The Great Blackdragon Debate: Are Open Marriages and Polyamory Good or Bad For Society? Part One


Get Free Email Updates!

Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!


The Great Blackdragon Debate: Are Open Marriages and Polyamory Good or Bad For Society? Part One

-By Caleb Jones

A few weeks back I put out the call for someone who disagreed with me strongly on a particular issue to debate me on this blog. The call was answered, the debate happened, and now here it is. The specific rules of the debate are listed here.

A few guys had several good ideas to debate me on, including politics and monogamy. Politics is fun to debate, and maybe we'll do that for the next Blackdragon Debate, but I wanted to keep the debate topic somewhat on-topic to women. The "monogamy is bad" debate I've had a bazillion times with a bazillion people so I'm little tired of that one, not to mention I've already laid out my case for that here.

I finally went with a guy named Soul, who's commented on this blog before. (Full disclosure: I happen to know Soul personally and he's used my services. That doesn't mean I was easy on him, as you're about to see.) The issue he wanted to debate was regarding monogamy, but in a way I've never discussed before. Thus the debate topic he chose is as follows:

RESOLVED: A society in which non-monogamy and sexual freedom are accepted social norms for both genders will fail because too many men & women will form unstable open relationships instead of nuclear families with stable pair-bonded couples, which will lead to social turmoil.

Soul will be arguing for, I will (of course) be arguing against. To be clear, this is not a debate on the validity of nonmonogamy for the individual, which even Soul admits is probably a good idea (Soul is married but not monogamous, both by choice). This is monogamy in regards to society at large.

Soul is a retired electronic engineer & cognitive neuroscientist, now working as an organizer in local small-scale agriculture, and is celebrating his 31st anniversary of an open marriage this week. (Congrats, Soul!) He was an academic debater in high school, and relishes the ability to argue with zest for either side of any issue. He's a very intelligent, knowledgeable guy as you're about to see.

One of the debate rules was to limit responses to four paragraphs. Both Soul and I took full advantage of that and both of us got too wordy at times. The next time I do a debate on this blog (and yes, I would like to do this again) I will tighten this up. Perhaps I'll implement an actual character limit on every response.

The debate was fought over eight "rounds", or responses, plus two closing statements. Because of the length of the debate, I'll post half of the debate here and the second half next week. As promised, I have presented Soul's responses here 100% raw and unedited by me, even when he gets a little testy with me. 🙂

Who was the winner of the debate? After reading part one today and part two next week, I'll let you decide.

Here we go:


Round One: Soul’s Opening Statement

Human societies need stable families centered around pair-bonded couples, to survive and prosper.  Children form healthy, well-integrated personalities when they grow up in loving households with both parents present and supportive.  In today's complex technological environment, it can take easily more than 20 years for children to complete their education and become fully independent, and during all that time they can benefit from the resources of an intact home base.  Stability can also be a benefit to the couple, as it helps to facilitate the accumulation of wealth and a sense of trusting companionship over time.  If the relationship is good, it can be an ongoing source of joy and emotional and sexual fulfillment for both partners.   Whereas men and women who do not have a sexual relationship partner tend to be frustrated and lonely, and children from broken families, primarily raised by single parents, are much more likely to live in poverty and to have poor outcomes in school.

Long-term monogamy is a simple, logical structure which offers the possibility that most everyone in society will find a stable hook-up: a law of nature, as explained in Genesis: "there went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded."   Also, individuals in relationships can thrive based on the expectation of their partner's faithfulness.  Sexual jealousy may be a result of innate and instinctual desires and fears about the way we want our partners to behave for our own benefit. If the Freudians are correct, subconscious processes related to childhood development may also be a factor in causing jealousy: an amorous competitor for a loved one’s affection can excite the Oedipus complex resulting in projections of the competitor into a parental role, re-stimulating deep emotional triggers. Perhaps for all these reasons, women (as well as men) find it very emotionally difficult when their sexual partner is non-monogamous.  Sexual jealousy can be experienced very powerfully even when there's an understanding that fidelity is not expected.  All of these reasons mean that monogamy will always be seen as a desirable norm in society, although today it must compete with other relationship ideals.

