cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Again, why marry? There are legal / financial imperatives used by society to compel people to M. My H's 1st M was for tax purposes. Both he and she had sworn never to marry, she felt it oppressed women (her "reason" for cheating on her 1st H) and she claimed not to believe in monogamy. He simply did not see the point in M. Bit when their government changed the tax structure to punish cohabiting couples and reward M couples, they were compelled to choose between poverty or M, and chose M. (He now says poverty would have been better...) I also "don't believe in M". I feel the State (or even the church, in some places) has no place in your bedroom, and who I have sex with, live with, or choose to love should be between me and whichever consenting adult/s I choose to involve. I also view M as the cornerstone of capitalist oppression (through the privatisation of "love" and the reproduction of labour) and, if given the choice, would have opted to cohabit without M. However, he and I are of different nationalities, and in order to live together, in his country or in mine, we need to be M so that the other can qualify for permanent residence in each other's country (or to facilitate both getting the requisite visas in any other country we wish to live and work in). For H though, it mattered that we M. He wanted our R to be at least as socially validated as his R with his X, he wanted to signal that he valued it more and took it more seriously etc and so it mattered to him to show the world - the state, bureaucracy, etc - that this was an R he was deeply committed to, and the only societal vehicle for that is M. Link to post Share on other sites
aed Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 From a biological perspective, no, it's not "natural" for human beings to be monogamous. That is not how humans were designed. Even in the Bible, polygamy was acknowledged. And to think... now many of us live to be in our 70's and 80's, unlike then, when to achieve age 30 was a milestone. How much harder must it be now? However, our society rules is what we are trying to adhere to. Is it a complete discrepancy? Yes. But it is what it is. it all depends. when a mm finds out is wife cheated and he doesnt kill her, is that also nature? Link to post Share on other sites
jwi71 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 (edited) but, in a sense you've proven that ONE is not enough. You've had a 'few'. So, even though when in a LTR, you are faithful, you haven't been in just one. So, fidelity, yes. One woman forever, no. Well now you are changing the premise. You, or at least I interpreted it as such, were referring to infidelity - which requires one to be in a relationship of some sort - M or other commitment. Within THAT context, I have indeed proven that ONE was enough. That is, I never felt the need to stray at any level -emotional or otherwise. That is altogether different from saying more than one partner PERIOD. So are you saying one partner in one's life - the whole virgin until M thing - or are you speaking of infidelity - having only partner in a committed R for eternity? Edited February 20, 2013 by jwi71 spelling 3 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 also, marriage should not be used as a "tool" the way some use it. if you don't believe there's value in marriage, and you wouldn't do it if you didn't feel that you had to, then don't do it. Seems pretty hypocritical to say that you don't believe in something yet you do it anyway... Huh?? If the state *forces* you to marry as the only way to be together, how is that hypocritical? It's not like you're exercising free choice - you are simply operating under the constraints imposed on you by the state. Many people don't believe in tax, but they pay them because the law requires them to. Are they also hypocrites? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
ThatJustHappened Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 There are legal / financial imperatives used by society to compel people to M. My H's 1st M was for tax purposes. Both he and she had sworn never to marry, she felt it oppressed women (her "reason" for cheating on her 1st H) and she claimed not to believe in monogamy. He simply did not see the point in M. Bit when their government changed the tax structure to punish cohabiting couples and reward M couples, they were compelled to choose between poverty or M, and chose M. (He now says poverty would have been better...) I also "don't believe in M". I feel the State (or even the church, in some places) has no place in your bedroom, and who I have sex with, live with, or choose to love should be between me and whichever consenting adult/s I choose to involve. I also view M as the cornerstone of capitalist oppression (through the privatisation of "love" and the reproduction of labour) and, if given the choice, would have opted to cohabit without M. However, he and I are of different nationalities, and in order to live together, in his country or in mine, we need to be M so that the other can qualify for permanent residence in each other's country (or to facilitate both getting the requisite visas in any other country we wish to live and work in). For H though, it mattered that we M. He wanted our R to be at least as socially validated as his R with his X, he wanted to signal that he valued it more and took it more seriously etc and so it mattered to him to show the world - the state, bureaucracy, etc - that this was an R he was deeply committed to, and the only societal vehicle for that is M. So your husband is free to have relationships outside of your marriage? