn’t involved, your relationship certainly isn’t stopping you from having, you know, friends. > [@Eonwe](#): > > Why you have such a hard-on for polyamory based on a thread about a monogamous relationship is beyond me. I resent the implication (by AHunter and others in this thread) that polyamory is the only ‘honest’ way to have a relationship, and the implied view that monogamous people are ‘only kidding themselves’. ---
**Author:** ![Hamadryad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6de8d8/32.png) [@Hamadryad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamadryad)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/91 "2010-07-14T02:17:30Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I resent the implication (by AHunter and others in this thread) that polyamory is the only ‘honest’ way to have a relationship, and the implied view that monogamous people are ‘only kidding themselves’. Who - in this thread - has said that? ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/92 "2010-07-14T02:39:35Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > But poly relationships and mono relationships most certianly do \*not \*have the same risk of someone sleeping with someone else while in the relationship. Unless you believe that 100% of monogamous couples are automatically unfaithful, which I most certainly do not believe. No, 100% of monogamous relationships are not unfaithful. Nor are all/many/most polyamorous people incapable of being faithful. What you’re missing is that if the relationship agreement is, “be faithful or the relationship is over,” it doesn’t matter _what_ kind of amory you call yourself. A polyamorous person is more than able to be faithful, _as exhibited by AHunter_. > [@](#): > > Don’t project your inability to commit to one person (be it due to a need for constant new conquests, boredom with one person, or whatever) on the rest of us. Woah, buddy. Who said anything about an inability to commit. Committed is what I am. That’s what promising to not sleep around and so forth means. I am happy and content in that choice that I’ve made, and am happy within the boundaries of my relationship. Don’t project your fantasy of what the perfect, right, and true feelings for a relationship are on the rest of us. You’re living in a fantasy world. > [@](#): > > I hope she doesn’t read these boards… But seriously, this I just don’t get. What, apart from the ability to have sex with new people, does she not provide to your relationship that you need? Is it just wanting to look at another pair of breasts or something? If you’re happy with her and the relationship…why would you consider wanting sex with someone else? And don’t say that ‘it’s not all about sex’, because if sex isn’t involved, your relationship certainly isn’t stopping you from having, you know, friends. I’d happily show her my post. (hehe, show her my ‘post’). Um, sex is fun. People are fun. Sex for the first time with someone can be exciting. Sex in a different way can be exciting; not everybody does everything the same, you know. And, even on the non-sex aspect, hey, it feels good to be needed. It feels good to be emotionally intimate with someone, to share secrets, to learn about each other, to have ‘firsts’ with a person. Maybe it would be nice to have some of those firsts again, and recapture those feelings. But really, if you are in all honesty baffled at how a person could possibly be sexually attracted (or intimately attracted without the sex) to a person when he or she is already in a relationship with someone, then I don’t think we can make any progress in this discussion. Just know that just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean it isn’t true for a large majority of the population. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Weird\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@The\_Weird\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Weird_One)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/93 "2010-07-14T05:45:12Z")
I find polyamorous theory and philosophy fascinating because it’s approach to issues of jealousy is so different from the mainstream culture’s. The idea that my partner’s romantic engagement to someone else is not necessarily a threat to my relationship with my partner is a pretty radical idea given our cultural constructs. We’re taught that feelings of jealousy are desirable within a relationship and that we should obey them –women should get upset if their boyfriend even looks at another woman, and men should get upset if another man looks at their girlfriend. I love that polyamory rejects the idea that we are subservient to our emotions without invalidating them, either. Jealousy stems from fear and can be overcome if the root cause of the fear can be identified and corrected. To me, facing unwanted emotions and working with your partner to get past them _is_ more mature than letting them control your relationship. I am still not – and may never be –at a point where I would be comfortable with my fiancé having a girlfriend, nor would I have another boyfriend, because both my fiancé and I spend _all our time_ with each other and have since we started dating. We’re both time-intensive people and I don’t think either of us could handle having a second romantic partner and still feel that we had enough time for each other. In short, I think the argument that polyamory is inherently immature is absurd. _Good_ polyamorous relationships require high levels of communication, self-awareness, and emotional maturity that are often under-developed in monogamous relationships. