"These are their stories" and then there's only one?
I don't know if that counts as fairness and equal time

Yaaaaaaaawwwwn.

"Tales of the Modestly Successful Lawn Maintenancers"
"Tales of the Single-Passenger-Vehicle Commuters"
"Tales of the Single People Who Drink Socially"
"Tales of the People Who Have a Job But Not a Career"
"Tales of the People Who Have Hobbies, Like, You Know, I Used to Play a Little Guitar in College and I Still Take It Out Once in a While"

Seems more monogamousish than monogamous due to the fact that there both open to an affair but hey whatever works for them. Being of Asian decent and knowing lots of Asians families I've seen many instances of monogamy working. Now could these couples be having secret affairs, I guess, but I think there are some people who could keep in their pants and be happy with one person.

Now this is not meant to bash non-monogamous couples. If that works for you thats great I don't feel anyone should tell anyone else how to live. I have always thought it was like being gay and straight, some are monogamous, some are not, and there is nothing unnatural with either.

@2, did he put the scare quotes around "marriage" and actually use that mangled word-mash "supermegamajorities"? Because somehow I'm not picturing it. Good try though. You're a champ.

How long has this couple been together?

Monogamy isn't especially difficult during the early years of a relationship. Show me a letter like this from a couple who's been together 15 years, and I'll be impressed.

Of course, everyone who thinks they're in a monogamous relationship is positive their partner isn't cheating. We're so happy together! He/she could/would never cheat. And then...yeah. I wouldn't trust anyone that much ever again because of my experiences. And I would never claim to be faithful when I wasn't. But a lot of people do.

@5, by way of @2. Nice try, indeed.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5…

@2 precedent for seeing marriage as a civil right that the states can't take away: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._V…

@6 Assume about 50-60% of married people cheat on their partners (which is approximately the stats I've read on the subject). Of the remainder, maybe half are monogamish and thus finding fulfillment outside the partnership without cheating. Maybe half of the remaining are unhappily monogamous.

That leaves something like 10% of married couple monogamous and happy about it. What I don't understand is why we should open up the institution of marriage to these strange people who only want one partner, but I guess we should be tolerant of minority sexualities. ;-)

@8, he's a Constitutional law lecturer, of course he's going to have a legalistic perspective on judicial decision-making; doubly so in an election year. I just couldn't help but notice how our anonymous coward friend couldn't keep his sticky little fingers off the text he was copy-pasting.

Damnit, will you people get over yourselves? He just puts one letter up (which, in my opinion sounds more mongamish in the future than straight up monogamous couple) and you guys shit on monogamy. I don't shit on people's choices about having an different types of relationships, I respect their choices and give them the benefit of a doubt. Studies have shown that people are the the same amoutn of happy v. unhappy regardless of the relationship (sorry, don't have time to find the link). It really is sex negative if you think about it.

I was 18 when we had our first kiss. We've been married 18 years. Two kids. Mom jeans? No. I'm a serious dancer, so slender and flexible frame is a necessity. Happy? Yes. Monogamous? Yes. It's a kink. Just like my love for oral sex, facials, et cetera. Sex? All the time, a lock on the door works well. Kids are an excuse to up our creativity.

Perhaps, I'm deluded and we aren't really happy? Maybe, he tells me falsehoods? Or maybe, I've got him tied up in knots literally and figuratively, and we really do make each other happy? He does have such a beautiful mouth, and a fine rounded bunda from all his years playing basketball. And, he does make lovely children. Anyhoo, open, monogamous, and all shades in between, if it works appreciate it and be joyful.

@13, I ain't shitting on monogamy. I'm effectively monogamous myself at this point, although that's really de facto rather than de jure and subject to change at any opportune moment.

No, I'm not saying monogamy is bad, or wrong, or impossible. I'm saying it's boring. It's the standard narrative. It's the status quo. It's what everyone assumes their neighbors are doing. It's so very profoundly... uninteresting.

@13 yeah, I read about all sorts of stuff in Dan's column I don't think would work for me personally. (And now I know what to do if I find someone tied up at a party.) I know the study you mean. Children, too: nada. Full set of limbs: meh. Money helps only to the extent that you know where you'll sleep tonight and finding dinner won't be a worry. Also, everyone feels they would be happy making exactly twice as much money. Go from $20,000 to $40,000, and you quickly reset to realize that at $80,000 you could have all the comforts of now, slightly upgraded, plus some nice splurges.

