Monogamy versus Polyamory - Research Paper Example

Is Monogamy a more sustainable relationship style than polyamory? and Introduction Times are changing and so are societies and cultures. What was being upheld as the absolute truth in the 1980s may not pass as even the truth in the twenty first century. One of the areas that have witnessed radical changes and paradigmatic shifts is the concept of love and relationships (Ruskin, 2012). The Western culture, for centuries, has predominantly supported monogamy as opposed to other relationship styles. Monogamy is the relationship style where one has a single spouse (Goudreau, 2012). The relationship partners cannot have a romantic relationship with another person outside their relationship as long as they are together. However, the circumstances are rapidly changing and the institution of marriage has been brought into great disrepute by the rising number of divorces worldwide. This has raised the question of whether monogamy is still relevant in the modern times or people should instead embrace the various forms of non-monogamous relationship styles such as polyamory (Barker, 2005). On this backdrop, this paper seeks to determine whether monogamy is a more sustainable relationship style than polyamory. The paper proposes and roots for polyamory and more specifically egalitarian polyamory as the most sustainable relationship style in the prevailing circumstances. Monogamy versus Polyamory Monogamy is the relationship style where a person has one spouse. For so long, monogamy has been upheld by the Western culture as the ideal and the right relationship style (Gourdreau, 2012). Strassberg (2003) asserts that the most significant benefit of monogamy is fidelity. The partners in the relationship uphold sexual faithfulness. Sexual fidelity implies that neither spouse could get into a sexual interaction that potentially makes the other partner feel uncomfortable (Goudreau, 2012). The emphasis is thus on sexual, emotional and spiritual exclusivity with the spouse. Monogamy has, however, come under close scrutiny in the recent past due to the increased cases of divorce. It is estimated that around 53% of marriages in the US end up in divorce before the fifth year of marriage (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). According to Ashbee (2007), a significant percentage of these divorces are grounded on sexual infidelity. Furthermore, incidences of cheating scandals among celebrities, political and power elites have also increased remarkably. Monogamy has, thus, showed that it is less sustainable in contemporary times where people are demanding to get their needs satisfied be it by a single or multiple partners. Given the evident challenges facing relationships based on monogamy models, polyamory has developed as the new solution (Barker, 2011). Polyamory is, essentially, a relationship style where one is in more than one loving relationship and all the parties involved have given their consent to be in the arrangement (Bennett, 2009). The relationship may be emotional, spiritual, and sexual or any mix of the three but the bottom line is that it is based on love. Sex in these relationships is not viewed as merely a recreational activity but also as a bonding activity (Ashbee, 2007). There is no demand for sexual exclusivity unless the individuals in the relationship have assented to it. Furthermore, polyamorous relationships do not have to end up in marriages; some do while some do not. Contemporary research indicates that regardless of whether the polyamory relationships end up in a marriage or not they tend to last longer than most marriages in the US given that the divorce rate stands at 53% (Klesse, 2006). The openness and truthful communication in polyamorous relationships is what makes it last longer as the relationship participants have the ability and flexibility to form other relationships and satisfy their other needs which may be unsatisfied in the primary relationship (Ruskin, 2012). Most importantly, polyamorous relationships are built on the concept of compersion which, generally, infers to lack of jealousy feeling (Barker, 2005). One or all the persons in the relationship can get into sexual relationships with other significant others. This does not mean that the partners in the polyamorous relationships do not feel jealous; they do. They just have better open communication with their partners and accept them the way they are (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). People in polyamorous relationships have a different view from others as far as sexual relationships are concerned. They do not view sexual and emotional exclusivity as the core of a long-term loving relationship (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). Sex in the relationship is just but one of the many major aspects of the long term relationship. Given that sex, which has been the divisive factor for most monogamous marriages, is effectively handled in polyamorous relationships, it is clear that the most sustainable form of relationship that guarantees a long term relationship is polyamory. The openness is facilitated by values of trust and loyalty and a strong emphasis on overcoming the feelings of jealousy. According to Goudreau’s “What’s wrong with monogamy?”, one of the most outstanding benefits of monogamy over non-monogamous relationship was that it had group beneficial effects in that instances of rape and physical abuses are reduced (Goudreau, 2012). However, polyamorous relationships can also achieve the same if not more. This is because the relationships are based on trust and loyalty. Polyamorous relationships are based on fulfillment of an individual’s needs (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). One of the reasons why rape and other sexual harassments happen is because the people perpetrating them are not satisfied in relationships. There are even instances where a husband rapes a wife. These sexually-induced crimes can be mitigated through shifting the relationship models from monogamy to polyamory (Barker, 2005). People will get sex and other benefits whenever they want with as many partners as they can get into romantic relationships with. The other advantage that monogamy has had over non-monogamous relationships is that they were seen as an important force in boosting child investment in families (Klesse, 2006). Proponents such as