Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
17. I think it's a married with children thing
Thu Apr 11, 2013, 10:39 PM
Apr 2013

And the reason that monogamy has been promoted (and the reason there's more stigma for females who step out) is to insure that a man was spending his energy to raise his own child, not someone else's.

This is the nuclear family view of family, rather than a larger, extended family view.

As a lot of people here know, one of the best examinations of the origin of monogamy came from Engels - within the context of looking at female subjugation within societies.

Engels states that the nuclear family model, and the pretense of monogamy for all marriage, and tracing children through the male line is also the origin of prostitution - b/c females are divided into those who are under the name of one male for financial survival, or those who earn money by selling sex. Historically, prostitutes were oftentimes women whose husbands had died, etc. and they had no source of income. This still goes on among poor people in just about every society I can think of.

But the issue comes down to males as uncles or males as fathers as their role in a family - so you're just seeing things as an uncle.

This is also the way that primatologists look at homosexuality within humans as a genetic factor that was positive - those who weren't attracted to the opposite sex wouldn't be dealing with their own kids, and they were helping out with those whose biology meant that they would. The benefit is through carrying on the extended family gene - in terms of the selfish gene issue. Whether that's true or not - I think the point is that this makes sense when you're not looking at a nuclear family as "the" unit of society.

Since our society has so few protections for women who place childcare before building a career - women who have chosen this route have to contend with sexual jealousy. they're afraid they'll lose standing and income in society if their guy decides to have sex with another woman. This is why so many of them are religious - they get a REALLY big guy on their side. But men have sexual jealousy, too (my ex was jealous for no reason.) Or rather, the reason is that they don't want another guy's kid around, and don't want to lose their kids since our laws favor kids going with their mother for the most part.

I've said, a lot of times, that I wonder what female behavior would be like if they didn't have to worry about their economic survival or that of their children if all women, and men, for that matter, knew they would not suffer by not adhering to the status quo. Since lesbians deal with the same income equality issues as other females - I don't know if they offer insight on this issue since we're all in a "trying to survive" mode. But they don't deal with the paternity issue, so I think they do have somethings to say about some aspects of committed relationships.

I know that one criticism of the gay marriage push is the idea that monogamy, etc. doesn't need to be a part of how one is acceptable to society. For me, I view the religious opposition to "gayness" in general as a tell for the disgust for femaleness - b/c of the stereotype of how a male treats another male in a sexual relationship. I find it offensive for males to view my desire as disgusting if it's placed in the context of two males.

Monogamy is just easier when you have kids and are trying to live in such a way that you can afford to retire, etc. etc. But the reality is that even within monogamous relationships, women, esp. religious women that I've known, read romance novels and fantasize or just simply get aroused by the idea of others having sex - tho they would never see it in those terms... voyeurism as a turn on. So, it's not "cheating" if you don't make bodily contact with someone else, I guess.

I think the biggest problem with monogamy is boredom. The trade off is in other aspects of the relationship, and the relationship of parents with their children. But, even within monogamy, I think both women and men get aroused by others - they just take that feeling back to their marriage bed.

I don't care what someone is doing or not doing until they start telling everyone else what to do - or try to pretend they're doing something they're not, and this somehow makes them "good" in comparison to, say, someone who did the same thing but also decided not to stay with a partner.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Faithfulness in a marriage HappyMe Apr 2013 #1
I agree with the little person.. one_voice Apr 2013 #12
Agree, and agree. n/t LadyHawkAZ Apr 2013 #30
No but its relevant to being a human Drale Apr 2013 #2
Well, yours is certainly ONE opinion MNBrewer Apr 2013 #10
True, but misleading. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #3
This. nt redqueen Apr 2013 #5
Feminism is Ethics; Faithfulness is Morals Taverner Apr 2013 #7
I don't think there's a universally-applied distinction between the two. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #8
Sure there is. Taverner Apr 2013 #9
There is no universal difference between the two. Many philosophers use them interchangeably. Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 #16
i actually like this distinction and find it helpful.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #28
Define "faithfulness" MNBrewer Apr 2013 #11
I think it's whatever the couple decides on BainsBane Apr 2013 #18
I don't, but I think you possibly should be for different reasons. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #20
Separate issues get the red out Apr 2013 #4
whatever someone may say about it RainDog Apr 2013 #6
Maybe it's a straight thing MNBrewer Apr 2013 #13
I'm gay Aerows Apr 2013 #14
This exactly. It's between the married people and no one else. Butterbean Apr 2013 #19
To me? Aerows Apr 2013 #23
Yes, I was agreeing with your post above mine. Sorry, my brain is scrambled these days. n/t Butterbean Apr 2013 #33
Then, IMO, you've made a commitment to monogamy, not a commitment to the relationship MNBrewer Apr 2013 #22
A commitment to the relationship Aerows Apr 2013 #24
I think it's a married with children thing RainDog Apr 2013 #17
Threesomes Aerows Apr 2013 #26
to each her/his own and all that RainDog Apr 2013 #32
Even polyamorous people usually pledge faithfulness to those they are dating. Gravitycollapse Apr 2013 #15
There seems to be widespread disagreement on what the word "Feminism" even means. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #21
Trust maintained when offered is relevant to everyone. Posteritatis Apr 2013 #25
To my mind unconnected; and I'm not interested in either as a MORAL issue. snot Apr 2013 #27
it's actually fairly simple.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #29
I am not married, but have been in a number of relationships where it was understood that smirkymonkey Apr 2013 #31
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Marital faithfulness is ...»Reply #17