The happily monogamous suffer the same lack of attention as the happily stable functioning anyone else, in that it's the default assumption and not exciting to write about--I get that part of 15's complaint. But there's an interesting research bias you hint at there, that people study the unhappy much more than the happy. The Geography of Bliss, by Eric Weiner, is an intriguing travel book addressing the happiest (and a few of the unhappiest) places on Earth. (Useful tip: do not eat the rotten shark in Iceland, national delicacy or no. Whyever they're happy, it's not the shark.)

@14 kim in portland
You're doing it right;-)

@17:

You're very sweet, Mr. J. xo

@Kim in portland - that's the kind of story I was expecting to hear in "Tales of the Monogamous"
Thanks :)

We go out together and flirt (with girls - helps that I'm bisexual)

For some reason, this makes me want to barf all over my keyboard. Oh well, whatever lifts their luggage, I guess.

Why do people get into relationships in the first place?

When things go bad, you're not alone. When things go well, you have someone to share with.

For over 25 years my wife has been the most interesting and fun person I've known. We share common interests across the board from professional to friends to food. I've been her only lover, and she's gone from late bloomer to knowing what she wants and, most importantly for me, what I want. She has learned to trust herself and to let go, to take and to hammer my dick into melted goo. I'm sure we were lucky to find each other, but we've also worked hard together (including with counseling to deal with the primarily external pressures, and my in retrospect workaholism). We've always had enough and more; my one foray into expensive car-dom was disastrous (never buy a first model year of anything) followed by bliss in our Prius. We mix frugality with trying to find the most sumptuous dining available to us and, now the kids are older, trips overseas and domestic. We have a lot of fun together.

It's cheesy, but last week I had one of the finest meals of my life, saving half of it and sharing how good it was with another person made it even better. It was our 25th anniversary dinner.

Peace.

@21 I see your point.

@13, agreed. Even among the "sex positive" there's still a lot of stigma for the monogamous and those who want monogamy, and stigma for those with low libidos (particularly if they also dare want monogamy!)

I guess it's overcompensation for all the years of shit piled on anyone who wasn't monogamous and straight. But it kind of bothers me. Of all those who should know better than to equate selfishness or immorality with "whatever *I* don't want"...

I'm in a relationship very much like the LW's -- currently monogamous but open to monogamishness in the future. We both enjoy our sex life and, for now, each other is enough.

@6 Wife and I have been together over 20 years, married for 15. Early kid years were hard on the sex life until we learned that spontaneity is vastly overrated. Now that they are older, like the letter writer said, a locked door solves all. Will spare the details but the sex is hot, frequent enough, and anything is on the menu.

Great for us but even I know that hearing about happy, well-adjusted, monogamous couples is boring.

Going on 17 years, happily monogamous and with no desire to open the relationship up. Monogamy isn't for everyone, but it is disturbing to hear so much negativity and doubt about it regarding those who do prefer it.

Such pejorative comments. If we are monogamous we must be boring? Or one of us much secretly be cheating?

Monogamy isn't hard for everyone. I find it very easy. I never liked dating. Lot of stress and trouble. The whole game of trying to win someones affections, or just their body for the night, was always an unpleasant process, particularly since there are a lot of jerks out there you need to sort through.

The idea of having to go through all that again is enough to make me want to stay faithful and monogamous. I wouldn't cheat not only because I wouldn't dare risk what I have, but I find the prospect of having to win someone over from scratch and maintain another relationship not only not attractive, but nonsensical when I have someone I am crazy about at home. Why would I want to take time away from that chase someone who will most likely to be a disappointment in the long run?

There are plenty of attractive, physically hot people out there, and I fantasize as much as the next guy. But the idea of actually doing it is really just unthinkable to me, and I am perfectly happy that way.

For those who do want that great, go for it. But no need to denigrate those of us who actually enjoy our monogamy. And it isn't boring if you have anything resembling an imagination. There is always something to spice things up.

Also if people want to fantasize that's fine but I find it best not to tell your partner, unless they are into that. If you keep it to yourself you get a little extra kick sometimes and don't hurt your partner's feelings. Win/Win

@21 I sort of twitched there, as well. Otherwise I got nothin'.

