5 ms·

Fantastic article, but as a monogamous married father of 4, I think the author misses the fundamental point of all relationships... And the point of life itself

Fantastic article, but as a monogamous married father of 4, I think the author misses the fundamental point of all relationships... And the point of life itself: Reproduction. The primary drive of every living creature from whales to amoeba is to procreate. Having children is WHY we have a sex drive and an urge to have relationships in the first place. Tons of studies show children require stability in the relationships in their lives. Poly may work great for people without children, but children need the stability of long term committed parents who are always there and this is best provided by monogamy.

9999px 2y ago
Downvotes are mad that you're correct.
krupan 2y ago
I generally agree with what you are saying, but you need to add "and not fighting" to "long term committed parents who are always there." Not fighting is so important that sometimes the parents need to split up so they can stop fighting. They can still be committed parents who are always there for the kids while no longer in a relationship with each other and the kids will do well. I really really wish someone had told me that a long time ago, and while I'm wishing I wish someone would have told my children's grandparents that an even longer time ago.
- em-bee 2y ago
  when my parents separated (and then divorced) and we moved, i thought it was the best thing that we moved so far away that they just could not meet and thus could not fight anymore. that was my feeling as a 12 year old. forget shared responsibility and kids alternating between both parents. in our case that would have been a disaster and the opposite of a stable living situation for us children.
bluefirebrand 2y ago
I suspect you're being downvoted based on the "purpose of life is reproduction" piece, but I hope people are aware that this part about studies showing that in general Poly parenting leads to worse outcomes for children is spot on Poly relationships tend to be complicated, and children are not capable of understanding all of the nuance of ethical poly relationships, nevermind the many variations of non-ethical poly relationships. It tends to lead to people who have really screwed up ideas about relationships and attachment issues. Note that this is not me saying that ethical poly relationships are inherently screwed up. What I'm saying is that from the outside perspective of an immature child, who will likely then go on to mimic what they see modelled without understanding it, that child is going to have screwed up ideas about relationships
t-writescode 2y ago
> but children need the stability of long term committed parents You can have long-term, committed throuples, just fine.
zeroonetwothree 2y ago
This seems correct, all the happy poly people I know don’t have kids. The ones that do have kids seem to struggle more (a similar level as being a single parent but obviously in different ways).
ajkjk 2y ago
I feel like the daily experience of relationships in 2024 America is wildly incompatible with the idea that relationships are for reproduction. Our genes may at some level be programmed to conspire to get us to reproduce, but we are (for all intents and purposes) autonomous and free to do that or not as we wish, and to have relationships for whatever reasons we want. There's a bizarre twist of logic going on when you replace "the drive of creatures is (empirically) to reproduce" with "therefore we ought to reproduce". The two are not equivalent; you do not have to do what you are "told".
- nradov 2y ago
  You might not be as autonomous as you think. Behavior in this area is mostly driven by instinct and emotion. People just rationalize their actions later.
  - ajkjk 2y ago
    I'm not saying that I am or am not autonomous at a chemical level. I'm saying that the fact that someone is programmed to do something has no bearing on whether they ought to do it at a moral level. The only reason a person ought to "follow their programming" is that they want to. After all, if it really is their programming, they will follow it automatically. There is no point rationalizing: "I must be programmed this way, therefore I have to do it". No, if you were programmed to do it, you'd be doing it already.
    - silexia 2y ago
      Are you wiser than billions of years of evolution?
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    Is it possible that instinct and emotion drive some people to scale mountains, write software, start businesses, create great works of art, instead of having children? The explore-exploit tradeoff is well known. Maybe my DNA isn't written to be happy with putting down roots and having kids?
big-green-man 2y ago
Well, you're not exactly primally driven to reproduce. You're primally driven to engage in some behavior, and experience hedonistic pleasure from it, with the side effect of reproduction. Reproduction is expensive, so evolution created a dirty trick. This is why birth control is so damn popular. You're driven to fuck, not to reproduce. I have no idea what the experience is for an amoeba, but I would guess it feels more like ejaculation than tears of joy to them. For a lot of people though, the desire for children is there, strong, and comes from somewhere else, almost like it comes from somewhere deeper like a soul or something. I know that's true for me. My goal with my relationship, and well before that when I was shopping, was about family for most of my adult life. It seems this is out of fashion these days and people figure it out late. Hedonistic pleasure is fleeting, creating amazing people can go on literally forever if done correctly, it is an ambition and achievement unto itself, and is rewarding in a way science doesn't yet understand, to be a little facetious.
- echoangle 2y ago
  > For a lot of people though, the desire for children is there, strong, and comes from somewhere else, almost like it comes from somewhere deeper like a soul or something. Isn’t that just another part of the evolutionary drive to get you to have children? Besides the sex drive? Just like you have a natural will to live and an objection to be killed/kill yourself?
  - big-green-man 2y ago
    Well, that feeling of wanting to have kids isn't really universal. It's not really primal, like needing to eat or something. The desire for sex pretty much is. Is it evolved? I guess everything is evolved. Some people have the desire to abuse their children. That's evolved too some how some way, I wouldn't call that an evolutionary drive though. I don't know if female dogs crave sex or crave puppies. If they're anything like us, the majority of the time it's the former craving that leads to puppies. That's all I know.
imetatroll 2y ago
Lots of people are going to push back against your statement - I personally agree with you. This is all about continuing our species and everyone else trying to weave some different tale is simply living in la-la land.
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  If continuing the species was really a matter of desperation, governments would pay citizens to do it. I don't inseminate people for free
amanaplanacanal 2y ago
From an evolutionary point of view the point of life may be reproduction, but from a personal point of view it most certainly is not. Plenty of people have no interest in having kids, and what about people who are sterile? Should they just give up on life? Some people prefer to live alone, but everybody has relationships of some sort, children or no.
- silexia 2y ago
  People have been fooled into thinking their hobbies should override billions of years of evolution... if you behave as your body is hard wired to behave, you will be happier.
PartiallyTyped 2y ago
[flagged]
- nradov 2y ago
  None of those tribes have ever managed to accomplish much. I doubt that's a coincidence.
  - PartiallyTyped 2y ago
    I think we are dealing with survivorship bias more so than anything else. We can look back and speculate about society, how it functioned and all that, but every time we do we are limited in knowledge and by our own biases. I chose to reply as I did because of the whole “I doubt it’s a coincidence”.
    - imetatroll 2y ago
      So which country is it that fits your model and you can point to as an example?
- moralestapia 2y ago
  [flagged]
- PartiallyTyped 2y ago
  I can't reply to the flagged comment, but I can reply to myself. There is so much more in humanity than our ability to procreate — every living organism does that, that's not special, it doesn't make us human. What makes us human, is our ability to create, to pour our heart and very essence into our art, the desire to reach perfection in our craft. We create knowledge, we explore the world, and are in the process of discovering its true nature. We kiss and dance and love, we give, and we share. Having kids doesn't prevent us from enjoying all those things, but having kids is also not a prerequisite for a good and fulfilling life. Anyone can have children, but not everyone can create good people, and personally, I love my unborn children too much to expose them to this world.

