Marriage -- a synonym to monogamy?

• All About This Forum by Marty Klein, 11/16/98
  • (...)
    
    • Assumptions on Trial by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/8/99
      
      

I can't help bringing up a cultural concept that came to mind when I was pondering the questions at the end of the previous post. In Finnish, the word "avioliitto" means "marital union", the official, traditional marriage that an authority figure (spiritual or civil) has confirmed and sealed. The word "avoliitto" means "open union". Two people living together without any official "seal". There's only a one-letter difference between the words. There is not much more difference in how the two unions are regarded in the society and by laws. The system seems to work well. There is still an emphasis on the unity of a family. For example, there is a law requiring that all children of the same two parents must have the same last name although the mother and the father can have different last names.

This to explain why I'm not sure whether to understand Mr. Hicks' term "open marriage" to mean an official, traditional marriage where the partners are not monogamous, or a union that doesn't have any official seal. In most cases there is a difference in the purpose (although both can be monogamous or not). Two people living together without the commitment to stay together for life is often a trial to see whether those two people suit each other, and to see in what respects they don't. There are also other reasons. And there can be a commitment.

What purpose would it serve to define marriage as a synonym to monogamy? To me, the high divorce rates in the western world indicate that there's something inherently "unnatural" in attempting to do so. Also, the number of unhappy marriages (i.e., people "having to" stay together because of their vow no matter what the quality of the relationship is) is another reason for me not to try to force marriage and monogamy to be synonyms. In my mind, that just might be the fundamental fault in the concept of marriage in most parts of the world today.

I see monogamy as being against the human nature. If we were meant to be monogamous, Nature in its infinite wisdom would have come up with some kind of biological "locking" mechanism to prevent us from wanting to pursue other men/women than our own spouse. Or at least in its simplest form, to prevent us from enjoying extramarital sex. But we don't have a mechanism like that.

[Because of the "lack of the lock", it will become harder and harder even to find presidential candidates in this country. Sorry, I just had to say it. ;]

Happiness, sexual enjoyment, and a sense of responsibility are not tied to monogamy. My questions would be: How strong are their ties to different kinds of unions between adults? What is the role of guilt in creating dissatisfaction in a (sexual) relationship?

• My urge for wordplay gets the better of me by Mr. J, 1/8/99
  • Back to the important clinical question by Marty Klein, Ph.D, 1/9/99
    • Important Clinical Question by Gary Van Arman,LCSW, 1/9/99
    • Religion as a factor by Anna Kay, 1/9/99
      • Dismissed Religion by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/11/99
        • Psychology Distanced from Religion by Anna Kay, 1/12/99
          • Religion and Psychology as means to the same end by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/12/99
            • I agree by Anna Kay, 1/13/99
            • The same goal? by Mr. J, 1/13/99
              • Community verses Individualism by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/20/99
                • 1 reply
    • Universal Assumptions by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/11/99
      • How faithful is faithful? by Anna Kay, 1/12/99
        • Oi Vey!!! by Mitchell W. Hicks, MA, 1/12/99
          • How about this... by Mr. J, 1/13/99
            • Good evolutionary points by Anna Kay, 1/14/99
          • Discreet infidelity instead of hypocrisy? by Anna Kay, 1/14/99
            • I doubt it would work by Mr. J, 1/15/99
            • I doubt it would work by Mr. J, 1/15/99
              • No solution :( by Anna Kay, 1/16/99
• Monogamy Is Not Against Nature by Finley, 1/30/99