Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, churches do seem to be discussing these issues. But in secular society and among a broad spectrum of people, you see the Puritanical norms for heterosexuals insisted upon, with no different views acceptable. Heh, just look at all of the "cheating" threads on this site! And all of the worries about one's lovey having friends of the opposite sex! It seems that with all of the freedom being afforded to non-heterosexuals, the rigidity in expectations of heterosexuals remain.
That's why I wonder if and when that will change. When will people realize that it's really not working very well and want to do something about it?
There are cheating threads because one of the couple doesn't believe in the cheating.
It's one thing for people in an open marriage to have affairs, the other partner is in agreement, but not everyone has a liberal attitude of how they want their own marriage to work. Many women and men still wish to have fidelity and commitment in their marriage and that isn't going to change.
True, Malamute. But is it realistic for the majority of heterosexuals to expect, considering the statistics and the whole of human history? And as the upcoming generations see what a mess it's become, will there be any sort of change with accepted options?
Not long ago, our local newspaper ran an article with statistics showing that marriage rates have dropped substantially and divorce rates have risen. I've seen other such statistics for the country, including one that said traditional, married households aren't the majority anymore. I'll see if I can find some links.
In fact, traditional marriage seems to have lost its lustre but many still cling to it with white-knuckled intensity and continue to force it as the norm, despite some stark realities. As I said, if that's what some want, good for them. But they shouldn't oppress others or halt the conversation.
You talk about different forms of sexuality in a historic point of view, and I think that's basically the essence of the answer here.
There have always been cycles of beliefs. Sometimes, homosexuality is in, sometimes it's polygamy, and sometimes it's being heterosexual. I think that these various other types of sexuality have been strongly repressed since the Victorian times, and only recently have they been more acceptable. Since this is a "new" thing, people are making it into a much bigger issue than it should be.
What you call Puritanical norms comes down to nothing more than tradition. It's been the way that things have been for so long that it's just expected. That's slowly changing, but among the leaders of our society, it's still the expectation. Up until a few years ago, if one of our "leaders" was found out to be gay, they were ostracized. Now that it's became so socially acceptable so quickly, people tend to overlook it, even though it's still rare in the grand scheme of things.
I think that all of this is changing though. I predict that, within another 20 years or so, the socially acceptable norms of today will be nothing more than outdated models of belief.
Will polyandry be cool any time soon? Every dog MUST have his day.
I don't think anything has actually changed. It's just done much more openly now. So many people just don't keep their sex life under the covers. It's just Out There.
But some scientists, sociologists, and anthropologists also believe that we're not wired for heterosexual monogamy, either, and that part of our survival mechanism made having multiple partners necessary.
I believe this to be correct.
Quote:
By contrast, this assertion is scoffed at by society.
Only those bound by the chains of archaic religious guilt. I am on my third long-term partner. My first one I was married to for 15 years. We divorced because we married at age 18 and simply grew out of each other. My second partner I was with for 11 years. We parted ways when he decided it was time to be with another woman. I am still with my third partner, and fully expect to be with him a very long time.
I have no guilt in having chosen multiple partners in my lifetime. They were each right for me at the right time, and when they were no longer right for me, I did not cling to some worthless puritanical standards while staying martyr-like in some torturous relationship, but I logically moved on and found the next one. No guilt, no questioning myself.
For the record though, I do understand what you are saying, and I understand why you think that way. I just don't necessarily agree with all of it.
No prob, Mercury. I'm just puzzling through this stuff. And I absolutely agree with you about having different partners at different times. Frankly, I think that's the norm -- to expect that one person (whom we choose in our mid-20s on average) will meet all of our needs, grow with us, and be the best partner for 50+ years just isn't realistic. Certainly, it doesn't work well enough to be considered the "norm" any longer without substantive changes.
We're given the model of past generations but, geez, most of those relationships were far from ideal or even remotely happy. Women had next to no options then and simply had to endure.
I'm 44 and have not felt impelled to marry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