Since the "sexual revolution" of the 1960's, Western Civilization has been on a trend towards creating a society in which sexual freedom is also an accepted social norm for both genders.  And what we've learned is that many people cannot responsibly handle this freedom.  We are discovering that the raw sexual appetites of men and women are unruly, illogical and irreconcilable.  In an environment of sexual freedom,  unstable open relationships flourish in their destructive power.  Highly successful, confident and competitive men (like BD) find that they can have simultaneous sexual relationships with multiple women, whose hypergamous preference leads them to at least temporarily accept a partial share of that man's attention.  However, women in these relationships experience enough jealousy and anguish over their reasonable desire for exclusivity, that they come and go from the relationship, sometimes repetitively.  As the  blogger "Heartiste" ever-so-humbly wrote, "Most girls who have torrid flings with alphas might learn what kind of player warning signs to watch for, but their hearts will ache for one more of his touches, and they won’t be able to bond very well with any future men who don’t rise to the standards set by her alpha ex.... those memories will be like stones dangling from heavy chains tied to her soul. They will haunt her for years, even into the bed of whatever future beta she marries."  One man can affect dozens or even hundreds of women this way. Meanwhile, young men who watch the  "cock carousel"  from the sidelines, are also damaged: filled with resentment and a sense of social injustice, questioning their own self-worth, they often never really understand what hit them.

So in order to survive, couples and families need a socially supportive environment in which long-term monogamy is the preferred and expected behavior. At a legal level, we need to restore the idea that marriage is a contract with consequences for failure to perform.  Traditional marriage included the concept that the man is the source of leadership for the couple, and also that marriage includes the expectation of  ongoing sexual availability.   We know now that men and women are not naturally monogamous, so it would be healthy for lapses to be treated with compassion and understanding rather than punishment; but nevertheless they are mistakes, not to be applauded but rather to be treated as symptoms of problems. Considering the current situation, I think there's a lot of value in teaching men to respond with courage, "alpha" confidence, and even "game" to get respect and love from women.  But it's going too far, to see rapid turnover in multiple sexual relationships as the new normal, or as a desirable goal for men to aspire to.   Bloggers like Blackdragon who advocate for open relationships and non-monogamy are not helping to reverse the trend to social decay in America; on the contrary they are unwittingly part of the problem.

Round Two: Blackdragon’s Response

I agree that a pair-bonded couple is best for both children and society, and I agree that children from divorced families are hurt, often hurt badly. In a minute I’m going to use exactly that to demonstrate my point. So we have no disagreement there (though my general attitude is “society” always finds a way to take care of itself, and usually “society” would be better off if people stopped trying to “do what’s best for society” and instead focused energy on making their own lives better, happier, and more productive). I also agree that jealously is biological and painful, and can even be uncomfortable even when monogamy is not expected. Where you’re wrong is stating that monogamy “has always been seen as a desirable norm in society”. Actually polygamy (one husband many wives) was the desirable norm in most societies for much of human history. Polygamy was very normal, indeed preferred, for hundreds if not thousands of years, reaching into the modern era. Southern Chinese cultures were widely practicing polygamy as recently as the 1970’s before westernization set in, and middle eastern Muslims still practice it. If you study ancient history, the true mass chaos of constant wars, plague, famine, and civil unrest started in earnest well after monogamy became the mandated norm, starting around 300 AD during the rise of the Catholic papacy and Constantine's use of the (admittedly weakened) the power of the Roman Empire to spread Christianity abroad. This ushered in the Dark Ages, arguably the worst 700 years of contiguous human history.  I’m not saying monogamy caused the Dark Ages, nor am I saying the world prior to 300 AD was a cakewalk, but you have to admit that A) polygamy as a societal norm didn’t cause mass chaos, particularly as compared to the harsh realities of the time, and B) monogamy didn't stabilize anything…one could even make the argument it made things worse (but that’s a different topic). Not that I’m for polygamy; I’m for either just-sex (FB), polyamory (MLTR) or serious-but-open relationships/marriages (OLTR).

