How can I actually pick 1?

[Consept]

To context what I'm gonna say I have had a bit of a shitty month so mood isn't great, not depressed or anything just not feeling upbeat. 

I've always had this feeling of not really wanting to settle down, if I'm honest I am an aviodant attachment style. I've tried to work on this amongst other and there has been progress, the main issue though is not trusting a woman to take care of me emotionally. This is obviously to do with my mum who definitely didn't do that and so I've always been very independent. 

I like having a woman be there and be someone you can talk to, do stuff with, have sex etc and I also like helping them with whatever, whether it's just being empathetic and giving advice or anything really. But I feel like I also really want my space, I also like meeting new people and I hate the feeling of being tied down. Because of this I keep getting in a cycle of getting attached to someone but not fully commiting, then either I realise it can't work or they get bored of no progress and it ends but I always feel terrible at the end. 

I've recently had this thought of like how the fuck do I just pick one and then that's it? I'm not saying I want multiple partners necessarily as that would be the same thing but more complicated, but I find it hard getting my head around just being with one person forever. I don't know if I'm weird because of this. 

My ex has just got with someone else and it is honestly such a shit feeling but I can't say anything because I either didn't commit or stayed with her way too long when I knew there were issues. So it's on me completely but still just feels crazy. 

Anyway kinda rambling but any input would be nice

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, Consept said:

I've recently had this thought of like how the fuck do I just pick one and then that's it? I'm not saying I want multiple partners necessarily as that would be the same thing but more complicated, but I find it hard getting my head around just being with one person forever. I don't know if I'm weird because of this. 

That's why hardcore players don't settle down, they just sleep around and date casually.

Not saying that's right, but that is one lifestyle option.

Yes, there is an inherent tradeoff between relationship and freedom/variety.

Edited Friday at 11:32 PM by Leo Gura

[Consept]

19 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's why hardcore players don't settle down, they just sleep around and date casually.

Not saying that's right, but that is one lifestyle option.

Yes, there is an inherent tradeoff between relationship and freedom/variety.

Man it's tough, there's pros and cons for each. But doing the player thing kinda feels like if you're travelling and you just make friends for that place and then you don't really see them again and then you make friends in a new place etc it's very transitory. Like you just dip in and out of someone's life. 

What road are you going down? I think we're around the same age 

[aurum]

The eternal struggle.

I don't have any magic wisdom on resolving it. Some people find ethical non-monogamy or being monogamish works. You just have to know yourself and what you value the most at this point in your life.

Edited yesterday at 12:58 AM by aurum

[PenguinPablo]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Man it's tough, there's pros and cons for each. But doing the player thing kinda feels like if you're travelling and you just make friends for that place and then you don't really see them again and then you make friends in a new place etc it's very transitory. Like you just dip in and out of someone's life. 

What road are you going down? I think we're around the same age 

I think the player needs to settle down eventually. Probably in his 40s or 50s.

Zan Perrion is great example from the pickup community. One of GOATs. 

That's what he did pretty much.

I think it's too lonely. And your options are gonna decline as you get older.

[Buck Edwards]

I don't know. It's really up to you. Men who fear to commit generally never settle down. The grass is always greener on the other side. 

[RendHeaven]

@aurum Have you found any solutions for yourself?

[aurum]

20 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

@aurum Have you found any solutions for yourself?

No.

I did date one girl who was into having an open relationship. But she partied way too much and wanted me to be the rich guy paying for her Paris Hilton lifestyle. So that didn't work out.

I'm optimistic for a better solution in the future, but realistically some compromises are going to have to be made. You're not going to get everything you want.

[Leo Gura]

One option is to have phases in your life where you sleep around, and phases where you are in serious relationships. This seems more realistic for many people.

Edited yesterday at 06:02 AM by Leo Gura

[Cubbage]

Struggling with this exact scenario right now in life, I empathise with your confusion.

[Consept]

It's interesting that a lot of people can relate, most of my friends are in ltrs or if not married with kids, that prob gives me a kinda fomo. Although when I look at their lives it looks so stressful especially with kids. 

6 hours ago, PenguinPablo said:

think it's too lonely. And your options are gonna decline as you get older.

It definitely can be lonely, however so can a relationship that goes sour. But I hear you, options will decline.

4 hours ago, aurum said:

No.

I did date one girl who was into having an open relationship. But she partied way too much and wanted me to be the rich guy paying for her Paris Hilton lifestyle. So that didn't work out.

I'm optimistic for a better solution in the future, but realistically some compromises are going to have to be made. You're not going to get everything you want.

