Is Marriage Natural?

[Zenister 0]

Actually I’d imagine the 'straw that broke the camel's back' was "jealousy, resentment, even hate"

if you aren’t capable of dealing with these emotions in a rational manner your not going to do well in any kind of relationship.. the difference is traditional marriages have less opportunity for these to become an issue. There are fewer reasons to be jealous in the first place, and if something else is going on its easier just to lie and hide, than deal with the real issues of jealousy and resentment before it becomes hate..

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[billvon 2,991]

>The two marriages that were considered "open relationships" had children
>involved and had FAR more problems due to the "open relationship" policy.

I've had the opposite experience. The marriages I've seen have the most problems were the "closed" ones, where such issues were never discussed. In one case the woman didn't want her husband looking at other women, for example. But they never talked about it, and he figured she was just being loony. He made a show of not looking at women while he was with her, chuckling all the while. Then he became friends with a woman at work and started seeing a lot of her at work (for lunch, etc.) The woman found out and went ballistic - but not to him. She just started bitching to her friends about what a cold-hearted bastard he was. She just stopped talking to her husband, because "that's what he deserved." The guy couldn't figure it out. The woman figured she was 100% in the right - he broke the rules.

I don't know what ended up happening (I left NY before the inevitable end came) but that's an example of where closed relationships simply don't work. Despite what people think, there ARE no hard and fast rules for marriage - the rules are whatever both people agree on. It may involve no looking at other women. It may involve being able to be intimate with other people, but no sex. It might involve casual sex with other people but no real intimacy. But the important part is that you have to talk about what it is you want, no matter who you have sex (or don't have sex) with.

[peregrinerose 0]

This doesn't sound like a closed marriage, it sounds like an incredibly insecure woman and a marriage full of crappy communication.

My marriage is definitely closed... but we aren't dead or blind. Yes, both of us notice other people that are cute, but neither of us is interested in anyone but the other. Sex is great, incredibly open communication, we can tell each other anything. Maybe because we got married later than most people do that we managed to find one another. Neither of us wants to change the other, for all our bizarre little quirks.

Open marriage or closed, the bottom line is that the success or failure is entirely dependent upon the two people in the relationship and the dynamic between them.

Is marriage natural? I don't know. I do know that I had a very wandering eye during my first marriage, and wanted to cheat. I also know that there have been absolutely no issues along those lines in my marriage now. It is good beyond words, why would either of us need anything else?

Jen

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[billvon 2,991]

> This doesn't sound like a closed marriage, it sounds like an incredibly
>insecure woman and a marriage full of crappy communication.

It was, but one of the reasons it was failing was that they assumed that all the "standard" rules applied and never discussed them - and then had different ideas on what "standard" rules were. My definition of a closed marriage is one where both people rely on the traditional definitions of marriage without talking about their own (differing) views on it.

>My marriage is definitely closed... but we aren't dead or blind. . . .Sex is
>great, incredibly open communication,

I think we're talking about two different things. To me, an open marriage isn't one where you have sex with other people - it's a marriage where the two of you set the rules without reference to anyone else's rules. It might mean you can look at other people and have really close friendships, or it might mean you can fool around but not have sex or whatever. But the difference between open and closed, to me, is who sets the rules. In an open relationship, the only rule-setters are the two people involved.

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

but I think we carry some of that evolutionary drive with us still.

That evolutionary drive has been built into us over millions of years. I can see the point about the male species wanting to spread his genes as far and wide as possible. But would you also say that for female, she would seek out a man that is stable, well to do and willing to stick around to raise the child. It seems like almost two conflicting points of view: one wants to spread his genes around, the other wants him to stay.

Your post got me thinking. Now I dont know wether marriage is unnatural or cheating is natural. Agh, TGIF.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Unfortunately, in the past two years...I have seen 3 open relationships end (2 in divorce)...

I suspect you know quite a few more people who are involved in succesful "non-standard" relationships, but have simply chosen not make it a subject of bonfire conversation. I suspect it's more likely the case that you've only found out about the failures.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[RoadRash 0]

Quote

[replyMarriage, as a social institution, exists primarily as a mechanism for the orderly transfer of property to descendants.


Michael

Yes, that is true, however, I believe that you have simplified it just a bit...