I think it's a wiring thing in people. Just like there's a Kinsey scale, I think there should be a monogamy scale. Just like you can say "straight" or gay" or "bi", there's many shades of grey (or rainbow) in between, & beyond that.

Some people are more comfortable being monogamous. Others find it a challenge, but go along to appease their partners. & others need to be open to some degree, that TBD by both partners (hopefully).

It's a scale, like any other factor in sexuality. Kinky/not kinky; gay/straight, mono/poly. Most of us live in some grey areas in at least one of those vectors. Discussion of it seems to get pretty polarizing quickly, of mono "vs" poly/open. Each type of arrangement - including saying "fuck it, & flying solo - requires different efforts & comes w/ different risks, & boredoms.

Just wish those preferences were something people felt more free to discuss earlier on in the dating process.

@24 / shurenka: It's totally fine for someone w/ a low libido to want monogamy from their partner, don't think it's a "how dare they" thing. But it should be on the low-libido partner to be upfront about both those things w/ a partner, as early on as is comfortable/possible. Y'wanna make sure both are on the same page about that.

I also think this true of high-libido partners; if you think you need a more than average amount of sex to feel happy, letting someone you're thinking about getting serious with know when you can is a good idea. ;)

@15 -- Meh, being straight is the status quo as well. Should straight people run out and try to force themselves to be gay in order to appear less boring and more interesting?

@30,

It's up to both partners to communicate, when beginning (or preferably before beginning) a sexual relationship, how much they are into sex and how often they desire it (or need it, as the case may be)... whether they have a low libido, average libido, or insatiable libido. Also, how much they are willing to compromise to meet the needs of their partner, either by having more sex than they want, going without, or agreeing to some type of open relationship. That doesn't guarantee that your partner will abide by the comprise -- but it does clarify and codify whatever your sexual and emotional expectations are, for yourself, making it easier to let go of (or not start) an incompatible relationship.

Unfortunately the a person with low-to-no libido will rarely initiate this sort of conversation... either because they are repressed or don't care enough about sex... so it is important if you need sex to bring it up. (Even though ideally the burden shouldn't fall on any one party.)

If your partner isn't willing to talk openly about their sexual desires then they perhaps aren't very mature (and shouldn't be having teh sex) and at the very least you know that a relationship with them is likely to entail huge communication problems.

@14 (Kim in Portland), to see an American using the word 'bunda' has really made my day. You've got me laughing for 2 straight minutes. :-)

I've met my wife about 11 years ago (it'll be 11 in June). We both had had many previous sexual partners, and were both somewhat disappointed with the idea of starting a relationship. We both had low expectatoins when we started dating, and we'd probably both be surprised if someone had told us at the beginning we'd still be together (and legally married!) after 11 years.

Dan is right when he says that no relationship works, until one does.

Being with my wife was not a case of 'love at first sight', but a case of slowly discovering more and more surprising things about her that solidified a bond that was originally weak. It came in layers, it became slowly stronger (while I wasn't looking), till at one point I could no longer imagine my life without her.

And we've been happily monogamous since the start. Even though both of us had lived non-monogamous situations at some point or other. Because, frankly, we became increasingly more interested in each other as time went by; at some point, her reaction to any new sexual ideas became, well, almost the best part of having new sexual ideas.

Not that I think monogamy is a necessity; in fact, since I do have a little cuckold fetish, I'd even quite enjoy it if my wife had affairs. But she doesn't want to (though she can pretend quite well to please me), because she says there is no interest -- it would be like a chore to her. And I feel the same way -- not simply to fit the cuckold profile, but because... well, sex with her simply seems more interesting. I want to know how she will react to any new ideas, not some other woman.

And, aside from a few external dates (no sex) in our first month together, it has been like that for 11 years. And I don't see any reason why it should change.

It's infrequent that people will talk about love here at SLOG, because sex is so much more often the topic. But I suppose that's the explanation. Much to my surprise, my relationship with my wife, through good and bad times (and oh! the bad times were really, really bad), has evolved to an extent that love -- that old-fashioned word, with so many good and bad meanings -- is the only word that has the necessary far-reaching implications to describe it. I simply love her; I love to have sex with her. I love the way we talk about sex, the things she says during sex, the things she asks me to do or does for me.

