Originally Posted by lawleypop

I'm being serious! It's not a game.

I'd love to have this conversation with someone.

It was going to over run the condoms thread (http://www.macinsiders.com/showthread.php?t=2441 7) - not that there's much left of it.

So: pros/cons of relationships, anyone?

Why limit yourself to just having one great connection with just one person? It's more than possible to have connections with multiple people but people don't look for more than one because it's "taboo."

Edit: Also, I might have to bail out early 'cause I have to study for a midterm. ;(

Based on your posts, I'm surprised you would let "taboo" or political correctness stop you! Being politically incorrect is the greatest joy life can give (might be stretching it, but whatever).

How does being with one person stop you from having "connections" with other people? Besides sex (in most cases), you can do everything else with other people that you can with your partner.

Edit: 10-4. I've been making Q cards this entire time

Originally Posted by madquarker

Based on your posts, I'm surprised you would let "taboo" or political correctness stop you! Being politically incorrect is the greatest joy life can give (might be stretching it, but whatever).

How does being with one person stop you from having "connections" with other people? Besides sex (in most cases), you can do everything else with other people that you can with your partner.

Edit: 10-4. I've been making Q cards this entire time

Nono, it doesn't stop me. Lmao, don't worry, I practice what I preach.

I'm saying it stops other people. Many people don't pursue strong connections because it's taboo and generally frowned upon.

And let's say one person in the relationship is okay with pursuing other strong connections in non-sexual ways. That doesn't mean their S/O will be okay with that. Many view it as "emotional cheating." (which I think is a load of bullocks but whatever. =P)

I think it all depends on how you describe "strong connections". If your S/O has a problem with you having other really good friends, then that's there problem IMO.

I can see what you mean by "emotional cheating", but it would still have to be taken pretty far to be called that..... I hope. Better check haha

Originally Posted by madquarker

I think it all depends on how you describe "strong connections". If your S/O has a problem with you having other really good friends, then that's there problem IMO.

I can see what you mean by "emotional cheating", but it would still have to be taken pretty far to be called that..... I hope. Better check haha

Well for example, you feel the same way about someone as you feel about your S/O. The only difference is is that you're not "dating" them. As an example.

I think the above situation (minus the S/O) is an ideal world to live in. Everyone has their cake and eats it too!

I mean, I haven't been in a relationship in a long time (olol) but last I checked, it's not a norm to be watching a movie in someone else's arms while you have a bf.

Now lemme ask you. What's the problem with the above situation? Personally, I don't see one but lots of people in relationships would have a problem with that, agree or disagree?

By our very nature, we're social animals. I don't understand why people strive for that "one" person. You should be with anyone and everyone. People should be promiscuous (be it sexually, emotionally, whatever!).

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Well for example, you feel the same way about someone as you feel about your S/O. The only difference is is that you're not "dating" them. As an example.

I think the above situation (minus the S/O) is an ideal world to live in. Everyone has their cake and eats it too!

I mean, I haven't been in a relationship in a long time (olol) but last I checked, it's not a norm to be watching a movie in someone else's arms while you have a bf.

Now lemme ask you. What's the problem with the above situation? Personally, I don't see one but lots of people in relationships would have a problem with that, agree or disagree?

By our very nature, we're social animals. I don't understand why people strive for that "one" person. You should be with anyone and everyone. People should be promiscuous (be it sexually, emotionally, whatever!).

I wouldn't say people should be generally promiscuous; I think they should decide that for themselves. I don't think there's anything wrong with the situation that you described.

I know that saying it's a personal decision is a wimpy way out, but really; why should society care if some people want to settle down with one person, while others want to keep playing the field? Both exist right now, and the latter is slowly becoming more accepted. Your day will come! (har har)

Third situation: many couples consider themselves "couples", but still allow outside "activities". Again, it would depend on each person.

(I'm aware I'm making a huge generalization here) Another issue to consider is that males (as a group) for the most part are concerned with quantity. They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs. Women on the other hand, DO have that connection so are more inclined to want one person.

Obviously that's not the case everywhere, but it does seem to be the prevalent under current.

Edit: other opinions are welcome as well!

Originally Posted by madquarker

I wouldn't say people should be generally promiscuous; I think they should decide that for themselves. I don't think there's anything wrong with the situation that you described.

I know that saying it's a personal decision is a wimpy way out, but really; why should society care if some people want to settle down with one person, while others want to keep playing the field? Both exist right now, and the latter is slowly becoming more accepted. Your day will come! (har har)

Third situation: many couples consider themselves "couples", but still allow outside "activities". Again, it would depend on each person.

(I'm aware I'm making a huge generalization here) Another issue to consider is that males (as a group) for the most part are concerned with quantity. They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs. Women on the other hand, DO have that connection so are more inclined to want one person.

Obviously that's not the case everywhere, but it does seem to be the prevalent under current.

Edit: other opinions are welcome as well!