9999px 2y ago

Downvotes are mad that you're correct.

krupan 2y ago

I generally agree with what you are saying, but you need to add "and not fighting" to "long term committed parents who are always there." Not fighting is so important that sometimes the parents need to split up so they can stop fighting. They can still be committed parents who are always there for the kids while no longer in a relationship with each other and the kids will do well. I really really wish someone had told me that a long time ago, and while I'm wishing I wish someone would have told my children's grandparents that an even longer time ago.

em-bee 2y ago
when my parents separated (and then divorced) and we moved, i thought it was the best thing that we moved so far away that they just could not meet and thus could not fight anymore. that was my feeling as a 12 year old. forget shared responsibility and kids alternating between both parents. in our case that would have been a disaster and the opposite of a stable living situation for us children.

bluefirebrand 2y ago

I suspect you're being downvoted based on the "purpose of life is reproduction" piece, but I hope people are aware that this part about studies showing that in general Poly parenting leads to worse outcomes for children is spot on Poly relationships tend to be complicated, and children are not capable of understanding all of the nuance of ethical poly relationships, nevermind the many variations of non-ethical poly relationships. It tends to lead to people who have really screwed up ideas about relationships and attachment issues. Note that this is not me saying that ethical poly relationships are inherently screwed up. What I'm saying is that from the outside perspective of an immature child, who will likely then go on to mimic what they see modelled without understanding it, that child is going to have screwed up ideas about relationships

t-writescode 2y ago

> but children need the stability of long term committed parents You can have long-term, committed throuples, just fine.

zeroonetwothree 2y ago

This seems correct, all the happy poly people I know don’t have kids. The ones that do have kids seem to struggle more (a similar level as being a single parent but obviously in different ways).

ajkjk 2y ago

I feel like the daily experience of relationships in 2024 America is wildly incompatible with the idea that relationships are for reproduction. Our genes may at some level be programmed to conspire to get us to reproduce, but we are (for all intents and purposes) autonomous and free to do that or not as we wish, and to have relationships for whatever reasons we want. There's a bizarre twist of logic going on when you replace "the drive of creatures is (empirically) to reproduce" with "therefore we ought to reproduce". The two are not equivalent; you do not have to do what you are "told".

