Will technology be the downfall of monogamous relationships??

[90_hour_sleep]

Why did you go back here and totally add an entire section and remove others??? That's not fair!! LOL. * * * ? At first here, I thought, ah well, he see's my point and just wanted to add it to his original post, but then you had to go and be all rude at the end. AGAIN. LOL. You know, I quoted you in a few comments down, and it contains your original words. BAD FORM, 90_hour_sleep. I think it's past your bedtime.

 

yah...you're right. bad form...and well past my bedtime.

 

the insulting candor was not directed at you...or any other specific poster. ranty rant rant. that's why i wanted to keep my nose out of it. clearly hooked by some masses of shenpa here. and also...that's what the apology was for.

[Blue Spiral]

Modernity will be the downfall of monogamy; tech shall indeed play a part in that.

 

I'm very fortunate to have been born when I was--my social skills have always sucked, and I suspect they always will. Sure, I can get FWBs for a time, but I don't have the whatever to make anything last, nor do I have it in me to be monogamous. If not for the internet, I'd be truly, truly miserable--it's enabled me to meet women, and, yes, it's enabled me to do other stuff, as well. The internet is like a huge pressure valve for the male gender, I believe, and it also gives an extra boost to those of us who weren't born with certain advantages.

 

To me, the most interesting thing about this is that women have real competition for men, now. General porn, engrossing video games, cam girls...no, it isn't as "good" as real live sex, but it won't divorce you and demand alimony, either. It's the more cautious option. I'll be interested to see how the future plays out.

[90_hour_sleep]

I'll be interested to see how the future plays out.

 

likewise....

[ProtestTheHero]

So if you had the chance, in the future, to have virtual sex with someone like...oh, I don't know, Angelina Jolie or Katie Hudson or WHOEVER....and it felt awesome and real, but you had your woman, who may have bad days due to job, kids, LIFE. Or she doesn't always have the time to fix herself up or just had a baby and couldn't have sex for 3 months, or WHATEVER the reason! You mean to tell me that you wouldn't hook yourself up to that computer and go at it? It provides people the unimaginable. The unobtainable. The biggest fantasies ever imagined..... and could be very detrimental to the break down of many otherwise, good relationships.

 

Just you wait. People will be bangin' whomever they please in the virtual world within 20 years. lol

 

Personally, I have no desire to get married so I doubt I'll ever be in this scenario, but it would be very difficult for me to get upset with someone who was having virtual sex. If a gf wanted to have virtual sex with someone, she can do what she wants. At the end of the day, it's not real. I'm not the type of person that would be upset with someone for cybering and things of that nature.

 

It's different for me if you go out of your way to be dishonest, meet some shady dude, have real sex, and then expose me to whatever nasty stuff he had going on. Then I would be gone.

[Chicklet]

and also...that's what the apology was for.

 

Ahhhh. My mistake. I didn't see your edit until later.....lots of confusion here, both off topic and on.

[rocio]

Personally, I have no desire to get married so I doubt I'll ever be in this scenario, but it would be very difficult for me to get upset with someone who was having virtual sex. If a gf wanted to have virtual sex with someone, she can do what she wants. At the end of the day, it's not real. I'm not the type of person that would be upset with someone for cybering and things of that nature.

 

It's different for me if you go out of your way to be dishonest, meet some shady dude, have real sex, and then expose me to whatever nasty stuff he had going on. Then I would be gone.

 

That's a good point. Technology isn't always negative. It would be cool if people could satisfy their polygamous natural instincts through a computer simulation and avoid all the drama that goes along with cheating - diseases, unwanted pregnancies, falling in love with someone else, etc. I actually think that would revolutionise how we view marriage and would results in millions and millions fewer miserable husbands and wives in the world.

[Lucidity]

I think that technological advances are wonderful, but I say that with the caveat that they are only wonderful if they actually do something to help us out as human beings. The problem is that there are always going to be two(or more) sides to every debate about what aspects of technological change warrant merit and praise.

 

I dont know if it's my age, but I see this entire debate as being centered around the "usage" argument moreso than anything. Take cell phones for example: Cell phone technology has saved countless lives by increasing the speed in which we can communicate from remote locations in the case of accidents and whatnot. However, how many times in our lives do we actually use it for such events? Yet, modern cell phone bills shows the average user to use their phones for hours each month along with hundreds if not thousands of text messages in the same time period.