Well of course people can choose to want to be with just one person. I just don't understand why. There will always be other people whom you feel just as strongly connected to (if not more!) than the person you "choose" to be with.

I need to WHY people choose this route. Is it being it's "safer?" It's a security blanket? There's always more odds of rejection the more you put yourself out there. Maybe some people can't cope with someone saying no to them?

I just find it mundane. The thought of just being with one person for "the rest of my life" (or till we get divorced =P) is just.. yucky.


"(I'm aware I'm making a huge generalization here) Another issue to consider is that males (as a group) for the most part are concerned with quantity. They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs. Women on the other hand, DO have that connection so are more inclined to want one person."


I'm so offended. XD I'm more emotionally detached than most men. =P Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs." If you're implying that men sleep around more than women, then they can be sure the baby is theirs because it would have to be the woman who sleeps around a lot for there to be confusion about who's the father. =P Maybe I'm taking it too literally, I really don't know what you mean by it.

And to be quite frank, why consider yourself in a relationship at all if you're fooling around emotionally/sexually with other people? If you're gonna be promiscuous, just be promiscuous!

Although I hate when people pull the society/culture card, I'm sure this has a huge impact on it. Why is "being alone" so looked down upon? I'll argue to the death it's a taught behaviour.

What I meant by my previous post (I realized I didn't explain it too well) is that we are social animals. We thrive on it, we crave it. We crave interaction. We crave to be needed, we crave to be wanted. So why do people want that "one" person when it comes to relationships, but wants as many friends and acquaintances as possible when it comes to other aspects of their lives? (just a sweeping generality here)

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Well of course people can choose to want to be with just one person. I just don't understand why. There will always be other people whom you feel just as strongly connected to (if not more!) than the person you "choose" to be with.

I need to WHY people choose this route. Is it being it's "safer?" It's a security blanket? There's always more odds of rejection the more you put yourself out there. Maybe some people can't cope with someone saying no to them?

I just find it mundane. The thought of just being with one person for "the rest of my life" (or till we get divorced =P) is just.. yucky.


"(I'm aware I'm making a huge generalization here) Another issue to consider is that males (as a group) for the most part are concerned with quantity. They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs. Women on the other hand, DO have that connection so are more inclined to want one person."


I'm so offended. XD I'm more emotionally detached than most men. =P Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "They can never be *certain* that that baby is theirs." If you're implying that men sleep around more than women, then they can be sure the baby is theirs because it would have to be the woman who sleeps around a lot for there to be confusion about who's the father. =P Maybe I'm taking it too literally, I really don't know what you mean by it.

And to be quite frank, why consider yourself in a relationship at all if you're fooling around emotionally/sexually with other people? If you're gonna be promiscuous, just be promiscuous!

Although I hate when people pull the society/culture card, I'm sure this has a huge impact on it. Why is "being alone" so looked down upon? I'll argue to the death it's a taught behaviour.

What I meant by my previous post (I realized I didn't explain it too well) is that we are social animals. We thrive on it, we crave it. We crave interaction. We crave to be needed, we crave to be wanted. So why do people want that "one" person when it comes to relationships, but wants as many friends and acquaintances as possible when it comes to other aspects of their lives? (just a sweeping generality here)

I learned this from my evolution and human behaviour psych course. Addressing the "men can't be SURE the baby is theirs". Most surveys that ask males and females what would hurt them more (finding their S/O have passionate sex with someone else or being emotionally attached to someone else), males chose sex while females chose the emotional aspect. From an EVOLUTIONARY point of view, this occurs because females prefer that ONE male who will raise your children and provide for them (they don't get more babies by having sex with more than one man, they only get one) but men CAN have more babies (spread their genes more) by having sex with more woman. HOWEVER, if the woman you slept with has sex with someone else, she may not have your kid (therefore your genes). This is why men are more hurt when women cheat physically than emotionally. Women aren't supposed to care as much because even if he has sex with another woman, you're not going to be losing your chance to spread your genes.

Keep in mind this is from evolution. However, this is supposed to be preprogrammed into our minds. Men who had more sex --> more kids --> spread their genes and thus their "more sex" mind to more kids. It's a form of evolution.

I do agree with lawleypop when she says that we should be able to be promiscuous without society telling us not to and frowning upon those that do. If you are with your S/O and you find someone else who makes you happy, should you sacrifice that to keep this one? I find that if you want to be emotionally satisfied with someone, you need to spend time together (I don't think you can have a one nigh stand with your minds). If you spend time together, generally you become a couple. If you become a couple, your S/O will not want you to be with someone else that you could emotionally connect on a high level with. It's a little hard to do in my opinion (but this is just from thinking about the situation, I haven't attempted to be with more than one guy at once).

Women.

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Well of course people can choose to want to be with just one person. I just don't understand why. There will always be other people whom you feel just as strongly connected to (if not more!) than the person you "choose" to be with.

