"When a non-monogamous relationship ends, non-monogamy always gets the blame."

Huh? There are a ton of reasons people split up.

And the second someone in a boring, low-conflict, (some would say) loveless marriage meets someone they actually love, they file for divorce.

When a monogamous relationship ends, monogamy never gets the blame.

Um, not exactly. How many monogamous relationships have ended because one person was tired of only getting sex (or not getting it at all) from their partner and so they cheated? Isn't that putting the blame on monogamy? Or am I missing something?

I know Viacom-owned MTV picked up ten episodes of your new show, and that CNN is owned by Viacom's archrival, Time Warner. Can't you find a better way to please your new head office besides running some sort of CNN hit piece every day? If nothing else think of Anderson Cooper's feelings, sir.

@3, it gets blamed on the cheating, not the misery that led up to it.

@3: You're missing something.

In your scenario, it is never said "well, if they just practiced non-monogamy, this never would have happened." That would be blaming monogamy.

@4 Wow, I hope you didn't pull something with that stretch.

@8, I am a yoga queen from way back - my stretches are epic.

@4: let's say the guy isn't getting enough sex, but he still likes the home-cooked meals. He cheats on his wife, but doesn't call a divorce lawyer. Wife finds out - she calls the divorce lawyer.

@3 No, you're right. I think Dan's being hyperbolic here. In any divorce where one partner is blamed for not being able to stick to having sex with just their spouse for the rest of their life, or where one partner is blamed for being completely unable/unwilling to sexually fulfill their spouse (within reason) that's blaming monogamy.

Maybe not in the explicit, hysterical terms that opponents of non-monogamy blame non-monogamy for the dissolution of non-monogamous marriages, but you're still essentially blaming monogamy for the divorce. Perhaps that's what Dan's getting at by saying "monogamy never gets the blame".

@10, I meant @3, not @4, whoops.

@11, yes, Dan is saying monogamy (refusing to be monogamish) should get the blame for dissolving many marriages. But monogamy doesn't explicitly get named as the problem.

@7 That's the implication though, even if it's not stated explicitly. "Well, if only this person would've been able to satisfy their urge for a little variety once in a while" or "Well, if only this person would've been able to go somewhere else to get basic sexual needs met" is a subtle way of saying "Well, if they just practiced non-monogamy, this never would've happened".

Yes, Dan, because sex is ALWAYS the root problem in failed marriages: not financial or job problems, not abuse, not substance abuse, not depression or related issues, not simply growing apart, not that they probably shouldn't have married in the first place. Nope, it's all about the sex.

If they could just get laid on the side without having to hide it then all those marriages would be saved. Right.

@14,

And certainly it's never happened that getting laid on the side (even with full permission) wound up ending a marriage, such as when the "cheating" spouse falls in love with the side piece.

I really don't understand why someone who is in a passionless marriage wouldn't leave the second they get hot sex with a great person. Barring serious issues like raising a child with special needs, what is the benefit (other than anti-divorce moralizing) to stay in a platonic, boring marriage?

@13 Hernandez
Outside of the microcosm of slog I've never seen that implication made. I doubt very many Americans would entertain the idea of monogamish marriage. I doubt that it's even something people are aware of as an option.

@14 of course those are reasons people get divorced/break up. That is (I believe) the point Dan is making. In a monogamous marriage people will likely say its because of one of those reasons. In a non-monogamous marriage they will likely blame the non-monogamy over any other reason.

I would speculate that privately, a lot of failed relationships (ones that failed due to cheating or similar) DO get blamed on non-monogamy, or at least, on the realization by both partners that monogamy isn't working for them. Publicly, of course, the broken up couple are essentially required to say what all the mundanes want (and need) to hear... that it was cheating, and evil, and monogamy is holy and sacred and the only true way. While there may be lots of people who privately could accept the idea that non-monogamy is ok, the vast majority would never publicly admit that. It's far too radical for this 'christian nation.'

