A review of the — movement? blip? pioneers? advantage-takers? evolution? revolution? devolution? — of sexual mores and (formalized and outwardly expressed) experiments with what monogamy means and whether it’s the be-all and end-all. (The title to this post comes from the glossary, where it is defined as “a promiscuous person who strives to approach partners with respect and honesty.” The article discusses open marriages, open marriages with restrictions (e.g., the “above-the-waist” rule), trinogamy, polyamory, etc.
Hrm.
First off, anything in New York magazine that describes a hot new trend must be greeted with a bit of suspicion. And, conversely, I suspect there’s a lot more carrying on of this sort than has been openly acknowledge (or written about in New York magazine).
That said, I have three reactions:
- In theory, whatever floats your boat. Open and agreed-upon rules for sexual conduct — bearing in mind the potential physical/health issues of different sorts of behavior — are the purview of the individuals involved. Just ’cause it’s not my cuppa doesn’t make it wrong (hurting each other and betraying trusts makes it wrong).
- In practice, I suspect that some folks (not necessarily all) get into such experimentation for less-than-upright (so to speak) reasons. The same may be said for traditional monogamy, too, of course, as with all human institutions. Still, the sanction to stray not only would seem to be suspect if sought after (or, for that matter, if too easily granted), but it would seem to move the bar and the temptation further. It’s easier to simply commit to avoiding sexual contact of any sort, rather than try to hold the line at “above the waist” (at least that’s what I recall from my own youth).
Also in practice, my experience (personal and observed) is that human relationships have a number of ways to go wrong, and the more intricate the relationships involved (including, in this case, numbers), the higher the likelihood of it all falling to pieces in a number of unsavory ways. If so many couples can’t work out their personal, financial, and/or sexual lives together, how many more ways can a threesome come to grief? And given the social and economic and personal fall-out from such things, why stack the deck?
Again, though, that’s all pragmatic (and may be as much my own projections as anything else). Folks don’t seek my permission for who they get hitched with in the traditional sense; I’m hardly going to ask for it regarding who they invite, singly or multiply, into bed with them.
- Personally, I’m a lazy guy. I’m also prone to temptation. Neither of which makes the work of balancing multiple partners of various sorts in the least bit attractive, except in the highly fantastical/theoretical sense. Add to that my profound satisfaction with my own marriage (and leaving aside any sacred oaths I’ve made toward same), and I have utterly no interest in straying (or arranging for formally recognized and permitted straying).
Your mileage may vary, of course. And I am, after all, quite the old fuddy-duddy, so bear that in mind, too.
(via BoingBoing)
Speaking of private fantasies …