|
Monogamy as Bondage...
Monogamy plays a very dubious role in our society today.
It is seen as the highest of virtues by the majority of individiuals
- whatever their moral alignment in most other matters. The reasons
behind the worship of monogamy are based either on archaic religious
mores or irrational philosophical premises, and the demands which such
beliefs place on relationships often destroys otherwise great romances.
The primary root of most monogamy is religion. Most religions restrict
sexual and romantic activity due to the common mystical perception that
pleasure is a sin. Thus religions tend to prefer any moral alignment
which restricts the prevalence or enjoyment of individual desires.
Other often-touted reasons for monogamy stem from the desire to have
and keep a single, life-long partner. Needless to say, this premise
has been proven flawed by history indubidubly. Whether through marriage
or interpersonal agreement, the majority of romantic relationships are
based upon monogamy. Unfortunately, this premise is in fact the root
of the statistically tragic plight of romance in the world today.
When demanding that oneself and one's partner restrict their sexual
and romantic behavior to a single primary love interest, they are being
asked to evade or deny any conflicting real or potential desires. After
all, the concept of monogamy wouldn't be the watershed issue which it
is in relationships were it the normal and natural tendency of individuals.
Rather, it is something which we tend to force upon one another, primarily
because we know that by restricting ours and our partners sexual and
romantic outlets, we are binding ourselves to one another in a way which
prevents us from seeking partners which may be more suitable or desirable.
But this is exactly why we should not covet monogamy
in our romantic relationships. If one's virtues are not adequate to
retain one's partner, the relationship will eventually end up based
upon false affection or permanent dissappointment. If a person is only
maintaining their fidelity due to another's manipulation, they are guilty
not only of allowing manipulation into the relationship, but of sacrificing
their true desires to the whims of someone they don't really care for,
and allowing that person to continue caring for someone who has nothing
to offer in return. If the fear is that a more suitable romance may
spring from extra-relationship affairs, is one worried for one's partner,
or about one's own inadequacies?
If one is unsuitable for one's partner, one should search for a more
suitable individual - coercively binding one another sexually and emotionally
will not improve compatibility. If a more appropriate partner exists,
they will be found, whether or not either party is currently involved
with another, and regardless of what restrictions are currently being
placed on the behavior of either party.
Thus, placing one's partner into the bondage of monogamy is useless,
and contradicts a healthy romance. A proper romance is based upon the
mutual desire of individuals to travel on the same road in the same
direction, and under their own indepentent motive power. Unfortunately,
most romances are based rather on codependence, where the partners involved
are incomplete entities, clamouring for stability on one anothers' foundations.
But as soon as the first temblor of instability threatens, their relationship
topples.
This needn't happen, if only individuals enter a relationship as equal
and independent entities. Monogamy is impossible and impractical for
all people all of the time. So long as there is adequate intellectual
communication present, this does not prove a problem between rational
partners. The majority of conflicts in realtionships are not based upon
infidelity, but rather on the inability of a person to interperet their
desires, inadequate communication of their desires to their partners,
or jealousy blinding them to the fact that their partner is independently
responsible for his own happiness to the same degree as they are responsible
for their own.
Romance is based upon mutual compatibility and the desire to enjoy
the company of one's partners, as they are, who they are, freely and
independently. Introducing coercion or sacrifice into the equasion only
begins the horrible downward spiral of delusion, deception and denial,
rooted in individuals whose self-worth convinces them that they must
bind another to them lest their partner discover their inadequacies
or discover a more virtuous individual. Ultimately, if one cares for
another, one wants them to be with the most appropriate and most compatioble
person - as they see fit - and coercing them away from their
choice is vicious malice, regardless of what virtue one attempts to
clothe it in.
The fact that either partner is capable of choosing who is most appropriate
for them, and constantly being exposed to a variety of potentially compatible
individuals, does not necessitate that one must in any way endeavor
to change for another. Partners can be unequally devoted to one another,
unequally promiscuous, and unequally compatible, so long as they are
constantly aware that it is their happiness that their partner is contributing
to, and that they are building the relationship in a way which maximizes
that contribution - however that may be for them. Don't mistake this
for subjectivism - rather, evey individual must simply maintain a constant
line of communication with their partners, 24-hours per day and all
the way down, in order to expect the relationship to be valuable to
them. Thus, the old habit of making a committment and then going into
cruise control is revealed for the evasion and deception which it is.
If one finds that one is incompatible with one's partner, changing
oneself to better suit one's partner is the last thing one should do.
Placing the survival of a relationship over whatever value it may have
provided - and disregarding such things as honesty, self-image and personal
happiness, is destructive and evil, not to mention unattractive. When
two individuals find they are romantically incompatible, the relationship
simply is not viable any longer - or never was. There should be no need
to attempt to "save" such a doomed partrnership. What was the purpose
of finding an appropriate partner in the first place if the natural
change and growth in onesself must be annihilated in order to keep that
partner?
Like all behaviors, romance should never entail sacrifice. Sacrifice
is a net loss of value. So long as what one is offering in exchange
is being repaid in return, the relationship is viable and healthy and
virtuous. But as soon as one starts building deception, coercion and
evasion around a relationship, it becomes a scene of carnage, where
one annihilates one's sense of self in order to maintain a ruse which
provides no return value.
Too many individuals ccommit romantic sacrifice by default, because
they feel it is expected of them, rather than because it refects their
true desires. They repress their exploratory desires because they have
been trained to despise them, when in fact such desires are the logical
equivalent of a survival instinct, and repressing such desires means
rejecting their individuality and denying themselves the ability to
achieve their own happiness.
Monogamous relationships are temporary when they do exist. Those who
continue to worship monogamy will always find themselves practicing
serial monogamy - jumping into a monogamous romance immediately
as soon as a suitable partner appears, and consequently ending the romance
tragically as soon as the monogamy is threatened from any direction.
Would we not be happier and more likely to sustain our romances if we
saw our partners as individuals, rather than as sex slaves? It is imperative
thus that we embrace our ability to enjoy our partners, and appreciate
their independent lives and individual identities - those qualities
which endeared us to them in the first place.
|