Goudreau (2012) argue that monogamous relationships essentially shift the focus of the male partners from looking for other women to making paternal investment on their children. Instances of child neglect in families were reduced. When compared to non-monogamous relationships, monogamous relationships presented a better chance for children’s interests to be taken care of as the parents focus all their energy on their family and children. Polyamorous relationships offer the same platform coupled with greater flexibility (Bennett, 2009). Since it is a loving relationship, there is a huge probability that the partners will be involved in one another’s lives in multidimensional context. The children involved will be taken care of collectively (Ruskin, 2012). The children of one partner can view the other relationship partner as a friend, a step parent, an aunt or an uncle. Regardless of how the significant other is treated, the children will have a backing of both parties because the openness in communication will facilitate an enabling environment. Therefore, the argument that monogamous relationships reduce instances of child neglect more than forms of non-monogamous relationships does not hold anymore. Furthermore, proponents of monogamy relationship styles such as Jenna Goudreau argue that monogamous relationships offer the best chance of successfully maintaining emotional security and further partners’ satisfaction (Goudreau, 2012). This is because the partners in the relationship devote all their energies and efforts towards making the relationship work and satisfying their partners. They do not sneak around trying to get into other relationships (Goudreau, 2012). The sexual fidelity also ensures that the chances of getting unwanted pregnancies outside marriage or contracting STDs are reduced considerably. Proponents of polyamory such as Strassberg (2003) offer a powerful counterargument. For a start, they argue that there is nothing like sexual fidelity; that all animal species are potentially polygamous, human beings not excluded. According to Bennett (2009), monogamy was more sustainable two decades ago when there was little technological advancement. Right now the current technology which has engraved the psyche of getting one wants when one wants it makes maintaining a monogamous relationship a great challenge. The Western culture has traditionally perpetuated the belief that one partner is capable of satisfying most or all of the other partners’ needs ranging from intimacy to companionship and beyond (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). However, this perception is misguided and untrue since one partner cannot satisfy all or most of the needs. Polyamorous relationships offer a way out. The pornified culture that is exacerbated by technological advancements makes monogamy unsustainable. Youths are getting sexual information and experience at very young ages. Obtaining sex becomes easy from a young age and will not change even as they grow up and get into serious relationships (Barker, 2011). Polyamorous relationships are, therefore, the best bet towards containing promiscuity by legitimizing it hence making the relationship more sustainable given the prevailing circumstances. Lastly, since polyamorous relationships have shown the tendency to outlast monogamous ones, they should be given a chance. It is estimated that there are more than 500,000 families in polyamorous relationships in the US alone representing a 40% rise from the start of the millennium (Mitchell, Bartholomew and Cobb, 2014). The trend should be encouraged. Additionally, there are no laws prohibiting getting into multiple relationships. The aggrieved party in such an arrangement can only terminate the relationship, and if married, file for divorce based on adultery grounds (Ashbee, 2007). Therefore, there is no way to enforce single-partner relationships and attempt to enforce the same will only be an exercise in futility. The most sustainable arrangement is letting everyone make informed choices and get into relationship that best satisfy their needs. In conclusion, it is clear that polyamorous relationships can offer just as much as monogamous relationships do. However, polyamorous relationships offer a way to circumvent the challenges brought about by the changing times which monogamy has been unable to adapt to such as increased pornography (Klesse, 2006). Polyamory, thus, is a more sustainable relationship style than monogamy. Future research should be dedicated towards inventing processes that further legitimizes polyamory so that more people can understand and adopt it for their own benefit. The research should also focus on the extent to which polyamorous relationships enhance need fulfillment and the effect they have on the level of the partner’s satisfaction and commitment in the relationship. This, hopefully, should provide an insight into polyamory and indicate how better suited it is in the modern times than monogamy. References Ashbee, E. (2007). Polyamory, social conservatism and the same-sex marriage in the US. Politics, 27(2), 101-107. Barker, M. (2005). This is my partner, and this is my…partner’s partner; constructing a polyamorous identity in a monogamous world. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18, 75-88. Barker, M. (2011). Monogamies and non-monogamies, a response to “The challenge of monogamy: Bringing it out of the closet and into the treatment room” by Marriane Brandon. Sexual & Relationship Therapy, 26(3), 281-287. Bennett, J. (2009). Only you. And you. And you. Retrieved from http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/07/28/only-you-and-you-and-you.html Goudreau, J. (2012). What’s so wrong with monogamy? Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2012/02/13/monogamy-sexual-fidelity-marriage-relationships/ Klesse, C. (2006). Polygamy and its “others”: Contesting the terms of non-monogamy. Sexualities, 9, 565-583. Mitchell, M., Bartholomew, K., and Cobb, R. (2014). Need fulfillment in polyamorous relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 329-339. Ruskin, K. (2012). Monogamy vs Polygamy- Are humans built to love one or many? Retrieved from http://www.drkarenruskin.com/monogamy-vs-polyamory-are-humans-built-to-love-one-or-many/ Strassberg, M. (2003). The challenge of postmodern monogamy: Considering polyamory. Capital University Law Review, 31(3), 439-563. Read More