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 When I was an OW, I most certainly did not believe in monogamy even though I am not liberal, and I myself certainly did not practise Thank you for making my point! Then you said: until We Fell In Love And Everything Changed. Thank you once again for agreeing with my point. But before then, when I myself was not practising monogamy, I would certainly not have had any such expectation of sexual exclusivity on his side, be it BW or OOW, Agreed, but once you made the emotional connection your conscious views on monogamy are trumped by your instincts. The point is: We have an instinct to be promiscuous. But, we also have an instinct to bond with a partner and to be very upset about infidelity. because that would have been hypocritical! I'm sorry, but this "one rule for me, and another for everyone else" attitude doesn't wash with me. It is not hypocrisy. It is mostly your genes. As I said the most liberal OW that does not believe in monogamy will be deeply hurt by the existence of an OOW if she is in love. I would certainly not have been devastated had there been an OOW, though that may well have led to an entirely different trajectory. You cannot predict how you would react to an OOW. However, I am glad you admit to a different trajectory. Once again agreeing with my point. :cool: 2 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 What state(gov.) forces you to marry? In order for us to live together in the UK, or in my home country, we have to be M. We're not given the choice. Link to post Share on other sites
ThatJustHappened Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 In order for us to live together in the UK, or in my home country, we have to be M. We're not given the choice. My Scottish friend lives with her British boyfriend in the UK and they've never gotten in trouble for it. They even own a house together. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Thank you for making my point! Then you said: Thank you once again for agreeing with my point. Agreed, but once you made the emotional connection your conscious views on monogamy are trumped by your instincts. The point is: We have an instinct to be promiscuous. But, we also have an instinct to bond with a partner and to be very upset about infidelity. It is not hypocrisy. It is mostly your genes. As I said the most liberal OW that does not believe in monogamy will be deeply hurt by the existence of an OOW if she is in love. You cannot predict how you would react to an OOW. However, I am glad you admit to a different trajectory. Once again agreeing with my point. :cool: OTC. I no longer practise monogamy because I am only sexually attracted to one man. That does not change my political views, nor does it change my expectations of others. If he wanted another partner, I would be upset only insofar as, because he is monogamous, it would end my sexual access to him. And of course that would suck, as I'm still attracted to him and would not otherwise have wanted to cede that access. But I also would never want a mercy ****, so if he was no longer attracted to me I would prefer him to find another partner, and I would exercise my other options. "Deeply hurt", no. Grumpy and put out, when I'd finally found someone who really suits my needs, yep... Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 My Scottish friend lives with her British boyfriend in the UK and they've never gotten in trouble for it. They even own a house together. Scottish *is* British! They both have UK / EU passports. That is *very* different! Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 OTC. I no longer practise monogamy because I am only sexually attracted to one man. That does not change my political views, nor does it change my expectations of others. If he wanted another partner, I would be upset only insofar as, because he is monogamous, it would end my sexual access to him. And of course that would suck, as I'm still attracted to him and would not otherwise have wanted to cede that access. But I also would never want a mercy ****, so if he was no longer attracted to me I would prefer him to find another partner, and I would exercise my other options. "Deeply hurt", no. Grumpy and put out, when I'd finally found someone who really suits my needs, yep... Coco: The more you talk, the more you agree with me. But, don't take it the wrong wat. Sooner or later we would be in agreement on something. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 So your husband is free to have relationships outside of your marriage? I would not stop him if that was what he wanted. But he's deeply monogamous. Link to post Share on other sites
ThatJustHappened Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Scottish *is* British! They both have UK / EU passports. That is *very* different! Yes I know Scottish is British. You did not clarify that you don't have an EU passport. I also have an American friend who lives with her boyfriend in Brighton. They also own a house together. Nobody has arrested them yet. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Coco: The more you talk, the more you agree with me. But, don't take it the wrong wat. Sooner or later we would be in agreement on something. The only way you could possibly be agreeing with me is if you'd completely changed your mind from your original point. Or if you were completely misunderstanding me. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I would not stop him if that was what he wanted. But he's deeply monogamous. Agreed. I would never demand fidelity or even ask for fidelity. It would be up to my partner to make that decision. I tend to favor monogamy if in a relationship because cheating requires too much effort, manipulation, lying, etc. If I could cheat without lying or being deceptive then it would be a wonderful thing. But, I also believe cheating dilutes one's sexual energy and that is not fun for some people----like your H. He is probably not looking for external validation at all times. