# ENM is good/bad



## As'laDain (Nov 27, 2011)

Place to argue against or for ethical Non-monogamy. 

More of a debate thread, so give your opinion on it. Cite facts, examples, hypotheticals, etc... argue your point of view.


----------



## OnTheFly (Mar 12, 2015)

The heart wants what it wants. It (your heart, the seat of affection) will use every manner of justification from the sublime to the ridiculous to get it. 
Good/bad, morally?

Bad


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Ethically good, as long as all the people involved or affected are informed and affirmatively choose to participate. There is nothing wrong with trying to fulfill your desires when approached this way. Since there is a significant percentage of people who want relationships but not traditional monogamy, it's good to have ethical alternatives for them, rather than being forced to hide who they are and/or cheat. And we know that many, many people cheat to achieve their desires, so no amount of policing or moral righteousness will change this fact.


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

To be honest, I don't fully understand what this means. So perhaps lets start with some agreed upon definitions. Non-monogamy could mean being in more than one relationship or not being in any relationship in particular. As for the "ethical" part of it, that can only be debated once we have the definitions. Non-monogamy is almost the same as being single and dating around. Is it ethical? I guess its not unethical if one dates someone knowing that neither is exclusive. When feelings come into it, things change and that is where the debate begins.


----------



## CatholicDad (Oct 30, 2017)

Ok, I can avoid the thread jack on the other and share my ongoing confusion with ENM. Here's another ethics question. Birth control is never 100% and say woman in ENM relationship get's pregnant with one man's baby but perhaps not the "intended" man. How's that handled? Is the baby aborted to keep peace in the family? How's that fair or ethical.... especially to the baby? I guess the sucker that was off at work while baby was conceived will share the fathering duties 50% with "accidental" man?

The reality of human sexuality is that babies _can _be conceived. I think abortion must be a strong tenet of ENM arrangements... lots of innocent babies must be getting killed. From the child's perspective- ethically bad. The adults are having lots of sex- at the risk/suffering/expense of innocent unborn babies.

For this reason "ethical non-monogamy" ENM actually doesn't exist except perhaps in the mormon sorta way where it's one man and several women. At least in this arrangement the babies can be cared for. Man get's lots of sex and attention though and women get little... is that really ethical? 

I'd argue the safest, most ethical, baby making arrangement is the one God instituted.. one man, one woman.


----------



## As'laDain (Nov 27, 2011)

CatholicDad said:


> Ok, I can avoid the thread jack on the other and share my ongoing confusion with ENM. Here's another ethics question. Birth control is never 100% and say woman in ENM relationship get's pregnant with one man's baby but perhaps not the "intended" man. How's that handled? Is the baby aborted to keep peace in the family? How's that fair or ethical.... especially to the baby? I guess the sucker that was off at work while baby was conceived will share the fathering duties 50% with "accidental" man?
> 
> The reality of human sexuality is that babies _can _be conceived. I think abortion must be a strong tenet of ENM arrangements... lots of innocent babies must be getting killed. From the child's perspective- ethically bad. The adults are having lots of sex- at the risk/suffering/expense of innocent unborn babies.
> 
> ...


In my case at least, my wife and I talked about that. We basically agreed to deal with that when we get there, if it ever happens. And no, that didn't mean abortion. Nowadays, it's impossible for her to get pregnant so it's a moot point.

So far as it being ethical or not regarding abortion, what you just called unethical is the abortion, so your argument is kinda weak.

Non-monogamy is unethical because abortion is unethical. So, by that logic, the absence of abortion removes the thing that is unethical, making it ethical.

The logic doesn't work very well because the main argument requires a hypothetical that exists outside of the topic. By the same logic, i could argue that marriages are unethical because married people sometimes get abortions after unplanned pregnancies.

But that would be a silly argument.


----------



## happyhusband0005 (May 4, 2018)

CatholicDad said:


> Ok, I can avoid the thread jack on the other and share my ongoing confusion with ENM. Here's another ethics question. Birth control is never 100% and say woman in ENM relationship get's pregnant with one man's baby but perhaps not the "intended" man. How's that handled? Is the baby aborted to keep peace in the family? How's that fair or ethical.... especially to the baby? I guess the sucker that was off at work while baby was conceived will share the fathering duties 50% with "accidental" man?
> 
> The reality of human sexuality is that babies _can _be conceived. I think abortion must be a strong tenet of ENM arrangements... lots of innocent babies must be getting killed. From the child's perspective- ethically bad. The adults are having lots of sex- at the risk/suffering/expense of innocent unborn babies.
> 
> ...


