Monogamy - does it make sense in sl?

You said somewhere else that you have been over the other side, which would explain it.

Pep (It eats your brain cells. )

I thought this thread was just making her hot

The word you are searching for is actually "hawt."

And I don't need no shtinking thread to make me THAT, hun.

I saw the pics But hawt don't explain your temperature risin

Thorry. I'd rethpond, but I hathe a thermometer in my mowth.

I take your word for it... that it's a thermometer ))))))

I would suspect that peoples' preference of monogamy or polygamy runs a little deeper than "what's easier".

Also, how much time did you spend thinking about the phrase "serial monogamy"?

I think you might be guilty of overestimating how clever the majority of the grownups of sl are, kid, but when you get a little bit older I am sure you'll find out for yourself.

Pep (How much time? No time at all; it occurs frequently in moral debates I attend.)

I practiced cereal monogamy for years...

(Decorously ignoring Smith's last post . . .)

It occurs to me (now that I've finished my first coffee) that the most important thing when dealing with lovers and partners in SL (or, indeed, anyone) is to avoid causing hurt. Personally, I have no moral objections to polyandry or polygamy in SL, so long as it is open and above board, and no one is being hurt by it. (And so long as it doesn't apply merely to males, of course: talk of "harems" makes me bridle somewhat . . . )

The idea of officially allowing multiple partners, via one's profile, doesn't bother me at all, but I can't imagine it being used very much, except perhaps within certain SL subcultures (as in some varieties of BDSM?), most of whom probably have their own rules for this sort of thing anyway.

The issue of whether one is cheating on one's RL partner or lover by engaging in sexual or emotional relationships in SL at all is, of course, a rather different one.

I am not monogamous but I am partnered.
In sl my profile shows I am partnered and we have been since Hal arrived in sl. But he has always accepted that I can choose freely my lovers or one-night stands. SL doesn't demand monogamy and I don't have the responsibilities of real to contend with.
I don't see it as cheating. The idea that I must have ONE boyfriend in real is always confining and I have never felt a need for long term commitment. So SL is a natural progression.
Hal is monogamous to me. But he understands that I need more. SL allows for making real rels. more plastic.

Emotional polygamy, (probably wrong term) to me, would be a much more important issue than sexual polyamory. I don't care about anybody getting off, it's biological. Giving of your heart, sharing of your thoughts, feelings, is to me, a much bigger deal.

As long as I don't have to cuddle, I don't care how many partners someone has.

And each time it was all over you said cheerio.

--
Aes

I think, personally anyway, that I agree.

Do you think that is a gendered perspective? Do men care more about sexual "infidelity" or "sharing"?

I hate "cuddling" also. There's too much "pillow talk" these days.

If you had posted that on SLUniverse, I could have responded with the laugh button.

Men have feelings? Who knew? Seriously, yes I think it's a gendered perspective. Every now and then though, you'll meet a guy who gets it, who is comfortable enough in his own skin, to let the macho go and explore and understand his emotional side, and not beat it into oblivion til it's non-existant. They're out there....I just know it. I haz a big faith.

So do I. And my two wives.

Hmmmmmm . . .

I'd far rather engage in a leisurely and loving bit of "pillow talk."

(I've just self-censored a lot of what I was going to say on this subject. Let it suffice that I get more personal enjoyment out of a real conversation with someone I care about, than with the other.)

Be right back. Weeping too much to be able to see the screen at the moment.

LOL

Yeah, they DO exist. The key, I think, is taking a longish time to get to know someone first (always a problem in SL, where everything is always rush rush rush!)

Awwwwwwww !!!

You've probably got a lovely little she-hamster already, don't you? Darn!

I am interested in what is being said here since sexual mores (can't do accent) are part of my business.
I think young women in real are slit on this. There are the girls who seek a partner (or rather the man seeks HER) and who is content to settle into a rel. and produce kids etc. and hope for a good life.
THEN there are more and more women like me, who maintain a distance between bfs and career (or education). Having a child does not validate me, anymore than having a husband. In fact, I feel a husband would be a liability to me in my career and in my financial situation. Men have always been wary of the clever / educated woman who doesnt beg for domestic chains.
I must add that I took my mother's advice when I started to work in my career when I was a teenager. I stayed single. I went on birthcontrol. I had my own bank account and my own investments. I purchased my own land. Any man in my life would never share what I own - prenups are non-negotiable.
n sl I am lucky to have met a successful and well-educated man who can partner me here without me feeling threatened by seperation just because I wanted a lover for a night or two. He says I am very elemental and "earthy". I have several men who are my lovers in sl and I also "play the field". If Hal started to mind, I w ould negotiate with him.
But this isnt a real world - I dont feel obligated to be monogamous here.

Well that restores my faith in male hamsters, anyway......now teach your human counterparts. Gotta let go of the bottom of the cage, first.....