Updated: Mar 31
It certainly seems like that it is becoming very trendy to have ten side-pieces rather than give all our energy and commitment to one person.
I, as one, can completely understand.
As a twenty-something slutty butterfly I definitely had my fair share of liasiones and one-night stands at my first year at university. Which, I do hope demystifies the misconception that women don't like to get around. It was definitely the time and place to live and grab every opportunity I can, with anyone I can. Without commitments.
Let me tell you - being a hoe is so much easier than being in a relationship. You go out, you have sex, he/she leaves you early in the morning and you can catch up on the sleep you didn't get because they kept hogging the covers.
I liked the perceived power it gave me. I liked having as many men wrapped around my little finger as humanly possible. I liked that I never had to pay for a single dinner because they insisted they wanted to treat me. The world was mine; I could have anyone.
And if the current member was not good enough I could instantly upgrade. No strings-attached. Swap your old one for a new. It was easy because I knew no one got hurt. If I didn't hear from them? Fine. If they wanted another session? Well, that depended entirely on whether I had a far superior option or not.
However unfortunately we are humans and while most of us are biologically programmed for one and only one duty (procreation), our social needs are far greater than our need for a lovely shag. People have not been built to endure and maintain many superficial social connections. We do possess an inherent need to form more meaningful relationships as it has been evolutionary advantageous for us to do so. Women require parental investment and care from men and men need to maximize their reproductive success by passing down their genetic material. Evidently this requires quite a significant one-on-one bond.
I believe society is stamping its great foot on this insidious need for connections, trying to extinguish it by commercializing it.
You've heard/used/downloaded-than-quickly-deleted tinder, right?
It's pretty great, isn't it? A visual repository of hot humans advertising themselves. They're a swift flick away from becoming acquaintances or tonight's date. It broadens the selection to one's you might not have come across otherwise as you move in different friend-groups, different professional circles. The chances of you bumping into each other are very slight. Online dating in its archaic form was meant to connect people who really, really wanted a relationship but for external reasons could not make it happen. There was the guy who dated literally everyone who could potentially be optimal but ran out of candidates. There was the guy who worked too hard and had no time to actually connect with someone or go out much working a minimal wage job or being too overwhelmed in the competitive sector. There was the guy who happened to be the outsider, nerd in a the midst of jocks. There was the middle-aged widower with young kids who had other priorities.
Online dating was invented to predominantly adapt choosing a partner to a life that was picking up the pace. It was meant to serve as a bridge between people who sought to achieve that deeper connection their lives ceased to give any opportunities for.
As the late-capitalist world slowly distorts everything of value into something frivolous, a bridge somehow transformed into a shop-window. With padded egos, superficial relationships and very, very brief encounters with half-strangers. It is rarely - if at all - about that connection anymore.
Which would be fine. However, it shifted people's priorities when searching for a partner. It has nudged the limelight onto outlook and impression management. Beauty without merits -which we can hardly imagine amounting to an everlasting, loving relationship.
This, I can only see result in a lot of attractive people getting an amazing amount of divorces very young. Choosing short-term partners on looks only is a lovely game. Until you're thirty and want kids and you have no idea what makes a good partner or what values you should be looking for in other potential partners other than their hot physique.
The hook-up culture is basically a maladaptive response to having to deal with the ordeals of an emotional connection. Cause ain't nobody got time for that.
It is easy to smush booties and be gone. It is easy to take someone out for dinner in exchange for sex. It is easy to answer a booty call cause you haven't had any in a month, and you are really frustrated because of your job and it's two am and not a single gym is open for you to drive your pent-up tension away in alternative directions. The ease of the hook-up culture is what feeds it's effectiveness and superficiality.
You can swipe left on an image - they will never know you don't think they're that attractive. You would probably die with the insurmountable cringe of the situation if you had to physically swipe left on somebody in front of you.
Have our newfound superficiality opened some new doors, though?
Relationships took on a more liberal flavor as almost anything is allowed. Most things aren't even frown upon as long as most parties agree and all around consent is in place.
Open relationships and polyamory are one of these gloriously newly accepted phenomena.
For those who always thought it absolutely stupid to have a single person define your entire life through the bounds of monogamy, these options and that they are a choice are pretty refreshing. For the right person, society's novel and overt promiscuity saved an immense amount of heartache and suffering.
I am a firm believer in that not everyone is meant to be monogamous. I know people use evolution as a major cop-out for justifying infidelity to support their case, which is just ridiculous, in my opinion. After all, humans aren't as much the prisoners of their own instincts as other mammals are. However the fact that you might be more satisfied with more than one person, psychologically and physically, could be the product of the absolute dissonance between what is intellectually and carnally considered desirable.
We all know really pretty people who make us hot'n'bothered by mere visuals but as soon as they open their mouth you can all but shirk from physically flinching. Then there are the people who aren't as physically attractive but you could lick their brains for hours and with them, despite their lack of corporeal sex-appeal, the conversation is so riveting your intellectual panties have already disintegrated.
Is it such an absolute blasphemy that if per chance, those two qualities can't be found in the same person we seek it out in two instead? Or more?
All the better if we can be honest about our needs. Communication in most fields of life is problematic and exists as a core of major issues. It is especially essential for a well-oiled relationship to work. Had we formed a tolerance towards these unconventional forms of 'coupling' we might achieve a greater acceptance in other things, as well. We might become better at communication and navigating human relationships which is becoming more and more unnatural the more time we spend in front of our screens.
Multiple relations with multiple people does not have to indicate frivolity. Humans are complex beings and therefore their needs are to be satisfied in a more intricate way sometimes. It is a feat nothing else if we can make multiple romantic relationships going on an equally fulfilling level when people struggle with navigating a single one.
I am not suggesting that hook-up culture educates people in the ways of bettering their own skills in human interaction but polyamory an its acceptance might aid us in that. Perhaps monogamy has taught us what it can and the shift towards less conservative ways of existing are a natural way of our physical and psychological needs evolving.
It is no wonder that one person might not be enough as we are bombarded with multi-sensory stimuli every day. The fracture of our attention in romance could be a result of this. Our developing lifestyle conditions us to thirst for quick changes to keep ourselves interested and entertained. The fact of the matter is that monogamy is not dead, it isn't going extinct either it is merely learning to co-exist with newer forms of romantic relations which may be more suited to the pace of life modernity demands form us.