exclusivity

[YoungCosmo]

Actually, exclusivity dates back to the earliest modern humans.

[VincenzoG91]

Exclusivity is important because it sucks raising somebody else's kids. And after hitting middle age, dating around gets harder.

[Wakeup]

Actually, exclusivity dates back to the earliest modern humans.

Key word here is "modern"

[michelle23]

"Exclusivity" is a fairly new dynamic in the scheme of things, at least for men, anyway. Before church and state dictated marital laws, men of means and ways .had many lovers King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines as an example.

Those men are narcissists ^^^ lol

[Wakeup]

No, they weren't. They were affluent and were accumulating all of the land (not to mention the eligible women) which was making it hard for the beta, men to acquire a wife (and the dowry that went along with it) so the church deemed it immoral to marry more then one and the state eventually made it a law that you couldn't. Keep in mind that many cultures still practice polygamy and are allowed to have more than one wife... Having more then on husband would ge them stoned to death though. I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you uttered thrice = divorced.

[michelle23]

some countries do allow women to marry more than one man such as tibet and other very poor societirs. they marry 3 or 4 brothers. its for survival. in countries where men have more than one wife - women are seen as second class citizens and have very little rights. marriage is just a means to an end, survival, children are assets etc etc

our society cant be compared to those as its completely different

[Wakeup]

The Point is that exclusivity is a rather new concept in the scheme of things. At one time EVERYONE was NOT monogamous (except those that couldn't afford more than one wife only had one) and that SOME people still are NOT monogamous otherwise known as EXCLUSIVE... and that just because they are not exclusive it doesn't mean they're narcissists... and most of all that exclusivity is not such the inherent trait that monogamist make it out to be but rather a possessive trait that is a rather new dynamic in the scheme of things.

I'll add that there are wealthy people who have more than one wife.. it takes a lot of dough to keep a harem.

[michelle23]

i no i didnt say all non-monogamous people are narcissists but your example of the dude with 700 wkves is a narcissists. there just throphies

[Wakeup]

Who gives a fk what they are. Point is... he's not monogamous nor were any of the other people that were wealthy and strong enough to maintain more than one partner. They populated the world with their "throphies" and without knowing anything different, he loved a goodly number of them and they returned the sentiment.

Michelle, you like to read. Why don't you google polyamory, polygamy and polyandry and read about what irks you so much. I think if you actually read of how some people can love more than one person at a time, you'd be less inclined to refute what you know little about and refuse to believe that anyone could be normal or without some negative adjective and not be monogamous...

There was a reality series on a network here in Cda that followed the life a man who was legally married to one woman (like the law alows) but had three other "sister wives" that all lived together and who he fathered children with. These women loved and accepted one another and that dynamic... that particular dynamic being polygamy. It was called "Sister Wives" if you're interested in googling more about that.

[YoungCosmo]

Key word here is "modern"

"Modern" means sapiens originating in the last million years..That's not really modern as we construe it. I guess if one is thinking relative to the age of the universe, then yes, it is...

[Wakeup]

In that case, you are incorrect in your implication that it was the norm, but not in your assertion that it existed.

[michelle23]

i have resrarched it. i dont really care what people do. i just dont believe you can love someone properly if your happy for them to have sex with someone else. our hormones oxytocin and vasopressin make us possessive over our partner and i believe if someone isnt-then they are lacking in these hormones. and a lot of those women are brainwashed. i watched a doc on it too and it was like a cult. the only relatively normal people were 3 bisexuals who shared each other and took turns. they ever had a calender lol to schedule sex sessions.

the weird thing abut it though was none of them were in any way attractive. a man surrounded by a load of ugly bitches ha! it hardly makes him special

[YoungCosmo]

In that case, you are incorrect in your implication that it was the norm, but not in your assertion that it existed.

-The hell you talking about and to whom?

[Wakeup]

i have resrarched it. i dont really care what people do. i just dont believe you can love someone properly if your happy for them to have sex with someone else.

Yes.. you've made that abundently clear.

our hormones oxytocin and vasopressin make us possessive over our partner

No they don't, they do make us bond with them though. Oxytocin is also released during breast feeding which makes us bond to our offspring so it's not just about the sex. Even if your premise has validity... those hormones don't stop at making us be possessive with more then one partner. You might want to read about "compersion" it explains about turning jealousy into passion and overcoming "possessiveness"

and i believe if someone isnt-then they are lacking in these hormones.

Uhm. sorry but you may 'believe' that but it doesn't make it so.

and a lot of those women are brainwashed. i watched a doc on it too and it was like a cult.

Its very likely that the doc you watched was about a cult rather then a voluntary and loving mutually acceptable dynamic.

the only relatively normal people were 3 bisexuals who shared each other and took turns. they ever had a calender lol to schedule sex sessions.

well if three bisexuals can love and share one another then so can three hetrosexuals do it and be 'normal'

the weird thing abut it though was none of them were in any way attractive. a man surrounded by a load of ugly bitches ha! it hardly makes him special

"ugly" is subjective and why would you think he thought himself "special?" It's not about the conquest. You'd know that if you did actually 'research' the subject.

[michelle23]

i am allowed to disagree with you without you assuming that im 100% wrong and your right. no it wasnt about a cult but it came across that way particularly one english man who had 12 wives and they were all terrified of him. he had them all in tears as he laid down the law during dinner. and the kids were scared of him too. he was a dictator.

none of the women in this particular doc seemed happy. they all looked broken and tired apart from the two bi women as it was their idea to have that relationship dynamic and it suited them because they wanted to explore their sexuality.

and it is a way to show off money, power, status etc. it always has been. the only fair dynamic that suits all parties involved are bisexual couples.