~R+R...Too much actually...but as I said in my previous post...I believe that you need to read up on the subject...

[kallend 2,027]

getting back to the original question:

How is "natural" defined in this context?

We know from anatomy and physiology that humans did not evolve as a monogamous species.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[crwmike 0]

Here is where you are missing my point...You are looking at it from OUR societies point of view...not that of another culture or for that matter another society. I'm looking at it from an anthropological standpoint.


~R+R..Sociology/Anthropology...there is a difference...

[vonSanta 0]

Quote

Quote

but I think we carry some of that evolutionary drive with us still.

That evolutionary drive has been built into us over millions of years. I can see the point about the male species wanting to spread his genes as far and wide as possible. But would you also say that for female, she would seek out a man that is stable, well to do and willing to stick around to raise the child. It seems like almost two conflicting points of view: one wants to spread his genes around, the other wants him to stay.

Your post got me thinking. Now I dont know wether marriage is unnatural or cheating is natural. Agh, TGIF.

Nah, the woman holds the good cards here; she'll just have some handsome daredevil deposit his seeds, and then hook up with a caretaker, convincing the latter that the offspring is either his or that it's a good idea to take care of it.

Best of both worlds. And this stuff happens all the time in "the real world".

Anyway, relationships are for dependent people. . They get what they deserve.

Santa Von GrossenArsch
I only come in one flavour
ohwaitthatcanbemisunderst

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Anyway, relationships are for dependent people. . They get what they deserve.

Cool....you don't know how you've just eased my mind....lol . Thanks for putting that into a new perspective....

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[vonSanta 0]

Sometimes truth is a soothing thing, no?

Santa Von GrossenArsch
I only come in one flavour
ohwaitthatcanbemisunderst

[tandembrent 0]

in my opinion, marriage was and still is a way for a woman to survive with means for the remainder of her life, after the death of her husband/ provider.

opinions are like assholes, we all have one and they usually smell like shit!

peace,
brent

***

~~~~Green grass and high clouds forever~~~~
no matter where you go, there you are!

[RoadRash 0]

Quote

Here is where you are missing my point...You are looking at it from OUR societies point of view...not that of another culture or for that matter another society. I'm looking at it from an anthropological standpoint.


~R+R..Sociology/Anthropology...there is a difference...

-------------------

Fair enough. I do hope, however, you will have a bit of understanding for my failing to get your point ...unless your point is that we all need to read more.

Just poking fun at ya, hun. Anthropologically speaking, what are the purposes of marriage?

Michael

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

is designed to pump out the previous guys' semen before putting in one's own are not monogamous in nature.

Really? pump out the previous guys' semen? Got a link? Thanks.

Why do you need a link - just look at the shape and compare it to the piston in a tire pump. Why do you think we take a long time to come (unless we're 16)? More pumping time to eliminate the competition before making our own deposit.

Well, I just had to follow up on this:

www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=secrets-of-the-phallus

Empirical evidence in favor of my assertion.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

is designed to pump out the previous guys' semen before putting in one's own are not monogamous in nature.

Really? pump out the previous guys' semen? Got a link? Thanks.

Why do you need a link - just look at the shape and compare it to the piston in a tire pump. Why do you think we take a long time to come (unless we're 16)? More pumping time to eliminate the competition before making our own deposit.

Well, I just had to follow up on this:

www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=secrets-of-the-phallus

Empirical evidence in favor of my assertion.

I don’t think I have ever read an article that mentioned penis so many times

Not sure how much I believe in the theory, the penis could be shaped the way it is just so penetration can be easier and more pleasurable.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Why do you need a link - just look at the shape and compare it to the piston in a tire pump. Why do you think we take a long time to come (unless we're 16)? More pumping time to eliminate the competition before making our own deposit.

Well, I just had to follow up on this:

www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=secrets-of-the-phallus

Empirical evidence in favor of my assertion.


That's bollocks. It's shaped that way because it resembles a triceratops; and everyone knows that boys like dinosaurs. Case closed.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=triceratops&gbv=2&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=tricer&gs_rfai=

[Hjeada 0]

Quote

Empirical evidence in favor of my insertion

Fixed it for ya...

Dudeist Skydiver #0511

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Empirical evidence in favor of my insertion

Fixed it for ya...

Maybe I should have posted it in Bonfire.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.