You talk about the negative feelings associated with some open relationships, like the women always wanting that Alpha she had before and beta men feeling bad they don’t get to participate (which is silly since they can participate any time they wish; all they have to do is make the decision to become more Alpha, a decision I had to make myself many years ago). Here’s the problem: The negative feelings you describe are MILD, and I mean MILD when compared to...

A. Discovering your monogamous partner has cheated on you.

B. Going through the pain of a breakup or divorce when your partner is leaving you and you don’t want them to leave, not to mention the damage this does to your emotions, life, finances, and children.

Between those two above feelings and a woman “longing for an Alpha” or a man feeling a little jealous, it’s no fucking contest. The two above are far, far worse. Just ask anyone who’s been cheated on or who’s been divorced (or experienced a similar big breakup). And don’t forget, as you yourself correctly implied, both of those things are standard parts of monogamy; there is no avoiding them in the vast majority of cases, since monogamy is not how humans were designed. You’re pointing out what’s bad about nonmonogamy, and I agree with those negative aspects. The problem is the negative aspects of monogamy are far, far worse. How is an over 60% divorce rate in most cities or a 70% to 77% infidelity rate in most long-term marriages good for society? How is it stable for its adults or children? You say encouraging open relationships undermines society, but you forget the horrific damage monogamy is currently doing to society. That means you must show that serious-but-open pair-bonded relationships will cause more damage to society than an over 60% divorce rate and a 77% infidelity rate(!). Good luck with that. I’m all ears.

Round Three: Soul

Blackdragon, I couldn't agree with you more that the institution of marriage in America today is deeply fucked up. What I'm debating is whether the problem is that men and women, against all odds, are still trying to get married, get committed and have kids; or whether the problem is that there's entirely too much sexual freedom and non-monogamy in our culture, and we need to bring back some good old-fashioned ethics and practical common sense into our sex lives. Our topic refers to "A society in which non-monogamy and sexual freedom are accepted social norms for both genders," and I submit that in many ways, that is exactly the way things are. For single people, basically any sexual behavior is treated indulgently. Women are free to pursue one-night-stands, short bouts of serial monogamy, and (usually duplicitous) multiple simultaneous relationships, all with abandon. Men do the same, if they're alpha enough. Teenage girls may still gossip among themselves about who's too slutty, but nobody really cares. Everything is forgiven when a person says the magic words "I just haven't found the right partner yet." The only exception is that married people are still expected to give up their sexual freedom.

When couples do jump off the singles carousel together into a marriage, they find that the wives are longing for their husbands to behave like the highly experienced, confident, top-of-the-heap "Alpha Males" that they dated and fucked but couldn't get commitment from; and the husbands are completely beta-ized if not terrorized by their wives' bitchy unhappiness, their capability of easy infidelity, and their power in a divorce. It's a downward negative feedback spiral. And for young women bored with the "beta" they settled for, or for "needy alpha" men who lose their cool, divorce is buying another ticket back on the carousel. How can you imagine a situation that puts more tremendous pressure on our families; and how can you possibly blame this fiasco on men and women’s simple longing for stable committed monogamous relationships?

You suggest that open marriages (OLTR) will be perhaps more stable and less painful at failure than monogamous marriages. And that may be true, but OLTR is no panacea. First let me ask you: if your primary relationship is working well and your sexual and emotional needs are being met, then what is the point of exciting the emotional angst of jealousy in your wife, by going out and sleeping with another woman? How does that help her feel more love and commitment towards you? And if your exploits make your wife feel emboldened to sleep with another man, even if she's initially not that interested because she's satisfied with you -- what is to prevent her from forming a strong emotional bond with that person? Serious pursuit of OLTR feels like leaving your wife's bedroom door open and inviting trouble in. Furthermore, you and your wife are reaching out and involving yourselves with other peoples' lives, who may be confused about your level of availability, who may be negatively affected emotionally by the experience, or who may be motivated to break up your relationship for their own benefit. Your wife's other partners may not play by your rules, and women are not good at following rules and logical structures either. So if OLTR is not less stable and comforting than monogamous marriage in our society, I don't believe that it works any better, either. The problem is too much sexual freedom and polyamory in the world of single people, and OLTR is a band-aid when we need a tourniquet to staunch an open wound.