nradov 2y ago
You might not be as autonomous as you think. Behavior in this area is mostly driven by instinct and emotion. People just rationalize their actions later.
- ajkjk 2y ago
  I'm not saying that I am or am not autonomous at a chemical level. I'm saying that the fact that someone is programmed to do something has no bearing on whether they ought to do it at a moral level. The only reason a person ought to "follow their programming" is that they want to. After all, if it really is their programming, they will follow it automatically. There is no point rationalizing: "I must be programmed this way, therefore I have to do it". No, if you were programmed to do it, you'd be doing it already.
  - silexia 2y ago
    Are you wiser than billions of years of evolution?
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  Is it possible that instinct and emotion drive some people to scale mountains, write software, start businesses, create great works of art, instead of having children? The explore-exploit tradeoff is well known. Maybe my DNA isn't written to be happy with putting down roots and having kids?

big-green-man 2y ago

Well, you're not exactly primally driven to reproduce. You're primally driven to engage in some behavior, and experience hedonistic pleasure from it, with the side effect of reproduction. Reproduction is expensive, so evolution created a dirty trick. This is why birth control is so damn popular. You're driven to fuck, not to reproduce. I have no idea what the experience is for an amoeba, but I would guess it feels more like ejaculation than tears of joy to them. For a lot of people though, the desire for children is there, strong, and comes from somewhere else, almost like it comes from somewhere deeper like a soul or something. I know that's true for me. My goal with my relationship, and well before that when I was shopping, was about family for most of my adult life. It seems this is out of fashion these days and people figure it out late. Hedonistic pleasure is fleeting, creating amazing people can go on literally forever if done correctly, it is an ambition and achievement unto itself, and is rewarding in a way science doesn't yet understand, to be a little facetious.

echoangle 2y ago
> For a lot of people though, the desire for children is there, strong, and comes from somewhere else, almost like it comes from somewhere deeper like a soul or something. Isn’t that just another part of the evolutionary drive to get you to have children? Besides the sex drive? Just like you have a natural will to live and an objection to be killed/kill yourself?
- big-green-man 2y ago
  Well, that feeling of wanting to have kids isn't really universal. It's not really primal, like needing to eat or something. The desire for sex pretty much is. Is it evolved? I guess everything is evolved. Some people have the desire to abuse their children. That's evolved too some how some way, I wouldn't call that an evolutionary drive though. I don't know if female dogs crave sex or crave puppies. If they're anything like us, the majority of the time it's the former craving that leads to puppies. That's all I know.

imetatroll 2y ago

Lots of people are going to push back against your statement - I personally agree with you. This is all about continuing our species and everyone else trying to weave some different tale is simply living in la-la land.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
If continuing the species was really a matter of desperation, governments would pay citizens to do it. I don't inseminate people for free

amanaplanacanal 2y ago

From an evolutionary point of view the point of life may be reproduction, but from a personal point of view it most certainly is not. Plenty of people have no interest in having kids, and what about people who are sterile? Should they just give up on life? Some people prefer to live alone, but everybody has relationships of some sort, children or no.

silexia 2y ago
People have been fooled into thinking their hobbies should override billions of years of evolution... if you behave as your body is hard wired to behave, you will be happier.

PartiallyTyped 2y ago

[flagged]

nradov 2y ago
None of those tribes have ever managed to accomplish much. I doubt that's a coincidence.
- PartiallyTyped 2y ago
  I think we are dealing with survivorship bias more so than anything else. We can look back and speculate about society, how it functioned and all that, but every time we do we are limited in knowledge and by our own biases. I chose to reply as I did because of the whole “I doubt it’s a coincidence”.
  - imetatroll 2y ago
    So which country is it that fits your model and you can point to as an example?
moralestapia 2y ago
[flagged]
PartiallyTyped 2y ago
I can't reply to the flagged comment, but I can reply to myself. There is so much more in humanity than our ability to procreate — every living organism does that, that's not special, it doesn't make us human. What makes us human, is our ability to create, to pour our heart and very essence into our art, the desire to reach perfection in our craft. We create knowledge, we explore the world, and are in the process of discovering its true nature. We kiss and dance and love, we give, and we share. Having kids doesn't prevent us from enjoying all those things, but having kids is also not a prerequisite for a good and fulfilling life. Anyone can have children, but not everyone can create good people, and personally, I love my unborn children too much to expose them to this world.