This probably a question better answered by someone involved in Poly relationships. I can say of the however many thousands of times I have had sex in my life I have only ever got a woman (my wife) pregnant twice. Both times on purpose. It's really not hard to not get pregnant if you don't want to. At least thats been my life experience.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

I cannot answer good or bad - it just IS. It's been around forever, and it will never cease to exist. People who think it's disgusting or immoral should certainly NOT practice it. That's their freedom!

What I'd really like to know is WHY it is so hard for most people to extend freedom and acceptance and respect to others who do not share the same views as they do...??

And just as an FYI -- I have never been in any ENM relationship, nor do I ever plan to be in one. It doesn't hold any appeal for ME personally...however, I recognize and support the right and freedom of other adults to make the choices that fill their needs and make them happy.

Why should anyone live any other way?


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

People have never been as free as they are now. 

And in terms of acceptance, I wouldn't go out of my way to be disrespectful or hurtful to anyone, but I'm not going to agree with or celebrate a practice that's very clearly not within my belief system.

And just for the record, I've not once witnessed @Diana _ever_ being unkind or hostile to anyone on this forum.

It's actually the opposite. 

She's the one who consistently gets attacked - usually by people who claim to be very open minded and tolerant.



LisaDiane said:


> What I'd really like to know is WHY it is so hard for most people to extend freedom and acceptance and respect to others who do not share the same views as they do...??


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

minimalME said:


> People have never been as free as they are now.
> 
> *And in terms of acceptance, I wouldn't go out of my way to be disrespectful or hurtful to anyone, but I'm not going to agree with or celebrate a practice that's very clearly not within my belief system.*
> 
> ...


And this is what makes you special and different when it comes to disagreeing with others!

For many of Diana's posts, I agree with you, and agree with her. 

And nothing I've ever posted to her (or anyone) was posted in a sarcastic or snarky manner - anything I asked, I really wanted to know the answer to. And if I thought she was being unkind, I would challenge her just as clearly and uncompromisingly as she does to others.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

LisaDiane said:


> I cannot answer good or bad - it just IS. It's been around forever, and it will never cease to exist. People who think it's disgusting or immoral should certainly NOT practice it. That's their freedom!
> 
> What I'd really like to know is WHY it is so hard for most people to extend freedom and acceptance and respect to others who do not share the same views as they do...??
> 
> ...


It is because some of us have too much empathy and hate seeing others floundering around and they suffering.

For 'their' obviously flawed, and gossamer thin reasons.

Yes, it is their life to live as they please (some limits apply!).

Yes, those who disagree can look the other way....and should.

Life often has a way of embroiling the innocent in these dramas.

Speaking of drama, some feed off of this, these matters.

Do what you must, leave me out of it.


----------



## Not (Jun 12, 2017)

I personally could not live with ENM, I’m way to territorial and would drop my man in a heartbeat if I were to find out it’s something he wanted but I would never shame couples who’re capable of living that way.

I value grace and dignity in my relationships but I can’t equate ENM with those traits, I imagine the opposite.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Like anything else it depends whose doing it. 

I think given the state of human beings in general it has the potential to be bad. I mean would probably say the same thing about monogamous marriage in today's day and age.

Let me put it this way. A lot less people then get married should. Less people then that should have kids. And less people then that could have successful ENM.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

LisaDiane said:


> What I'd really like to know is WHY it is so hard for most people to extend freedom and acceptance and respect to others who do not share the same views as they do...??


Because there is a never ending supply of those who luxuriate in the policing of others.


----------



## Mybabysgotit (Jul 1, 2019)

I've always been of the motto: live and let live. You know, to each his own. I just don't understand why one would want to get married if they're ENM? Why put up with the headache of marriage if you want to date other people?


----------



## maquiscat (Aug 20, 2019)

Mybabysgotit said:


> I've always been of the motto: live and let live. You know, to each his own. I just don't understand why one would want to get married if they're ENM? Why put up with the headache of marriage if you want to date other people?