It's true that polygamy was practiced in the earliest historical civilizations, and still to the present day in Islam. Of course I'm not denying or ignoring that. But monogamy as an ideal has an equally ancient history -- as evidenced by the Egyptian archetype of Osiris, Isis and their child Horus; the Canaanite god Baal and his consort Astarte; and of course the biblical Adam and Eve. Polygamy in patriarchal cultures is a manifestation of the fact that men are competitive. The distribution of physical strength, intelligence and cunning is unequal, so some men will always emerge more victorious than others. Women have always had very simple taste in men: they prefer the best, the strongest, the wealthiest, the most powerful. Now, I'm not denying that most men in modern culture could benefit from Alpha Male 101 boot camp. I know I have. But the idea that we can all be alpha enough to pull an endless stream of 19-year-old supermodels, is basically a ridiculous pipe dream -- although no doubt a good way to sell E-books. Furthermore, women may enjoy their time in the king's harem, but they don't generally stick around for long -- that is unless you imprison the women and castrate the prison guards.

Round Four: Blackdragon

If I'm understanding you correctly, you would prefer that all this sexual freedom women now enjoy is bad. Indeed, woman's sexual freedom IS the cause of the high divorce rates now as compared to 50 years ago. If your solution is to go back to rigid laws (social or otherwise) restricting the sexual freedoms of women, all so we can get back to a 1950's style marriage system, then you already know I would strongly disagree with that on every level. As an individualist and libertarian I think personal freedom is the highest value of human life. I have no right whatsoever to tell you what to do with your personal life as long as you're not directly harming anyone else. If an adult woman goes out and has fully consensual sex with 20 guys and I don't like it, that's my problem. (The conversation changes drastically when we start talking about women making babies when they can't afford them. There I do agree there should be very harsh social punishments for women who do this. But I've talked about this before.)

You said that "it may be true" that OLTR is better than traditional monogamous marriage. Well, then we're done. I win. 🙂 You go on to list the reasons why OLTRs are not perfect, and I have said repeatedly that OLTRs are not perfect, but they are better. No one can offer you a perfect system. But I can offer you a better one.

I am not saying people will never feel jealousy in an OLTR. I am not saying people won't possibly break the rules in an OLTR. I have also said, many times, that OLTRs are not permanent. Just like monogamous marriages, an OLTR will likely come to end someday (unless both partners are well over age 60). I am not saying all men can be off-the-chart Alphas, nor do I expect them to. I am not saying that all men can fuck "an endless stream of 19-year-old supermodels". C'mon dude. Here's another important point: I not saying or expecting that if nonmonogamy becomes a societal norm EVERYONE will chose to jump into MLTRs or OLTRs. Even if those arrangements became normal, a huge swath of the population will still choose monogamy. There will always be a strong percentage of religious people, or needy people, or low-sex drive people, or hyper-jealous people who will choose monogamy over poly/open. Which is fine. Again, freedom. Choose what you like.

What I am saying is a man being married or living with an OLTR, with or without children, with a prenuptial agreement and no co-owned debts or assets, and having one or two occasional fuck buddies on the side is far superior than traditional monogamous marriage in literally every way, both for individuals AND society. (Except for the one possible downside of jealousy, but I'll happily take the one negative of jealousy over the 14 negatives of long-term monogamy.) Society would far more benefit from this arrangement than either the status quo or an oppressive 1950's conservatism. Far less cheating. Far less arguments, anger, and drama. Far less damaging, hateful divorces. (Divorces and breakups, yes. Angry, damaging, hateful ones, no.) Far less men being ripped away from their children. Far less screwed-up kids from having two divorced parents who hate each other. Far less lawyers getting rich from people's misery. Far less people using the family court systems as a weapon to get even. Far less terror and shock when one discovers their spouse has cheated on them. Far less dashed dreams and hopes for a Disney fairytale that was expected but impossible (even if the marriage lasts forever!). My alternative sounds like a much better society to me. Not perfect, but better.

Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.

This article was originally published on September 27, 2012


  • Jarrod 2012-09-27 10:59:52

    Too long, I'll try and read later.