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Yes I know Scottish is British. You did not clarify that you don't have an EU passport. I also have an American friend who lives with her boyfriend in Brighton. They also own a house together. Nobody has arrested them yet. I cannot comment on the visa status of people I don't know. But in order to qualify for Right To Remain, I needed to produce a M certificate, proof that the R was not a fiction, pass a Life in the UK test, and she'll out a great deal of money. Perhaps it's easier for Americans, IDK. I do know that many people who *do* produce valid M certificates are still denied Right To Remain, because Immigration is such a big right wing concern here. Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 yet he cheated on his first wife... how is that "deeply monogamous"? maybe I am mistaken, but didn't his first wife cheat on her husband with him, or do I have you mixed up with someone else? He left his wife for Coco. Exit affairs don't count as true EMRs. I believe it is mostly ending a relationship to start another. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 yet he cheated on his first wife... how is that "deeply monogamous"? maybe I am mistaken, but didn't his first wife cheat on her husband with him, or do I have you mixed up with someone else? They co-existed in the same house. Both had checked out of the M long ago. He did not need to transfer his sexual involvement, romantic interest or day-to-day intimacy to me from her - it had already long ceased with her and was in cold storage elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 They co-existed in the same house. Both had checked out of the M long ago. He did not need to transfer his sexual involvement, romantic interest or day-to-day intimacy to me from her - it had already long ceased with her and was in cold storage elsewhere. Sometimes, the marriage has really ended. But, many cheating men use the term "my marriage is dead" to hook OWs. It works every time. I am glad that in your case the marriage had really ended and you were not fooled by a philanderer. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 what country 'forces' you to marry to be with someone? Seriously, that's pretty warped. If you mean that someone can't immigrate to a country without being married to someone, then that's still a little fishy, as there are other ways to immigrate without having to be married. If it's for tax breaks, etc., then again, that's being hypocrite and using something...in other words, one doesn't believe something has value and has zero respect for it unless it benefits them. There are other ways to immigrate, but none that were available. The UK has tightened its immigration controls and there was no other way I could remain in the country for longer than 6 months. Believe me, we explored all of that very thoroughly. And similar constraints would apply to him seeking to live in my home country, though it made more sense for us to live here in the short-term. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 maybe I am mistaken, but didn't his first wife cheat on her husband with him, or do I have you mixed up with someone else? What does that have to do with the price of fish? I said *he* was monogamous. I did not say _she_ was. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 So it seems the gov. is not forcing you to marry. You are doing that because you want to stay in the country. The state is forcing us to marry in order to be together. What part of that are you not understanding? We want to be together. That requires us to: 1) both live in his country. Where they require us to be M. 2) both live in my country, where the state requires us to be M. 3) both live in another country, whose visa requirements would vary but in the cases we explored, would require us to be M if we were to be certain of both being granted access. How hard can this possibly be to understand??? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 because people who are "deeply monogamous" may very well find it hard to accept in in others... perhaps he is not as 'monogamous" as you would like to believe? Seems he is when it suits his needs, but isn't when it doesn't suit his needs. He is not a bigot. He is perfectly capable of accepting that others have different views to him, and of respecting those. He does not preach monogamy. He practises it through his inability to be attracted to, or sustain a R with, more than one partner at a time. That does not mean he stands in judgment on those who can. He accepts his personal limitations, but does not try to impose his own constraint as a law on anyone else. Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I understood what you said initially. Thanks for more details though. I stand by my post. Let's get back on topic...shall we? You said, I wanted to stay in the country. Actually, I don't. I could care less where we lived. I want to live *with him*, which is something entirely different to what you claimed. It was your t/j, nice try calling time on it to get the last word. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Science shows sexuality is on a bell curve. Just like humans can vary from heterosexual to homosexual with levels between, our tendency towards monogamy is on bell curve bending towards polygamy. With the most common tendency to be a serial coupler: monogamous for four-seven years and then recoupling with a new partner. In my ideal world people would read the science, classify their own natural tendency and only enter relationships with people who share that tendency. Most issues with cheating is because people who KNOW they are serial couplers lie about their limited monogamy ability to dupe a person who is a life time coupler into a relationship they wouldn't enter if the true circumstances were revealed. I specifically told my exes if a single lifelong relationship was not enough to keep looking, both lied to dupe me. I will always be angry for the years I lost to those liars. I agree with this. But many people only find out down the track what their own "tendency" is. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts