The fact that I am congenitally monogamous often confuses people. I am not religious, I have no intention of raising children, I don't in any way see monogamy as morally imperative (assuming you're not leading anyone to believe you're being monogamous with them), so often people don't understand why I am monogamous.
An answer I've found helpful is to describe it as my sexual orientation. Monogamy and commitment are what I find sexy. Polyamory and/or casual sex are simply not sexy to me and there's just...no point in my wasting my time with them, the same way that (if you are monosexual*) people who are not your target gender are simply not sexually attractive to you and there's just no point in engaging in sexual and/or romantic relationships with people who aren't your target gender.
Because monogamy is my sexual orientation, it would never occur to me to deem it a moral imperative. I don't even get to the point of thinking about it terms of broadly-applicable morality. It is simply what I find sexy, so I proceed accordingly.
So thinking about this, I really can't imagine how the people who consider heterosexuality morally imperative got to the point of thinking of it in terms of moral imperative. So you think people of the opposite sex are sexy. How do you get from there to thinking that everyone in the world should only ever have sex with people of the opposite sex? If you think redheads are sexy, would you at all ever possibly arrive at the point of thinking about it in terms of broadly applicable morality, and come up with a rule that everyone should only have sex with redheads?
*I know some people don't like the word monosexual, but I can't figure out how to construct the sentence without it. If you object to this word choice, feel free to rephrase the sentence for me in the comments.
1 comment:
It is very strange.
Post a Comment