That's an issue as well, most girls don't really want an open relationship, unless they're at a certain stage of life and if they are at that stage they will want to party and meet a lot of people.

Another way it could go is if she really likes you, she'll go along with whatever you say just so she's stays around and the intention will be to wear you down, she won't necessarily do this consciously. So basically you run into a lot of issues doing this and I'm with you that you do have to compromise on things, it's hard though. 

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

One option is to have phases in your life where you sleep around, and phases where you are in serious relationships. This seems more realistic for many people.

Yeah that makes sense and then give yourself fully to each phase. Thing is I don't like randomly sleeping around, I do like to build a connection with the person and see them again, I just don't want them around all the time. 

1 hour ago, Cubbage said:

Struggling with this exact scenario right now in life, I empathise with your confusion.

I guess there isn't really an answer just pros and cons on each side. Part of me thinks are we just getting funneled into these traditional relationships by society? Like is that why it feels so difficult for a lot of people and flat out doesn't work for a lot of people in it? 

I'm more than open to me being the issue as well but I have always felt this pressure to find the 'right one'. Maybe I will come across someone who changes everything, who knows. 

[RendHeaven]

4 hours ago, aurum said:

No.

I did date one girl who was into having an open relationship. But she partied way too much and wanted me to be the rich guy paying for her Paris Hilton lifestyle. So that didn't work out.

I'm optimistic for a better solution in the future, but realistically some compromises are going to have to be made. You're not going to get everything you want.

Party girl sounds like a problem. Glad you caught onto her scheme.

Personally I'm pretty sold on non-monogamy.

For you or anybody else in this thread, can you spell out the hangup? Why cling to monogamy?

Here are some objections I can think of off the top of my head:

1. But I don't want my girl fucking other guys! (enormous objection, aptly #1 on the list)
2. But I think sacrificing your options is virtuous and strengthens your mutual bond! Without that upfront cost, there's no incentive to stick it out together when things get tough!
3. But I want true, deep love. This can't be possible if you're sleeping around!
4. But look at what happened to (insert polyamorous celebrity having a disastrous episode)!
5. But I want to get married and have kids. I dream of that kind of stable nuclear family ideal!
6. But girls wouldn't want an open relationship even if I did!

And here are some contemplation avenues (each number corresponds to the list above):

1. You sound insecure. The reality is, she's gonna fuck whoever she wants because she has free will. And this is the case even under monogamy - she can still cheat on you or leave you. In fact, her leaving you is the most likely scenario, especially if she's attractive. You really think becoming her legal husband means her genitals exclusively belong to you forever? That's beyond delusional.
2. I agree with the importance of sacrifice. But why is the metric of sacrifice sexual optionality? This stinks of cultural indoctrination and insecurity. There are an infinity of ways to sacrifice for your partner - how self-serving and ego-boosting of you to hoard their genitals and to paint that as virtue... A monogamous deal asymmetrically benefits the partner with less sexual options. This is oftentimes the man, although rarely a woman will triumphantly lock down a total stud and feel the rush of asymmetric value arbitrage. Very convenient for a guy to act like he's making a noble sacrifice by getting monogamous, when he's actually not giving up much, and the deeper underlying motive is to capture the woman's body for himself.
3. Why does gatekeeping each others' genitals influence the quality of your love? There more I think about it, the more suffocating and unloving monogamy is. Is controlling each other your definition of love? Imagine a relationship with as little possible control happening in both directions. The level of trust and vulnerability and development this takes is a true test of love. This means your girl can go fuck another guy, come home to you, tell you about it (to the extent that you're curious), and then you're happy for her as long as she's happy. Her winning = you winning. Why not? You love her! This should be a no-brainer. And then you guys can have awesome sex, and everybody wins. And before you get up in arms about refusing to be a cuck or whatever, remember that the vice versa scenario is also active. You have unbound freedom as well. Best case scenario your girl is down for threesomes or even more. This may sound utopian, but I know real people who have these kinds of relationship arrangements. It requires next-level openness and communication skill and self-esteem, but it's certainly possible.
4. Celebrities and internet influencers are usually egomaniacs that have self-sabotaging personality traits. It's very likely that you simply haven't seen a healthy example of non-monogamy, therefore your mind jumps to the conclusion that it's not possible. How would you know? Have you tried playing devil's advocate against your assumptions (go out of your way to seek examples of healthy non-monogamy)...
5. What stops you from having an open marriage? Why do you assume that to be a good parent, you must be monogamous? If you have multiple partners, simply don't flaunt them in front of your kids (obviously it will fuck with their attachment and development if you're constantly introducing them to a revolving door of adult figures).
6. How do you know? Have you tried asking? How many times? Keep in mind that a girl who really really likes you will bend over backwards for you. Basic frame control is required to "convince" her of your non-monogamous agenda - you can't just get on your knees and start begging her. Is it manipulative to "frame control" her into adopting non-monogamy? Perhaps. But locking her down into a monogamous contract is also manipulative, we just don't see the manipulation because everyone is doing it. By participating in dating you are bound to manipulate, so as long as you are a thoughtful and empathetic person, don't get hung up on it.