  • Alejandro 2012-09-27 12:42:44

    I think its perfectly ok from the lenght, and Im certainly enjoying it so far!! Soul has some very good and well tought points, but ultimatelly he is arguing that the pre 1950 society where people were not so promiscuous and monogamy somehow "worked" was better for raising children and creating more stable family structures. This may be true, but even if this is the case, there is no realistic way for society to go back to how it was. Things are very different now. The question is what would be better for todays society and not for some hypotetical society on which the "good old fashioned ethics" are restored.

  • DaviT 2012-09-27 13:42:13

    As a matter of fact, never did human kind have less sexual desire/activity, libido or promiscuity than nowadays. Not before 1960's, not in the 50's, not before Christ, not ever. Women were oppressed and discriminated before, and perhaps that did modulate their cheating, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, that they didn't have the desire to do so, nor that they didn't do everything they could to guarantee plausible deniability and discretion. I believe its not healthy to live trying to deny reality and wishful-thinking that the Disney-prince-charming-forever-monogamous-model is the best and most perfect form of relationship. It just isn't. People simply don't function that way. I don't find valid the argument about most men (being betas) being envious of the alpha men who do fuck the women they want, as a deterrent to having OLTR. That is just simply their fault for choosing a faulty way of thinking and not realizing Disney is a fantasy. As BD says, becoming more alpha IS a decision, as it implies becoming the best, manliest and most assertive version of yourself. The real problem is society, who by means of the education system, television/hollywood, religion and plain ignorance of our biologic and psychologic wiring, keeps shaping humand with next to non emotional intelligence, with weak, complacent, pusillanimous men (bringing the male role model to a very real crisis) and demanding and delusional women. Jealousy is another very important topic. The truth about this emotion is the fact it comes from 2 distinct origins. Insecurity and Dishonesty. People who consensually engage in a monogamous relationship, that is with emotional and sexual exclusivity, go in right from the start over-valuing the other person. This is because they are enamored, and this state alters a persons perception of the world and his/her couple, glorifying the virtues and underestimating or selectively ignoring the faults. Once this state fades, so do the expectations they both had about each other, as they finally start to see the person for who he/she really is, recognizing those selectively ignored faults. Once this happens, and following our biologic impulses, humans tend to cheat on one another. Insecurity breeds jealousy as the person tends to project his/her own sense of self-worth on the other person's acceptance and unconditional love (altruism is another myth, but that's another discussion), therefore, if the other person cheats, that would bring the first person to a crisis related to their weakened ego. And obviously, dishonesty also brings forth this emotion as one person assures the other one initially that infidelity is never happening, product of his/her state of altered mental status due to love, and then obviously it does. Thus, jealousy is indeed a problem, which ONLY the jealous person can solve, and how? simply not falling into these triggers. It is quite possible to virtually erase this emotion from your persona, firstly once you realize and self-assure your own sense of self-worth, not relying only on what other people think of you, but most importantly becoming a person of value yourself and loving yourself, and secondly ACCEPTING the fact that human beings are biologically and psychologically wired for promiscuity, that is more than two (certainly) sexual partners per year, therefore not having delusional expectations regarding the other persons behavior. It is possible to make your woman completely infatuated and centered in you if you are Alpha enough, but even becoming the manliest man of them all, it simply doesn't give you any guarantees. Obviously, OLTR are certainly not a panacea, but neither is living a lie. Thanks for the post and the insight BlackDragon, great post.

  • Jack 2012-09-27 18:03:09

    @DaviT: "As a matter of fact, never did human kind have less sexual desire/activity, libido or promiscuity than nowadays. Not before 1960s, not in the 50s, not before Christ, not ever." Please explain how in hell you came to such a conclusion.

  • Matt T. 2012-09-27 19:13:33

    I like this post! I'm agreeing with BD so far, but the debate is not over... One very important point is that not all men can be equally alpha. Even if all men in society learned to be alpha, some men would still out-alpha the others. So, men at the bottom of the alpha-ladder would still find it hard to get into an OLTR unless it's with an UG. Another interesting thought: How would the numbers in a world look where OLTR's are accepted as normal? You can assume that half of all adults over 18 are married and half are single. Then, probabilistically speaking, half of the FBs of every member of an OLTR will be single and the other half will be married. And since OLTRs are considered normal, nobody gets hurt beyond the occasional jealousy, which is also considered normal in the OLTR world.

