Love and Marriage may not go together like a horse and carriage

by blokeintakapuna

What if “Marriage” was not the auto-default setting for human relationships? Sure it seems to be the “ideal” most are conditioned to accept – even from a young age, but remaining “single” and capable/enabling of brief, intense liaison’s between consenting adults should also be a perfectly valid auto-default setting also – yet the constant narrative is only about “marriage & committed, monogamous relationships”.

In today’s world where many social norms are being out-paced by an ever-evolving and fast-moving social society, out-pacing traditional customs and tired, legislation also – maybe we should re-examine our auto-default setting regarding monogamy/marriage/cheating and divorce?

Generally as a society, we’re still very prudish – as evidenced on TV (and especially in USA) where naked breasts are hardly ever shown in bedroom scenes – let alone a naked female nipple – all whilst they simulate, but never show, actual fucking. Yet, rather than be completely “natural” about various human body parts for authenticity, our prudishness is allowed to flourish under the cloak of righteous sanctimony, as we the sheeple, follow traditional customs and social mores as dictated by someone else’s sense of proprietary and morals, preordained from many generations ago.  

“Marriage” has only recently been defined/redefined as being between two consenting adults and not necessarily of the opposite gender. In other parts of the world, it’s still only defined as being possible between male and female. And all cultures have differing interpretations of what is a “marriage ceremony” and what is or isn’t appropriate and when is or isn’t possible for them to marry. In some cultures the female infant is “promised” to a future husband before the baby can even open its eyes. In other cultures, that is viewed as abhorrent!

So could it be possible that our perception and auto-default setting of “monogamy” has been hijacked somewhat by vested interest groups such as Church and State as a means to control the masses? – but also as a mechanism these groups use to keep themselves in “power” administering the “rights” for 2 consenting adults to “marry” and be monogamous?

Society is subjected to the glory and awesomeness of people being married for X amount of decades etc – and good on them if that’s what they want. However – rarely do we hear it being celebrated that individuals can and should value and enjoy NOT being monogamous!

One is almost a heratic to even “ask” society for that permission. Females would be labelled “Sluts” for even suggesting such a proposition – yet it’s our natural human DNA default setting… as the ever increasing divorce rates attest to. Monogamy is a man-made ideal, not a never-ending programme one must adhere to forever and a day – as it simply does not seem possible due to the very make-up and essence of our DNA coding.

The narrative we’re all subjected to is that Human’s are monogamous creatures – hence needing marriage to enable and legitimise this proposition. Yet, because of “cheating” divorce rates continue to soar decade after decade, making a complete mockery of that proposition that humans are only meant to be, or are only interested in being monogamous. Why is that?

More and more I think that perhaps our “auto default-setting” should be the opposite to “monogamy” and celebrated as sovereign sexual beings enjoying pleasure as and when we decide with other consenting adults, with no “guilt” attached.

Monogamy actually goes against the predisposition and DNA programming we all have as free, sexual beings… and monogamy’s “ideals” are the actual cause of so much grief and guilt when a sovereign individual wishes to experience the utmost of personal pleasure with another consenting sovereign adult individual.

The Monogamy concept is the cause of so much stress, guilt and grief because it’s a man-made construct, warped and twisted by the mores of an ever-evolving society, layered-over by customs, ideals, religion, philosophical and political beliefs and all according to someone else’s pre-defined sense of “ideal” as set many generations ago.

Where as, should our collective societies auto-default setting be that “marriage and monogamy” were actually going against the natural order of human behaviour – then it’s very easy to see how “Marriage and monogamy” actually corrupt the very essence of our human DNA and pre-programming of how us human’s behave.

Change the paradigm, get a different result… and maybe, just maybe, society wouldn’t have so much collective & societal “guilt” for celebrating our awesomeness as vibrant sexual beings? …and maybe, just maybe, a “committed, monogamous relationship” won’t then be seen as the “ideal” very few can maintain… or choose to maintain the fictional facade of.

There should be no “guilt” or adverse judgement on a consenting adult individual if they wish to share and experience the utmost of personal pleasure with another consenting, sovereign adult individual. Yet, in our society today, there is just that. Why? And especially so, when the majority of adults are chasing more quality and quantities of a good romp? Yet, “we” don’t talk about it in a meaningful way…

We know it’s possible for 2 adults to “love” one another – regardless of gender, race, religion and even location. So why as a society, do we insist we must limit our personal pleasures to only one committed individual, where the fixed narrative is set that to do otherwise is “wrong”? Why?

Do you want:

  • ad-free access?
  • access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • access to Incite Politics magazine articles?

Silver subscriptions and above go in the draw to win a $500 prize to be drawn at the end of March.

Not yet one of our awesome subscribers? Click Here and join us.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story.  And when he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet.   Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet, and as a result he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist that takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him.  But you can’t ignore him.