 

Between the internet and cell phones, I'm seeing life long friends increase the size of their clothes as the sedintary nature of such an existence destroys their health. No longer do they have to get up and walk accross the room to answer the phone, it's always within arms reach every waking/sleeping second of the day. Usage is key, but I think reliance on these technologies has to become the greater concern - when that reliance crosses over the threshold of becoming a socially embraced dependancy - supported by logical fallacy on all sides.

[hexaemeron]

If technology is making it easier to cheat and people are taking the opportunity to do it, I think they would take the chance no matter what it was that made it easier. Maybe technology exposes the truth about what some people really are like.

 

This x 1000000000000.

[hexaemeron]

Personally, I have no desire to get married so I doubt I'll ever be in this scenario, but it would be very difficult for me to get upset with someone who was having virtual sex. If a gf wanted to have virtual sex with someone, she can do what she wants. At the end of the day, it's not real. I'm not the type of person that would be upset with someone for cybering and things of that nature.

 

It's different for me if you go out of your way to be dishonest, meet some shady dude, have real sex, and then expose me to whatever nasty stuff he had going on. Then I would be gone.

 

I'm very much of this mindset as well. If you expect 100% of your partner's attention at all times forever, you will be 100% disappointed each and every time.

[teabee]

Personally, I have no desire to get married so I doubt I'll ever be in this scenario, but it would be very difficult for me to get upset with someone who was having virtual sex. If a gf wanted to have virtual sex with someone, she can do what she wants. At the end of the day, it's not real. I'm not the type of person that would be upset with someone for cybering and things of that nature.

 

I think that if you actually found yourself in this situation you might feel differently. You could be ok with the virtual sex itself, but would you be ok with it being done behind your back, outside of an agreement you thought you had in the relationship? I would not be upset about virtual sex, but I would be upset if it were happening without my knowledge and acceptance. It can be the dishonesty about something, not the something in and of itself, that does the damage and causes the hurt/betrayal.

[hexaemeron]

I think that if you actually found yourself in this situation you might feel differently. You could be ok with the virtual sex itself, but would you be ok with it being done behind your back, outside of an agreement you thought you had in the relationship? I would not be upset about virtual sex, but I would be upset if it were happening without my knowledge and acceptance. It can be the dishonesty about something, not the something in and of itself, that does the damage and causes the hurt/betrayal.

 

I know I'm in the minority, but that wouldn't bother me. If it's not something that is expressly discussed beforehand (within reason), how can people get butthurt if someone does it?

[BellaDonna]

Ok laugh at me....but how the heck would a person "have sex" through virtual computer simulation? I don't want details at all- but when you all refer to this do you mean like the way doctor's practice "simulated" surgery in their classes with 3D effects and such?

 

I don't care how realistic it might look, 3D pretend sex via a computer or other device is still not the real deal as far as sex goes, IMO. No human-to-human contact...I can't see the point???? If my husband did that I really hope he'd hide it from me, not because I think it is cheating, but to spare me having to LMAO at him at the mere idea. I'd also have to buy him disinfectant wipes to keep near the computer. Although this could be considered a technological advance, I don't see it advancing humanity in any significant way. I think it just makes people less likely to get some action in real life. That's just me.

[hexaemeron]

Well, think of it this way. You know how Xbox has the Kinect. Modifying computer user interfaces and games by touch and sight? Well, give them about 10 years to get the sensory side down, and then you've got true virtual sex. And then the real question is, is THAT cheating, if it feels like sex, and it's with someone else on the other side of the fiberOp, and they feel it like real, but no one actually touched someone else?

[BellaDonna]

And then the real question is, is THAT cheating, if it feels like sex, and it's with someone else on the other side of the fiberOp,

 

Ohhhhhhh. So there'd be some chick at her computer doing it with him to....a human female? Ohhhh. Well no- that would be no bueno . I would not like it- not if it was interactive with another human. That would be making an imtimate sexual connection with a woman other than me so it wouldn't fly.

 

Thanks for helping me understand hex, lol.