Food for thought.

I'm not saying that non-monogamy must be better than monogamy. There's clearly deep nuance and individual preference here at play.

I think my main point here is simply that, the urge to defend to monogamy, or the repulsion toward non-monogamy is usually unexamined cultural bias and personal selfishness/weakness.

Feel free to be a champion of monogamy, but make sure you choose it from a place of serious introspection after first steelmanning non-monogamy

[RendHeaven]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Part of me thinks are we just getting funneled into these traditional relationships by society?

Yes. There is a titanic wave of invisible pressure on every human in the developed world to follow monogamous trends.

It's usually implicit and unquestioned.

The problem here is not that monogamy is wrong or bad. The problem is that we are unconsciously magnetized towards it without even realizing it.

I have enormous respect for people who consciously choose monogamy after doing a thorough excavation of all alternative options. But who really does this? Most people just fall into the funnel with 0 self-reflection.

[AION]

The fear of ending up as a senile lonely old guy with no legacy and kids is what makes you pick 1. What you give up in breadth you gain in depth. 

Edited 21 hours ago by AION

[RendHeaven]

1 minute ago, AION said:

senile lonely old guy with no legacy and kids

I'm strangely ok with this lol

[AION]

5 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

I'm strangely ok with this lol

Sounds very appealing right

[Consept]

12 minutes ago, AION said:

The fear of ending up as a senile lonely old guy with no legacy and kids is what makes you pick 1. What you give up in breadth you gain in depth. 

I would push back on this although I get where you're coming from. 1. Is that it's essentially a fear motivation, it's the ultimate fomo 2. There's no guarantee that you won't still end up lonely, there's a good chance you'd break up and if you do you may not have built the social relationships you would've otherwise 3. Legacy is kinda irrelevant once you die, also even if it is relevant there's an argument to be made that you can make a greater legacy without kids. 

I don't even necessarily disagree with you I'm just making an argument for the other side. I agree you potentially will get a lot more depth with one person over multiple, that is actually the best argument for me personally 

[gettoefl]

3 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

Party girl sounds like a problem. Glad you caught onto her scheme.

Personally I'm pretty sold on non-monogamy.

For you or anybody else in this thread, can you spell out the hangup? Why cling to monogamy?

Here are some objections I can think of off the top of my head:

1. But I don't want my girl fucking other guys! (enormous objection, aptly #1 on the list)
2. But I think sacrificing your options is virtuous and strengthens your mutual bond! Without that upfront cost, there's no incentive to stick it out together when things get tough!
3. But I want true, deep love. This can't be possible if you're sleeping around!
4. But look at what happened to (insert polyamorous celebrity having a disastrous episode)!
5. But I want to get married and have kids. I dream of that kind of stable nuclear family ideal!
6. But girls wouldn't want an open relationship even if I did!

And here are some contemplation avenues (each number corresponds to the list above):