Had it occurred to you that some of us want to marry more than one person, not just date? Naturally, I don't mean married in the legal sense.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk


----------



## maquiscat (Aug 20, 2019)

minimalME said:


> And just for the record, I've not once witnessed @Diana _ever_ being unkind or hostile to anyone on this forum.
> 
> It's actually the opposite.
> 
> She's the one who consistently gets attacked - usually by people who claim to be very open minded and tolerant.


But she is also the one who tries to place things in her absolute. She doesn't say, "I would consider that unfaithful" or adultery is a sin for me". Instead it's more along the lines of "they are being unfaithful" and "they are violating their vows". When she says, "adultery is being unfaithful" she is trying to tell us what faithfulness is supposed to be for us. That is what we are having issues with. Not that she doesn't feel it's for her.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Because there is a never ending supply of those who luxuriate in the policing of others.


More so, policy-ing others.

Group-think, employing shun-gun shaming.

Free speech and free thinking has *now been replaced by permitted speech.
Free speech by consensus only.

The consensus may not be the majority, just those in power.

*Now, is never unique. Just a new twist on past human practices.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

I think ethical non-monogamy is a good thing, since it is about participating in non-monogamous sexual relationships with informed consent which is the ethical way to do it. Of which adultery can be perfectly good as well, as long as it falls within the practices of ethical non-monogamy.

As far as my perspective goes the only time I think adultery is poor form, is when it is done behind a sexual partners back without their knowledge. With the caveat that I think it is perfectly fine to cheat on a spouse, if that spouse frequently, mostly or always withholds sharing sex.

On that caveat, I will also add that I don't think cheating on a spouse in marriage is ethical behaviour. Yet choosing to impose a limited sex life upon a spouse or affording a spouse only celibacy is not ethical behaviour either. So if a frequent/mostly or always sexual withholder gets cheated on, they are simply getting what they deserve.


----------



## BruceBanner (May 6, 2018)

Personal said:


> I think ethical non-monogamy is a good thing, since it is about participating in non-monogamous sexual relationships with informed consent which is the ethical way to do it. Of which adultery can be perfectly good as well, as long as it falls within the practices of ethical non-monogamy.
> 
> As far as my perspective goes the only time I think adultery is poor form, is when it is done behind a sexual partners back without their knowledge. With the caveat that I think it is perfectly fine to cheat on a spouse, if that spouse frequently, mostly or always withholds sharing sex.
> 
> On that caveat, I will also add that I don't think cheating on a spouse in marriage is ethical behaviour. Yet choosing to impose a limited sex life upon a spouse or affording a spouse only celibacy is not ethical behaviour either. So if a frequent/mostly or always sexual withholder gets cheated on, they are simply getting what they deserve.


Getting what they deserve would be divorcing and both people moving on with their lives. Not dragging your marriage through the mud and causing a bigger fallout with sneaking around.


----------



## maquiscat (Aug 20, 2019)

BruceBanner said:


> Getting what they deserve would be divorcing and both people moving on with their lives. Not dragging your marriage through the mud and causing a bigger fallout with sneaking around.


I'm going to agree. While I also agree with @Personal that the wholesale withholding of sex within a marriage (unless agreed upon) is unethical, you don't counter unethical behavior with the same. Now I will say, probably contrary to others' opinions, if you separate, but haven't finalized the divorce, then it's not unethical to begin dating or sleeping around. 

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

BruceBanner said:


> Getting what they deserve would be divorcing and both people moving on with their lives. Not dragging your marriage through the mud and causing a bigger fallout with sneaking around.


Sure, this is the ideal. But relationships and how things happen don't always follow an "ideal" path. I agree more with @Personal. Refusing to meet sexual needs in a monogamous marriage is equally unethical (for ME).


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

Shouldn't the ethics of non-monogamy be viewed from within that community? Those ethics don't govern my behavior as it pertains to my relationships, so I find myself in a like minded community that supports those ethics in theory at least. There are a lot of vastly different communities, and there are good and bad aspects to them all when viewed from within, I'm sure.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

I don't think you can give ENM a blanket good or bad at all - it depends on the couples involved.


----------