I'm not blind to other bodies and personalities, and I probably would enjoy having sex with others if my wife decided to swing; but... I don't feel any urgent need for it. Just as I don't feel a strong need to travel to China (though I like China as a country and as a culture). At this moment in life, I sincerely don't think I would be unhappy if we stayed monogamous forever. As far as I can see, that is probably what will happen.

Happy monogamy isn't (necessarily) boring for the participants, but it's not very interesting to hear about because it is the standard model and is therefore unremarkable. It's what everyone is "supposed to be doing". There are LOTS of sex/dating/relationship/advice sites that cater primarily or exclusively to monogamous people. Asking Dan to feature letters from happy monogamous couples is a little like asking the It Gets Better Project to feature videos from happy heterosexual people. It's good to be included in the conversation, but you're not being overlooked - you ARE the majority.

Everyone gets to choose whatever kind of relationship model they want, so whatever judgment other people have of your choice is their problem. Yes, some nonmonogamous people can be pretty judgmental and elitist - now imagine how it would feel if they outnumbered you 10 to 1 and romantic comedies and tv shows and books and pop songs were all about their version of what a relationship should be.

Hopefully one result of the relationship-model-discussion is more conscious monogamy, which is much, much better than unconscious monogamy (or unconscious nonmonogamy). That may be the primary contribution of nonmonogamous relationships to monogamous culture, the notion of being able to choose your relationship structure instead of just following someone else's script. But someone had to point that out - try not to resent them for it.

I am kind of surprised by the negativity about monogamy I read here. (Possibly I have it wrong, and what I am reading is merely skepticism.)
Yes, you can never be 100% sure that your relationship is, in fact. monogamous, because you have to take your partner's word for it. But you can also never be sure that your partner is happily non-monogamous, for the same reason. You can only go by their words and actions, in either case, because you can't be inside someone's head..
Monogamy works for some people, even if it doesn't work for you. This doesn't seem to be all that startling a statement, to me.
Although: letters from people who are happy in their relationships are almost always less interesting than questions about problems, in the same way that a book about people who have no troubles at all would be deadly dull to read. Happiness is often boring to hear about.

Another not so minor consideration in monogamy is not needing condoms.

We used condoms briefly after my wife went off the pill, but before we were "ready" for kids. It's been "Inshallah" ever since.

Peace.

We go out together and flirt (with girls - helps that I'm bisexual), and when we get home we use all the excitement stored up from our adventures on each other.

So, basically, you spice up your sex lives by being pussy-teases. (Shrugs) Okay, whatever floats your boat, but some day you're going to pull this on an Alex Forrest.

Aurora Erratic @37 I think that a lot of people here react with some asperity to monogamy for the same reason that a lot of atheists are becoming increasingly testy towards religion: there is only so much you can take with the notion that only the societal default setting has merit, and everything else is flawed, morally wrong, and probably doomed. I think, too, is that a lot of folks here agree with Savage in that they believe that monogamy is great but it's BS to pretend that it's natural or easy or inevitable or preferable, as our society generally does.

I have long had an idea similar to that of Ms Hopkins about the scale - I would not box the LW with Ms Kim and Mr Married, for example, or Mr J.

Could we have a separate thread for same-sex monogamy? I won't go so far as to say that it's more interesting, but historically it seems like a different conversation, and, as can happen, in this one the straight/through/bi-straight voices are drowning out the others (not intentionally).

By the way, am I the only one inclined to cramp (or something similar) from reading too much explicit imagery? Most of the time, I can glaze over when something is headed in that direction, but somehow some of the posts here took a sudden turn and voila.

I met my husband 19 years ago. In the beginning we had tons of hot sex, I'm talking 3 times a day, every day for years. Then kids, but we still made time for sex. Neither one of us could consider having sex with someone else, I mean what was the point? All needs were being met. It isn't a challenge to be monogamous. And he is still the person I feel most attracted to. Whose hugs feel the best.

It gets to me when people say that there's always cheating. There isn't. But it means finding your sexual equal, which doesn't always happen. We were lucky.

The kicker is that now we are estranged/separated. So even great sex can't save a marriage that isn't right.

I don't have the energy for anything buy mono. Call it what you will, I think making this one relationship work is enough.