I need to WHY people choose this route. Is it being it's "safer?" It's a security blanket? There's always more odds of rejection the more you put yourself out there. Maybe some people can't cope with someone saying no to them?

I'm going to use myself as an example, just because I feel like I know myself and my situation better than I know anyone else or anyone else's situation.

Firstly, I believe that everyone is different, and how someone wants to live (be it with multiple partners, serial monogamy, etc, etc) is completely up to them, as long as their partner(s) are fully aware of the situation and fully consent.

I have thought a lot about what I want for myself in the future... I don't know why I care about the future so much, but I do... it's just the way I am. I'm fully convinced that I want the stereotypical, "traditional" western lifestyle, with a loving wife and a couple of kids. Does that mean I'll think this way forever? Not necessarily... but I feel quite strongly about it right now, so at the moment I suspect I will always want this.

Now, why do I want this? It could be for a number of reasons, some that I'm aware of, others I may not be aware of (psychology is complex!). One big reason is probably because my parents have been married for a long time (they had their 25th wedding anniversary two weeks ago), and while they've had fights, they've been completely loving and faithful the whole time (as far as I know anyways). When I see just how much my parents love each other, it really makes me want the same thing... I want to love someone that much. Does that mean you can't love multiple people to the extent that I percieve my parents loving each other? No... but I don't think I could love more than one person that much, and thinking about how well my parents know each other, it would take a very long time with a lot of good times/bad times to really get to know another person that well!

I've read that it takes something like at least 10,000 hours of practice at something to reach the level of "one of the best in the world" at it (ie professional athletes, the best musicians, car drivers, etc have practiced at least 10,000 hours to get to the level they are at). I honestly believe that in order to get to know and love someone to the extent that I want to, I'll need to fulfill something similar to the 10,000 hours of practice rule. A strong relationship takes a lot of time and effort, and frankly I don't think I would have the time and energy to really get to know and love more than one person in the same way.

There are other reasons/influences on my feelings on this topic, including being raised in the traditional western social structure... obviously I've been somewhat socially conditioned to think that the "one S/O at a time" rule is somewhat important. I've also thought about the possibility of having the same type of relationship with more than the one person I'm with, and I genuinely don't want it... it really doesn't appeal to me. I can have a bunch of really great close friends, but I would never spend as much time or put as much effort, or enjoy being with them as much as I do with my S/O.

I've written quite a bit, so I'll let people take in what I've said... I'd be happy to comment further if anyone is unclear on something I've said or w/e.

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Although I hate when people pull the society/culture card, I'm sure this has a huge impact on it. Why is "being alone" so looked down upon? I'll argue to the death it's a taught behaviour.

What I meant by my previous post (I realized I didn't explain it too well) is that we are social animals. We thrive on it, we crave it. We crave interaction. We crave to be needed, we crave to be wanted. So why do people want that "one" person when it comes to relationships

Duarch explained the evolutionary aspect of my argument much better than I did.

Regarding why people want that "one" person - how else would you constantly have companionship? Someone support you? Care for you? If you're moving between people so quickly, it would make that more difficult.

I agree with you regarding:

Originally Posted by lawleypop

...wants as many friends and acquaintances as possible when it comes to other aspects of their lives?

However, I think it's important to make a few distinctions. Are people really doing this? I have a ton of acquaintances, but how many of them would I consider them actually *friends*? Not even a tenth of them.

People you could always count on for help or are genuine friends - those, I think would be where we get our "craving for need/desire" fulfilled.

I agree with Taunton in our desire for one person, but I admit I can see the attractiveness of remaining a roaming person. Maybe I'll change in the future. I don't know.

I agree that it's difficult to write about; I couldn't really do my argument justice unless I took a lot longer with this post.

One more thing I'd like to say. From an evolutionary and physiological point of view you can determine:

Polygyny (one male mating with multiple females) by -
Male size in relation to female size. If some males have more than one woman, some will have none. There is more competition in this situation between males and the larger the male, the more likely he will win in a physical battle. Humans are SLIGHTLY polygynous (because males are larger than females). You will see that in monogomous species, males are females are very similar in size.



Polyandry (one female mating with multiple males) by-
Males having larger testicles. If that female is going to have more than just your sperm ready to fertilize her egg, there had better be more of your sperm. Bigger testicles --> bigger sperm. This is seen in chimpanzees where I believe males have more than one mate as do females. However in gorillas, the male has a harem of females and his testicles are very small. Human testicles are between these two sizes.


Learned this in Psych 3F03 in case any of you are interested

Originally Posted by Duarch

If that female is going to have more than just your sperm ready to fertilize her egg, there had better be more of your sperm. Bigger testicles --> bigger sperm. This is seen in chimpanzees where I believe males have more than one mate as do females. However in gorillas, the male has a harem of females and his testicles are very small. Human testicles are between these two sizes.

Yay for semen!