  • Jon 2012-09-28 07:59:32

    This is an interesting topic. I have to admit that I started with a bias towards Blackdragon's point of view, but Soul is making some good points. I'm beginning to wonder if this might be a situation where the misery of many makes it possible for a few to be happy. Marry up the beta guys so they work hard like good drones at shitty jobs to support their wife and little broods of failure while the minority of guys who opt out get to sit back, sip an ice tea and play with their harems. Although, there's another answer for the beta guys who can't get laid - legalize prostitution. It helps guys who can't get laid to get laid, gives single moms an alternative to food stamps, increases the tax base and frees law enforcement officers to pursue real criminals. Win-Win-Win-Win! Why hasn't this happened in most of the country yet? While we're at it, let's legalize marijuana too! Hmm...I seem to have gotten off topic. 😉

  • Blackdragon 2012-09-28 10:42:34

    @Jon -

    Although, there’s another answer for the beta guys who can’t get laid – legalize prostitution. It helps guys who can’t get laid to get laid, gives single moms an alternative to food stamps, increases the tax base and frees law enforcement officers to pursue real criminals. Win-Win-Win-Win! Why hasn’t this happened in most of the country yet?
    I completely agree, but the answer to that question is the same as "Why isn't marijuana legal yet?" and "Why aren't open marriages considered normal yet?" Americans, even most liberal Americans, are still desperately clinging to their outdated conservative religious roots. Give it time. It will happen. @Matt
    How would the numbers in a world look where OLTR’s are accepted as normal? You can assume that half of all adults over 18 are married and half are single. Then, probabilistically speaking, half of the FBs of every member of an OLTR will be single and the other half will be married.
    Not exactly, because if OLTR was widely accepted, theoretically there would be less legally married people than now. Instead of 50% of households it might only be 20% or 30%. Of course many people could have a legal OLTR marriage so I guess that would skew the numbers upwards again. Nonmarried people would still crank out children in vast numbers, just like they do now, so the human race would be in no danger of dying out if legal marriage became less common (a common objection to OLTR that I hear). My other guess is that since (generally speaking) the younger a man is the more sexually jealous he tends to be, most monogamous people in such a society would be the younger ones (though young people cheat a hell of a lot so it would be "monogamous" rather than monogamous), and most OLTR people would be over age 35 or so. MLTR/FB people would be all over the place, mostly with people in their 20's and 30's. Just a guess.

  • Matt T. 2012-09-28 14:22:14

    @ BD - Yeah I'm not worried about humans dying out due to fewer marriages. We would fuck like rabbits no matter what jewelry we have on our fingers. Has anyone seen the show "Polyamory" on Showtime? It's an example of real-life open relationships although not OLTRs. Some of those people in the show have children also. These are very emotional, less logical people, than the typical blackdragonblog reader. It goes to show that not everyone would do OLTR + multiple discreet FBs only. Many would do OLTR + multiple strong public MLTRs as well just like in the show. If OLTRs became accepted, then polyamorous groupings like triads and couple-couple relationships would become more accepted too.

  • M 2012-09-28 19:18:11

    I casually follow this blog and although I understand BD's non-monog standpoint, I have a hard time picturing myself NOT being worshiped and admired from one girl I absolutely adore that I choose to settle down with. I am in my first open relationship now, and although we're very casual - bits of jealousy can get annoying and dampen whatever the base level of trust is. Also, although Polygamy was practiced centuries ago and was the norm, it is vitally important to note that in ancient times - especially Rome - it was the MEN who slept with whoever they wanted (including boys) and had a wife for social status. When women slept around, they could be exiled or executed if the lover was not of lower social status. So promiscuity was expected of the males, who were building the greatest civilization the world has known, but kept hush hush for the women. Just look at what happened with Augustine's daughter.