@18: Dan has stated ad nauseam his belief that monogamy is the root of most failed marriages, or at least that non-monogamy would prevent marriages from failing. My point is simply that issues around sex are most often a symptom of other problems in the marriage, not the cause.

Yes, it's progress that the social narrative no longer says nonmonogamy is unequivocally pathological and unworkable, but I really can't wait until there's a more informed and nuanced view of it in the general consciousness.
It's frustrating to see nonmonogamy being generalized into DADT-style open relationships. While they exist and work for a lot of people, there are a ton of other formations that also exist and also work and don't have anything to do with the questionable ethics of "letting extramarital affairs nick the consciousness of marriage, but don't discuss anything... let the monogamy imperative drift." In my book, not talking about something like that, particularly in a troubled relationship, is not ethical at all.

Non monogamy is like the Sixties.

It only works when all parties are young and pretty.

@20 No one suggests monogamy is the root of most failed marriages. The lack of knowledge that *there are options besides monogamy* (and thus a lack of awareness that many people, including yourself and your potential partners, may not be capable of being successfully monogamous) could very easily be played that way, but they're very different things. One is about having sex and the other is about the overall socialization around sex and relationships. Nonmonogamy and monogamy are not simply about sex, but are entire frameworks for interacting with other people. Monogamy as a socially-required baseline for healthy relationships appears to be a very flawed framework.
At least that's what I've been getting from all these years reading Savage Love, practicing nonmonogamy, and studying sexuality.

@ 20 I have never gotten that from reading Dan's columns.

But, you have to take into account that Dan is a sex advice columnist, so that is what he sees. People simply don't write into him about their financial, child rearing, simply growing apart etc etc etc issues.

Non-monogamy would prevent some marriages from failing if they would see it as a viable option. But non-monogamy takes a lot of communication and trust, so as with anything it would depend on the situation and the people involved. I would agree, though, that most people in failing marriages do not have the communication and trust needed to make non-monogamy work. I would argue that most experienced poly people would rather not get involved in a situation in which they are there to "fix" a failing marriage.

@17 Yeah, usually people are more likely to say, "well, that person just wasn't ready to settle down/isn't mature enough for a married relationship/doesn't know how to compromise". But privately, they'll say "well, the problem was that person never got laid" or "that person didn't get enough of a chance to sleep with different people and of course they were going to get curious" (I've heard friends attribute a few divorces to that second one).

While I'll concede that is not the same thing as promoting non-monogamy, it is implicitly blaming the monogamous arrangement for the dissolution of the marriage. My point is that contrary to what Dan wrote, people sometimes DO blame monogamy.

Your idea that people are "always blaming" one thing or "never blaming" another thing for failed relationshps is just ridiculous. Unless you have some evidence of this actually being the case, of course.

@16: what is the benefit (other than anti-divorce moralizing) to stay in a platonic, boring marriage?

Because even in the best cases, divorce means
1 - Breaking up a family
2 - 50% custody of kids
3 - Huge cost of living decrease

And it only get's worse from there, if the divorce is at all contentious.

Not surprisingly, many would rather cheat or go without passion than pay these costs. For people stuck in situations like this, why not at least consider opening the marriage up?

@16 Why not open the marriage up? Because in many states, the partner who opens the marriage up loses custody of the kids and many of the shared assets, and has to pay child support, should the other partner then file for divorce (depending on the judge).

Dan never seems to understand that particular aspect of the marriage laws - since adultery is a crime in most states (even if agreed-upon), the "adulterer" can lose big if there ever is a contentious divorce.

That's why civil unions are better than marriage:
Civil unions = marriage without the religious and legal bs about adultery and sodomy.

Triangles are very stable geometry for relationships.....

@25 Exactly. If (one or) two people are already miserable in their monogamous marriage, opening things up at that point is not likely to turn things around. If they had the skills and disposition to be monogamish they would have been doing it already before things started to break down.

