| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
slutty (0)
|
Sort of an odd question? I'd go with emotional stability I guess. Maiming the concept of love doesn't seem like a benefit, nor does ownership...
|
04-22-12 12:22am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
elephant (0)
|
Emotional stability gets my vote, going very high brow on pornusers today lol.
|
04-22-12 01:29am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Capn (0)
|
Emotional stability.
|
04-22-12 02:48am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
Ergo Proxy (0)
|
I am happy to see my suggestion for a poll. To clarify the point "Maiming the concept of love", I was struggling to get the expression in the way I wanted it to appear (and this one is also meant ironically of course). I wanted to give a choice for differentiation here between social and sexual monogamy. Although most people see these concepts intrinsically linked to each other, they are not. So the number one reason for most people to say that someone is unable to be socially monogamous is sexual promiscuity. Social standards don't allow one to follow this combination. My point for this 4th option was, however, that (from my point of view) the level of commitment and trust one puts into his relationships should be viewed independently from his promiscuity. There are different levels of "love" and they shouldn't be discarded by social standards. I found a citation in an article which expresses my thoughts on this topic quite well:
"While monogamy is the perfect form of social organization, its pressure is eliminating all other options and putting aside the persons that are not capable of it and want to experiment other life styles."
http://hugocrispim.suite101.com/monogamo...ial-monogamy-a324570
So I polled for point four. Makes the most sense to me. There is so much love going around, I wouldn't want it restricted just by social standards or stigmata.
|
04-22-12 03:21am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
Monogamy is when you and your partner both know that you're, to each other, all you need. That's my take on it. When it's true monogamy, it springs from the interrelationship between two people, not from social pressure.
I don't think there's anything right or wrong about it, but when it works, it's great.
|
04-22-12 05:17am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Ergo Proxy (0)
|
REPLY TO #5 - Drooler :
Maybe it's like you said it is but I think you underestimate the society and its influence on the individual's decisions. Even if one is unaware of it.
|
04-22-12 05:28am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #6 - Ergo Proxy :
If you read what I wrote carefully, you won't find anything in it that implies strength or weakness regarding the influence of society.
|
04-22-12 11:16am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
pat362 (0)
|
I picked the first one but frankly there should have been others because none is exactly wha I was going to use.
|
04-22-12 12:09pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
messmer (Disabled)
|
I don't quite know how to answer that either. I fell in love, was lucky enough to find someone who felt the same and this love has become so strong over the years that we have become one. She is my best friend, a person I trust to never to let me down, on whom I can rely completely. So, monogamy worked for me. There is also the emotional stability mentioned above. The family expands, first through children, then grandchildren, which gives you the feeling that within this world there is a safe spot where you belong.
If other societal models are more to your liking, or if you haven't been fortunate enough to find the only one for you then I have no problem with your life style, no matter what you choose. I am simply glad I struck gold without actually looking for it.
|
04-22-12 02:20pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
Cybertoad (Disabled)
|
You know , its not made up that family's are a unit, like a wolf has a pack, fish have a school, Whales have pods. Humans are designed to care for their young. 65% of all marriages end in divorce, leaving children to figure out things like sex and relationships. Its easy to go stick it where it fits, but takes more to be a healthy member of society. Religion is not what I speak of when I say family and values. I speak of unity and trust, what better way then to keep in in your pants and your legs closed on behalf of your family!
|
04-22-12 04:11pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
Toadsith (0)
|
Evolutionarily speaking (Yes, SpellCheck - that IS a word), monogamy is more important to males than females, as it serves to guarantee for an aggressively protective male that the offspring a child of that male rather than another. Biologically, females can usually be rather certain if a child is theirs or not. That said, long-term monogamy is non-existent in nearly all species of animals, even the ones known for monogamy. Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal did a great comic about that recently: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2566
In modern Western society, most people exhibit a behavior called Serial Monogamy. This is sexual activity with only one sexual partner at a time, but with the average individual having had multiple sexual partners throughout their lifespan.
Societal pressures are omnipresent and very persuasive and I think it is naive to say any complex behavior like social-sexual partnership can exist without being affected by society for any beings that exist within any identifiable society. That said, a classic meta-study (a study that studies other studies) was unable to find any (ANY) behavior exhibited by humans that was not in someway influenced by the genetics of the human exhibiting said behavior. So nature versus nurture? Nay, it is both.
Back to the question at hand, I believe couples that maintain longterm monogamy reap many rewards from society (both directly and indirectly) and can often be happier than couples that do not. I also believe it is extremely important that a couple have closely matched libidos, for otherwise one partner will begin seeking satisfaction outside of that relationship and will risk being punished for ignoring our society's mores.
That is not to say all sophisticated human societies have had such an interest in monogamy. Western society is rather renowned for its obsession with monogamy and its general "sex-negative" viewpoint. Many "eastern" societies like those native to Japan, India and some Arabic societies were much more "sex-positive" and more relaxed about multi-partner relationships.
Then there's the Mormons. Side Note: Mormons are often known for being really devoted to their religion. Wouldn't you be if you were certain your religion could guarantee you that you will rule your own planet if you follow the rules?
|
04-22-12 10:18pm
Reply To Message
|
12
|
gaypornolover (0)
|
Should be a "don't know" option really as every case is different and what works for one couple may not work for another.
I've never had a relationship so I'm not sure.
|
04-23-12 04:23am
Reply To Message
|
13
|
RustyJ (Suspended)
|
By far emotional stability. I find monogamy mainly positive thing if one has functional relationship. I can imagine so many things that'd be lost or different without it.
|
04-26-12 03:38am
Reply To Message
|
14
|
yote78 (0)
|
Really kind of a dumb question. I'm pretty happily married, got two grown kids...and love porn! Fortunately, I have a wife who lets me indulge in my curious little pastime, just so long as I implicitly promise that it won't get to kinky or let it control my life. Besides, she know she reaps the benefits of my motor getting revved up by such other means as are provided by porn.
So, what else can I say other than that this is a question which is far too complex be answered by a few multiple choices.
|
04-28-12 09:25am
Reply To Message
|