@42 phuni44
And the converse appears (at least at the moment) to be true as well: bad or no sex need not end a marriage that is right in many other ways.

@ 20 (GoodOmens), you are welcome.

@ 22 (Married in MA), congratulations!

@ 33 (ankylosaur), I'm delighted by your laugh. To think my favourite term for my backside was introduced to me by an Aussie. I'm wishing you safe travels.

@ 41 (vennominion), I'm sorry. I don't know where I fit either. But, I do see what makes a man a beautiful thing to behold.

Best wishes, all.

And then there is the question of quantity versus quality.  

Is it better to have 35 years of misery, or 15 of bliss?  One of the hardest things about maintaining an LTR is not doing the same old, same old, again and again and again.  Boring is boring, even if it means everything is "perfect" (maybe especially so).  OTOH there is "comfy food", the types of things you want for a bad day retreat.  For us meatloaf and mashed potatoes has morphed into chicken okdol or quesadillas.  Then it turns out you have to cut high cholesterol foods, and you end up working with faux eggs and faux cheese.  But, ultimately, you end up working together on a nourishing and healthy environment.

Having children helps to stir things up, and can even bring you onto tracks you wouldn't have otherwise.  It counts as a date, even if you bring the kids with you.  Sharing a love of live music and glass sculpture as a family still counts between us (as a couple).

I too hope to read more single sex tales here, even if they aren't 20+ years.  Those tales are like ammunition for marriage equality.  The proof that the fear mongers are wrong already exists to be brought to light.

Peace. 

@41 & 46
Just for the record, my tale is a same-sex tale.

@36(Chase), that is true, and in principle I agree with you. I think Dan is doing this so that people won't see him as biased towards something (say, towards non-monogamy). Too often Dan's enemies claim he is "against" monogamy, and they may cite the absence of 'happy monogamy' letters as evidence. I don't know if that's enough reason to justify doing it, but at least the motivation (to show he isn't anti-monogamy-baised) is OK.

@MrVen, actually I think it would be a good idea (Fortunate above did provide an example). Will the happily monogamous same-sex couples at SLOG want to share their insights and experiences?

@42, sorry to hear that. Indeed sexual compatibility is not everything in a relationship... Here's hoping you'll find the best solution for your problems.

Ms Kim - Please don't apologize; I'm sure everyone (or as near as makes no difference) wishes you would post more. This conversation is fine as it is; the other just should be on its own to be able to keep on track.

Mr Married has given me the idea that the divide between parental and non-parental monogamy might be as interesting as OSM/SSM. I have thought on occasion that Mr Savage Himself's orientation (if one will allow the concept of perhaps adjusting the term to life orientation should that clarify better) is Parent.

Even among the "sex positive" there's still a lot of stigma for the monogamous and those who want monogamy, and stigma for those with low libidos (particularly if they also dare want monogamy!)

Oh, malarkey. It is not "stigma" or some other objectively unfounded prejudice. It's that it is very tiresome to deal with the expectations of people from whom no effort of their own is required. You want monogamy and you have a low libido? Well, how convenient: you're making a huge sacrifice there!

It doesn't count as fasting if you give up something you never wanted in the first place, you know? Sex-positive is not the same as supporting the null option - it's not stigma to disdain the asexual (null) option if you want sex - it's a pretty objectively rational(!) disdain.

@40 put it much more nicely than I did.

stigma for those with low libidos (particularly if they also dare want monogamy!)

Actually, if you will take the trouble to peruse the archives, SL readers don't have problems with that. They do have problems with people with low (or) libidos who want monogamy from people whose sexual desires they usually spurn. Again: low- or no-libido types shouldn't date, cohabit or settle down with high folks with high sex drives. Settle down with somebody like you, and make each other happy. Do not branch out to us and make us miserable.

okay, that was a weird formatting glitch...
A sentence in @54 should read "people with low[hyphen] or no[hyphen] libidos...."
Learn from my lesson: the system will insert parentheses in place of em-dashes.

@26: the disturbing sounds of angst you hear are coming from people who have been told for decades that monogamy is the *ONLY MORAL CHOICE, ANYTHING ELSE MEANS HELLFIRE AND DAMNATION* by people who care more about control and tithing than making your life better.

But that's still no excuse. I believe that it would be better all around if people would just live and let live.