1. You sound insecure. The reality is, she's gonna fuck whoever she wants because she has free will. And this is the case even under monogamy - she can still cheat on you or leave you. In fact, her leaving you is the most likely scenario, especially if she's attractive. You really think becoming her legal husband means her genitals exclusively belong to you forever? That's beyond delusional.
2. I agree with the importance of sacrifice. But why is the metric of sacrifice sexual optionality? This stinks of cultural indoctrination and insecurity. There are an infinity of ways to sacrifice for your partner - how self-serving and ego-boosting of you to hoard their genitals and to paint that as virtue... A monogamous deal asymmetrically benefits the partner with less sexual options. This is oftentimes the man, although rarely a woman will triumphantly lock down a total stud and feel the rush of asymmetric value arbitrage. Very convenient for a guy to act like he's making a noble sacrifice by getting monogamous, when he's actually not giving up much, and the deeper underlying motive is to capture the woman's body for himself.
3. Why does gatekeeping each others' genitals influence the quality of your love? There more I think about it, the more suffocating and unloving monogamy is. Is controlling each other your definition of love? Imagine a relationship with as little possible control happening in both directions. The level of trust and vulnerability and development this takes is a true test of love. This means your girl can go fuck another guy, come home to you, tell you about it (to the extent that you're curious), and then you're happy for her as long as she's happy. Her winning = you winning. Why not? You love her! This should be a no-brainer. And then you guys can have awesome sex, and everybody wins. And before you get up in arms about refusing to be a cuck or whatever, remember that the vice versa scenario is also active. You have unbound freedom as well. Best case scenario your girl is down for threesomes or even more. This may sound utopian, but I know real people who have these kinds of relationship arrangements. It requires next-level openness and communication skill and self-esteem, but it's certainly possible.
4. Celebrities and internet influencers are usually egomaniacs that have self-sabotaging personality traits. It's very likely that you simply haven't seen a healthy example of non-monogamy, therefore your mind jumps to the conclusion that it's not possible. How would you know? Have you tried playing devil's advocate against your assumptions (go out of your way to seek examples of healthy non-monogamy)...
5. What stops you from having an open marriage? Why do you assume that to be a good parent, you must be monogamous? If you have multiple partners, simply don't flaunt them in front of your kids (obviously it will fuck with their attachment and development if you're constantly introducing them to a revolving door of adult figures).
6. How do you know? Have you tried asking? How many times? Keep in mind that a girl who really really likes you will bend over backwards for you. Basic frame control is required to "convince" her of your non-monogamous agenda - you can't just get on your knees and start begging her. Is it manipulative to "frame control" her into adopting non-monogamy? Perhaps. But locking her down into a monogamous contract is also manipulative, we just don't see the manipulation because everyone is doing it. By participating in dating you are bound to manipulate, so as long as you are a thoughtful and empathetic person, don't get hung up on it.

Food for thought.

I'm not saying that non-monogamy must be better than monogamy. There's clearly deep nuance and individual preference here at play.

I think my main point here is simply that, the urge to defend to monogamy, or the repulsion toward non-monogamy is usually unexamined cultural bias and personal selfishness/weakness.

Feel free to be a champion of monogamy, but make sure you choose it from a place of serious introspection after first steelmanning non-monogamy

First point is that non-monogamy for a man means you need to be financially independent for example wealthy.

Be able to pay your way and theirs.

For a woman it's you need someone with status and stability who can take care of you, your present and future kids, other people and other people's kids.

Non-monogamy is transactional and no sacrifices needed on either side; we are all complete just as we are and another person in the mix is a bonus not a necessity.

For example, polygamy works in the Middle East because men have a juicy 8-figures in the bank - thanks to oil largesse.

Monogamy on the other hand is more equal and each helping out the best they can to make things work; each one needs and each one sacrifices.

Edited 18 hours ago by gettoefl

[AION]

@Consept you make a good point about FOMO but that is life. You can’t have your cake and eat it too so we have to make trade offs all the time. Death is a real thing and a great teacher but obviously it shouldn’t be your only teacher. Rarely I have seen people who have chosen their career instead of a family and be fulfilled and feel belonging.  I’m not saying it is not possible. I’m just sharing my experience with what kind of energy they were radiating. They have this very overcompensating vibe. Being an eternal child aka Peter Pan is all fun and games when you are young and vital but it looks sad after a certain age. 

Edited 18 hours ago by AION

[RendHeaven]

1 hour ago, gettoefl said:

First point is that non-monogamy for a man means you need to be financially independent for example wealthy.

Be able to pay your way and theirs.

Not necessarily. I'm not suggesting you have multiple wives in your saudi harem or anything insane like that lol.

The simplest and most hassle-free non-monogamy is to have a girlfriend/wife in an emotionally exclusive relationship, but both parties are allowed to have unrestricted sex with anybody in a "friends with benefits" setting. The emotional exclusivity helps her feel safe, fulfills the criteria of mutual sacrifice, and disincentivizes her from running off with other men (lmao)

Therefore, money spent should be roughly identical to standard monogamy.

1 hour ago, gettoefl said:

Non-monogamy is transactional and no sacrifices needed on either side

Re-read point #2 in my original post. I am pro-sacrifice, I think it is necessary for a deep connection. However, it is totally arbitrary to sacrifice your genitals. Successful non-monogamy still involves rules, boundaries, and sacrifice. This is discussed in advance through skillful communication and compromise. A total free-for-all would just lead to headache and chaos.

Don't forget that monogamy is also "transactional." All dating is transactional.

1 hour ago, gettoefl said:

we are all complete just as we are and another person in the mix is a bonus not a necessity.

Strawman.

1 hour ago, gettoefl said:

Monogamy on the other hand is more equal

Spell out why you think non-monogamy is less "equal"