Should your partner be the most important person in your life?

[Guest]

Mysticus, do you believe that the level of control exerted in the average monogamous relationship is abusive or manipulative?

Yes, because I would most definitely feel constantly abused and manipulated if I were stuck in a relationship with an "average monogamist". I don't ever want to be in that situation, not to impose it on anyone, myself.

Where do you draw the line on when it should be a concern for the safety and well-being of people in these relationships? Most monogamous people don't see it as controlling until it gets to a damaging point.

*nods* That's exactly where we differ.

Even when there isn't any tangible harm done yet, the breach of principle is already torturously inacceptable to me. Actual tangible harm is merely a matter of degree - in my eyes, literally locking up a person behind bars and make them do your bidding on threat of torture is exactly the same mindset at work as not 100% affirming and respecting their right and freedom to do whatever they want with whomever they want (assuming that this whoever-else person completely consents, too, natch). The difference between these things is merely one of quantity to me; the quality is identical in both cases.

It's like childfree people often hear "you're taking away your partner's right to be a parent", which isn't true at all. If the partner wants to have kids, they can have them, just not with the childfree person (not a very good analogy, I know, but I think at least the "taking rights away" part is comparable).

That's pretty spot on... to even think of having a "right" to be a parent is inacceptable entitlement to me, and any thought like this is a thought I will thoroughly try to purge myself from if and when it crosses my mind.

It's always a privilege, never a right, what another person chooses to share with you; and if you don't qualify for the privilege, it's your ethical duty to accept this humbly, know your place, and don't make a fuss about it. For me, it's absolutely neccessary never to overstep the boundaries of your place, in order to have a sane, respectful relationship with another person. Yes, it takes a lot of discipline and vigilance. But it's my conviction that if one doesn't feel up to such discipline and vigilance, they're better off staying alone - both for their own sake, and for the sake of the potential partners whose life they'd be negatively affecting.

Because even though the other person does indeed always have the option of just telling me to piss off if I make an entitled demand of them (and rightly so - telling me to piss off would be the sanest reaction!), it would already be an inappropriate imposition to even bother them enough in the first place to bring them into the situation where they have to tell me to piss off. The best and most respectful thing to do is not to make the fuss in the first place - it is 100% my own responsibility to learn to keep my fat mouth shut when I have wishes that aren't in my place to ask for.

And well, the bottom line for me is that it's blatantly obvious to me that the average monogamous relationships is chock full of these kinds of assumptions of "rights" over the other person. I can't and won't deal with that kind of mess in my life - it would ruin my ethical integrity and what little sanity I have. No, thanks.

[Sally]

Mysticus, do you believe that the level of control exerted in the average monogamous relationship is abusive or manipulative?

Yes, because I would most definitely feel constantly abused and manipulated if I were stuck in a relationship with an "average monogamist". I don't ever want to be in that situation, not to impose it on anyone, myself.

Why would you consider yourself to be "stuck" in such a relationship? Doesn't everyone have agency to leave a relationship, no matter what type of relationship or what type of partner?

[Guest]

Because as long as I have any kind of free choice, I will simply never end up in a relationship with a monogamist in the first place.

[AceInhibitor]

I used to think the same as Mysticus that monogamy is inherently controlling, but now I can see other people's point that monogamy doesn't have to be controlling. To me, a non-controlling monogamous relationship means the partners don't enforce any rules to prevent each other from falling in love or having sex with other people. i.e. They don't say "no one-on-one time with an opposite-sex friend", "no being friends with your ex", "no checking out attractive people", "update me every hour where you are and who you are with", etc. They completely trust each other to be faithful.

The idea that people can't be friends with someone of a different gender without wanting to date them has always been hilarious to me. I mean if we all had crushes on every person we could potentially be attracted to, bi and pan people would never have any friends.

[Sally]

Because as long as I have any kind of free choice, I will simply never end up in a relationship with a monogamist in the first place.

But you might find yourself in such a relationship because your partner decided to become monogamous. You couldn't control that decision/change. But you wouldn't be stuck, because you'd leave. Therefore -- you'd never be stuck.

[Guest]

Because as long as I have any kind of free choice, I will simply never end up in a relationship with a monogamist in the first place.

But you might find yourself in such a relationship because your partner decided to become monogamous. You couldn't control that decision/change. But you wouldn't be stuck, because you'd leave. Therefore -- you'd never be stuck.

In which case I would obviously immediately break up with them, before they would have a chance to control, abuse, and manipulate me (which they would immediately start doing if I stayed in the 'ship).

I repeat - the only way I could be in a relationship with a monogamist is by being stuck in it. I would never give free and informed consent to monogamy.

[Sally]

Because as long as I have any kind of free choice, I will simply never end up in a relationship with a monogamist in the first place.

But you might find yourself in such a relationship because your partner decided to become monogamous. You couldn't control that decision/change. But you wouldn't be stuck, because you'd leave. Therefore -- you'd never be stuck.

In which case I would obviously immediately break up with them, before they would have a chance to control, abuse, and manipulate me (which they would immediately start doing if I stayed in the 'ship).

I repeat - the only way I could be in a relationship with a monogamist is by being stuck in it. I would never give free and informed consent to monogamy.

Arrrrgh, Myst -- you would not be stuck because you'd leave. Leaving un-sticks you.

OK, moving on, I'm going to the next thread to see if I agree with you, which I plan on doing.