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/94 "2010-07-14T07:10:57Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Because I guarantee that you want to sleep with people other than your wife, it’s just that you feel the consequences are unacceptable. I find this reasoning kind of backwards. The consequences of a thing are part of what determines if you want to do it or not. Not wanting to do a thing because it has bad consequences is still not wanting to do the thing. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/95 "2010-07-14T14:43:36Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Right, because baby boys and girls in the 70s were soooo under the influence by the entirety of culture. :rolleyes: Unless they were raised in complete, total, and literal isolation, yes, they were, shitdick. I bet you also think that we could solve racism in the U.S. by giving all Black people blue contacts. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/96 "2010-07-14T15:22:06Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I’ve decided to stop all pretense of trying to have a serious relationship with women. Why are you wasting your time on internet boards, when you could be out buying a season pass at your local brothel? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAleq](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smartaleq/32/163_2.png) [@SmartAleq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAleq)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2010, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/97 "2010-07-14T21:32:13Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > When a wife beater starts trying to legitimize it by giving his lifestyle a name, I’ll start that thread. Looks like it’s gonna be a busy day for you–[better get crack-a-lackin’ on this!](http://christiandomesticdiscipline.com/home.html)😃 ---
**Author:** ![The\_Weird\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@The\_Weird\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Weird_One)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/98 "2010-07-15T03:14:49Z")
> [@SmartAleq](#): > > Looks like it’s gonna be a busy day for you–[better get crack-a-lackin’ on this!](http://christiandomesticdiscipline.com/home.html)😃 Wow, what an interesting site! Coming from a kinky perspective, it looks very familiar, except that the reasoning behind the relationship structure it discusses is “this is what God wants” instead of “this is what we want.” (That, and the fact that the authors think all relationships should follow their model.) ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/99 "2010-07-15T04:14:03Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > I find this reasoning kind of backwards. The consequences of a thing are part of what determines if you want to do it or not. Not wanting to do a thing because it has bad consequences is still not wanting to do the thing. It’s also the statement that says that polyamory is more honest than monogamy. Which is fucking stupid. I’ve never understood this idea that people want to have sex with everyone they are attracted to. I absolutely do not want to have sex with anyone until I am in a committed, monogamous relationship with them (preferably marriage, which adds the weight of law to the commitment). It doesn’t matter how attracted to someone I am–I do not want to have sex with them. I honestly do have a problem with people in monogamous relationships that want to have sex with other people, but don’t out of the commitment. You shouldn’t be making the commitment in the first place if you want to have sex with others. You’re lying to yourself, saying you’d rather be in a committed relationship than have sex with multiple people. Very clearly you’d rather be in a relationship where you were committed, but were allowed to have sex on the side. If that is what you are doing, then I would agree that polyamory, or, at least, the situation described by AHunter, is the more honest approach. But, again, to assume this is always the case is itself the same problem poly people have with their detractors: a lack of acceptance of feelings you don’t personally have. IOW, it’s fucking stupid–nearly literally. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375/100 "2010-07-15T06:24:51Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > It’s also the statement that says that polyamory is more honest than monogamy. Which is fucking stupid. I’ve never understood this idea that people want to have sex with everyone they are attracted to. > > I absolutely do not want to have sex with anyone until I am in a committed, monogamous relationship with them (preferably marriage, which adds the weight of law to the commitment). It doesn’t matter how attracted to someone I am–I do not want to have sex with them. > > I honestly do have a problem with people in monogamous relationships that want to have sex with other people, but don’t out of the commitment. You shouldn’t be making the commitment in the first place if you want to have sex with others. You’re lying to yourself, saying you’d rather be in a committed relationship than have sex with multiple people. Very clearly you’d rather be in a relationship where you were committed, but were allowed to have sex on the side. > > If that is what you are doing, then I would agree that polyamory, or, at least, the situation described by AHunter, is the more honest approach. But, again, to assume this is always the case is itself the same problem poly people have with their detractors: a lack of acceptance of feelings you don’t personally have. > > IOW, it’s fucking stupid–nearly literally. You aren’t the typical young adult male. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monogamy-is-for-idiots/546375.md?page=6)