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.