  • Soul 2012-09-29 12:09:37

    @Alejandro: You ask about what would be better for modern society as it is. I think that we as a culture could be doing a lot more to provide a wide variety of nuturing & educational situations for children. One thing that BD hasn't challenged in this debate is Soul's assertion that stable nuclear families are crucial for children's well being. With my debater's hat off I think that tribal cultures may have done OK by following Hilary's prescription ("it takes a village".) @DaviT: It's very interesting to me, that you say that it's possible to "virtually erase" the emotion of jealousy. Maybe as young people get more experienced and comfortable with MLTR and OLTR lifestyles, that will become more and more true. I completely agree that jealousy in open relationships is a lot less devastatingly painful than the feelings of betrayal that follow from infidelity in standard relationships. @Matt & @BD: If the human race dies out, it will be because of our bad behavior (war, toxics, resource depletion) and not because there aren't enough of us. But it's still a big aspect of the problem, that those least able to take care of the kids are the ones who are having the greatest number of them.

  • Soul 2012-09-29 12:19:28

    @M "I am in my first open relationship now, and although we’re very casual – bits of jealousy can get annoying and dampen whatever the base level of trust is." Has she said anything specific that makes you think she's annoyed, or losing a base level of trust? The "Soul Strategy" if she's asking for monogamy, would be to quietly stop being in her face about seeing other women, and wait to observe if she reciprocates. I'm curious how well that would work for you.

  • DaviT 2012-09-29 13:58:11

    @Jack I really recommend "Sperm Wars" by Robin Baker. Biologically, we are made for infidelity, and we haven't really evolved biologically since ancient times, thus having the same impulses as we've always had. Sure, social impositions and protocols throughout history deterred people in different communities away from poliamory, and not arbitrarily so, since it poses a serious disadvantage for a man to raise someone else's child, and women couldn't just reproduce with just anyone for the sake of passing on their genes, no, they had to make sure their "mate" was the "alphaest", but it STILL happened; Men are programmed to "scatter" their seed to the most healthy-attractive-women he can find or grasp, and Women are programmed to be inseminated, as I said not just by anyone, but surely by as most real alpha men as she can find/grasp (they don't usually come by the dozens, but when they did come all females are on top of them) ESPECIALLY at short intervals of time between mates; think about it, it would actually GUARANTEE survival of the fittest when the struggle happens at the microscopic level of different males' sperm!(thus the name of the book), plus she can have various providers....Check it out, a seriously GREAT read. @Soul I have to admit, regarding my beliefs towards monogamy and poliamory (I share my opinion with BD's on this subject), I'm also very puzzled by the fact that nuclear families REALLY TRULY ARE the best system there can be for better chances at satisfactorily raising children. The more people are involved in a family (considering all of them being at least functional and relatively "well behaved") and the more united they are, the better the odds. There is just no arguing that, the evidence speaks for itself, and I should know being a family physician. The more and better social network support, the better que quality of life of the members, but the difficulty of children's up-bringing is very underestimated in nowadays society. The way I see it, children CAN also be raised to be excellent members of society and exemplary citizens by single parents, and although it's no lie chances at succeeding are less than those brought up by a married couple, it is not necessarily a condemnation; it's just harder. Since a poliamory-tolerant/promoting society is virtually very far away (at least for our lifespans in my opinion), I believe it's safe to assume that, regarding the subject of child-raising having OLTRs there are lots of variables to consider, but it just would be too hard right now, considering jealousy, lack of maturity and leadership-capabilities amongst men and society's complete disregard towards puericulture. You are a very eloquent man Soul, and I really enjoyed reading this debate!

  • Jack 2012-09-29 14:23:17

    @DaviT; But you didn't answer my queston. Why do you think we have less sexual desire today than at any other time in history?

  • DaviT 2012-09-29 17:56:17

    @Jack .......what? LOL wow, sorry!!, never meant to say THAT. “As a matter of fact, never did human kind have less sexual desire/activity, libido or promiscuity than nowadays. Not before 1960s, not in the 50s, not before Christ, not ever.” I guess I see how it could've been misinterpreted....I was implying that never did we have less sexual desire than now meaning that we've always been as horny and unfaithful, unchangeably! sorry again for that (sounded better in my head apparently hahaha, I must carefully read my posts before pressing the button :P)