@26 Hernandez
I see. It may be that we live in very different parts of the country. I believe that your friends have said those things but where I live most of the people who are currently my wife simply don't see non-monogamy as any sort of acceptable option.

@28 huge cost of living INCREASE with divorce, because same income now has to support two households.

@29 according to Wiki, "As of October 2010, all states and the District of Columbia allow no-fault divorce." What is your evidence that under provisions of no-fault divorce, the court system is prejudiced against the adulterous spouse? Do you have evidence, for instance, that cheating wives don't get as much alimony as faithful wives (in no-fault states)?

@32, "most of the people who are currently my wife" - I didn't know you have a harem, Mr. J! ;-)

The thing most on my mind after reading the full article is this:

Dan, thank you for not interspersing your blog posts/columns with links to random, only-mildly-related other articles. Right in the middle of the non-monogamy musing is the suggestion, in blue clickability, that I should "See celebrity wedding gowns". Apparently CNN is trying to increase its readers' ADD...

Well played, Ms Erica.

Cute, Mr J, although you are starting to sound like Dr Schwyzer, and you really cannot expect others to accord your wife the same deference you do. However significant the impact of her views on your personal conduct, you can hardly ask Mr Hernandez to accept her as balancing out his monogamy-blaming friends.

You almost remind me of Lady Bertram, unable to recall what someone whispered to her at the ball, resolving to ask Sir Thomas what the remark had been.

I'm guessing that SeanDr meant to say "huge *standard* of living decrease".

@35 Mr. J not being here to defend himself, I'll note that he probably meant "most of the people who are currently friends with my wife simply don't see non-monogamy as any sort of acceptable option."

Though I can understand that Dan sees things a certain way because his job involves reading about the sexual problems that impact relationships, it remains true that the #1 difficulty that breaks up marriages is conflict over Money. Many different kinds of studies have examined these causes, over a long period of time, and Money hasn't been knocked off that throne yet. Problems in communication and trust are also connected to all of these other causes, in conflicts over money, sex, or whatever.

So, I agree with those who say that if your marriage is already suffering from these problems, it's not clear that becoming monogamish is going to solve the underlying issues, even if offers relief on some grounds. If I don't trust my spouse about money and we can't communicate about it, how are we going to accomplish that when it comes to mutually-sanctioned extra-marital sex?

This is why it bothers me that Dan does indeed often blame monogamy for failures in relationships, as if somehow a little extra on the side would be just the solution for many people, if only they could get over themselves enough to try it! The problem is, if you deeply value being with that one person exclusively, this is not going to work, and the fact that it can and does work for others is irrelevant. There is nothing wrong with deeply valuing monogamy, and this value is in fact blamed, by Dan and others, for relationship failures all the time.

@33 Hi, EricaP,
I've admired many of your comments on other threads.

You are certainly right that in a no-fault divorce, adultery does not need to be an issue, and alimony is generally set by formula in all states. But if there is any contention between the parties in the divorce, the lawyers can and will use everything they can dig up to justify their client getting more, and especially getting custody of the kids. The judges have tremendous leeway in this issue, so if they see one party as a "bad parent" for ANY reason (and most judges tend to reflect the conventional morality of the community they're in), the other person can get 100% custody, and of course the requisite child support money follows the custody. For some judges in my area, there is a (bigoted) presumption that the woman should always get 100% custody, unless....

@39, So the issue is demonstrating that your outside sex shouldn't affect the custody arrangements. Best way to do that, probably, is to make sure that both spouses are having extramarital sex and keeping each other informed, so there's no allegations that the children were neglected because of the sex. Presumably, in your area, the (bigoted) assessment of promiscuous women will balance out the (bigoted) presumption that women are better parents, leaving the ex-spouses more equal going into the custody battle.

But, remember, the goal of opening up the marriage is to maintain honesty and communication and affection for each other (while getting some extra nooky) so that even if the marriage eventually ends, the custody and finances can be arranged relatively amicably.