  • M 2012-09-30 16:35:05

    Hey Soul, thanks for the great response. Its hypocritical, but I want her to rely/only fuck me while I do my thing. She seems to like when I talk or tell stories about me with other girls, and encourages me to fuck around, and also wants to 3 way a girl with me - BUT part of me is turned off by her openness and wants her to only want ME. It's sort of a me being selfish vibe - she mildy flirts or fishes for compliments with other guys/gals when we go out and it gets annoying always swatting that shit down or playfully calling her a brat and pulling her in to kiss/claim her, which she responds well to. The problem is we are both in our 20s, two of the most attractive people at school, and have near identical personalites - to the point that I know her antics and both our jealsousy isn't trying to piss eachother off intentionally, it's that we both can be pretty inconsiderate. The more I read on BDs Needy Alpha type, the more I find myself identifying with it....since it's pretty much my default - unless I'm in a group I'm more of a charismatic type. Anyway, the whole things turns into a paradox of me logically and understanding and living a non-monog lifestyle, while wishing the world wasn't so.

  • Jack 2012-10-01 01:34:30

    @M: So you want to get back to a time when women were shamed, spit on, and put to death for their sexuality? You realize that such needy territoriality on the part of men (coupled with women's golddigging) is what allowed anti-sex attitudes of prudery to sweep throughout our culture, right? This "anti-slut" attitude on your part would ruin everything for all of us.

  • Matt T. 2012-10-01 03:27:12

    @M: it sounds like you're young and you'll grow out of the intense jealousy as time goes on.

  • Billu 2013-05-10 03:44:19

    Why are we even having a debate. Here are some points. Its Two parts based on two different sides of seeing things. Part A. 1. Men would prefer more than one partner, but if every man had more than one partner, then men would have to be prepared to see their partner being fucked (imagining it) by others. 2. Men don't like the scheme of things. The majority may not be able to change things at first, but the powerful will, and men lower down the order will follow, ORDERING their partners not to fool around, basically owning them. We come to status quo. Part B. 1. Kids whose parents stay together would progress more and have more evolutionary advantages. 2. Hence people have an incentive to stay together. 3. They may be very unhappy with staying together, but life was never meant for happiness, its meant for procreation. So .......we get status quo. Now the author may like to change the status quo, and I agree that some (including me) may change, for some time, but it'll only be the fringe.

  • Taylor 2015-09-08 13:57:23

    HOLY SHIT. Being a man sounds awful. A world filled with sexual obsession and a lack of deep, strong emotions. I literally feel like I'm high sometimes because of how deeply I feel. It's incredible. Do our emotions sometimes turn on us? Certainly. But without them, what's the point? What differentiates a man and an animal? It seems to me that I may as well date a wolf. I'm a calendar model and a psychology major. I've experienced men both as an attractive young girl, and as someone who studies humans, and my conclusion is a sad one. Most men are not compatible with women in the way that both want. Woman want a life of depth, full of rich meaning. Plus sex always feels good, whether it's with ourselves or our partner. It sounds like a curse feeling that we can't fullfill our innate demand for pleasure without switching partners continuously. Not sure why men can't keep their penis' up unless they're constantly moving from person to person. THAT sounds like drama. THAT sounds like an exhausting, lonely, empty life. I'm beginning to see that the more "manly" you are, the less human you are. You may be psychically stronger, but your minds are dull. I have an idea, why don't y'all just go fuck each other? Oh, and the alpha male bs? Your muscles make you look like an alien and you're WAY too confident about how good you are in bed. We're faking. The reason women "come back" is because they're attempting to change you, a silly fantasy of most women. But I assure you, no woman just wants to fuck guys, y'all just aren't that great. Seriously, you're ability to shove something in me just isn't very impressive.

  • Blackdragon 2015-09-14 15:27:00

    Taylor, the unhappiness, vitriol, and anger you're displaying proves everything I've ever said about women wanting both positive and negative emotions.
    Enjoy your negativity. I'll be over here being happy.

  • Quora 2015-11-27 10:50:26

    I just read the argument given in the description so if u read it who do u think has won soul or blackdragon? A few weeks back I put out the call for someone who disagreed with me strongly on a particular issue to debate me on this blog. The call was answered, the debate happened, and now here it is. The specific rules of the debate are listed here. A few guys…