[hexaemeron]

Ohhhhhhh. So there'd be some chick at her computer doing it with him to....a human female? Ohhhh. Well no- that would be no bueno . I would not like it- not if it was interactive with another human.

 

Thanks for helping me understand hex, lol.

 

Did you ever happen to see the movie "Demolition Man", BD? It'd be like that.

[BellaDonna]

Did you ever happen to see the movie "Demolition Man", BD? It'd be like that.

 

No I haven't. I'll have to check it out. Although I'm sure I'll be chuckling the whole time given this whole context.

 

I'd be more interested in someone invention VIRTUAL BROWNIES that I could "eat" over the internet and not have any unwanted calories. Now that would be pleasure.

[hexaemeron]

No I haven't. I'll have to check it out. Although I'm sure I'll be chuckling the whole time given this whole context.

 

I'd be more interested in someone invention VIRTUAL BROWNIES that I could "eat" over the internet and not have any unwanted calories. Now that would be pleasure.

 

Same thing really, from the programming point of view. If they can crack the code for how to simulate sensory and tactile stimulation, you could eat an amazing brownie that isn't there, or have sex with the UPitt wrestling team. It's just a question of scale and programming.

[oldenoughtoknow]

I don't think technology will cause the downfall of monogamous relationships. People have been cheating long before any of our modern technology was even thought of - but I do agree that it makes cheating easier and that will cause more people to fall into it.

 

I always find it interesting to hear what other people consider cheating. For me, it's somewhere around the human interaction line, even in electronic form. So mutually interactive web cam sex would be yes. A one way web cam would be a no - it's not much different than looking at a Playboy magazine 50 years ago. A one way web cam exchange where you can tell the other person what to do...is a real gray area.

 

I'm glad that I don't think about this often, but it does make for an interesting discussion.

[Chicklet]

I don't think technology will cause the downfall of monogamous relationships. People have been cheating long before any of our modern technology was even thought of - but I do agree that it makes cheating easier and that will cause more people to fall into it.

 

I always find it interesting to hear what other people consider cheating. For me, it's somewhere around the human interaction line, even in electronic form. So mutually interactive web cam sex would be yes. A one way web cam would be a no - it's not much different than looking at a Playboy magazine 50 years ago. A one way web cam exchange where you can tell the other person what to do...is a real gray area.

 

I'm glad that I don't think about this often, but it does make for an interesting discussion.

 

I completely agree with everything you said.

[Chicklet]

No I haven't. I'll have to check it out. Although I'm sure I'll be chuckling the whole time given this whole context.

 

I'd be more interested in someone invention VIRTUAL BROWNIES that I could "eat" over the internet and not have any unwanted calories. Now that would be pleasure.

 

Now that would be something. lol. How about an exercise routine that you just have to plug up to. lol. Who knows what the future will hold!?!?

[JonasWaingaro]

No I haven't. I'll have to check it out. Although I'm sure I'll be chuckling the whole time given this whole context.

 

I'd be more interested in someone invention VIRTUAL BROWNIES that I could "eat" over the internet and not have any unwanted calories. Now that would be pleasure.

 

But would this be 'cheating' on your diet?!

[BellaDonna]

^Yes it would. But my diet and I have a strained relationship. We don't always see eye to eye.

 

As for

 

I always find it interesting to hear what other people consider cheating. For me, it's somewhere around the human interaction line, even in electronic form. So mutually interactive web cam sex would be yes. A one way web cam would be a no - it's not much different than looking at a Playboy magazine 50 years ago. A one way web cam exchange where you can tell the other person what to do...is a real gray area.

 

 

I agree, but I actually wouldn't be accepting of the 3rd activity either which was: one way web cam exchange where you can tell the other person what to do. Even if the cam was one-way there would still be a real-time sexual interaction taking place involving 2 parties if one was telling the other what to do and it happened. It would mean there was a connection.

[rocio]

Ohhhhhhh. So there'd be some chick at her computer doing it with him to....a human female? Ohhhh. Well no- that would be no bueno . I would not like it- not if it was interactive with another human. That would be making an imtimate sexual connection with a woman other than me so it wouldn't fly.

 

Thanks for helping me understand hex, lol.

 

I agree. If there is a human on the other end, it's cheating.

[tiredofvampires]

And....the race has begun!

 

The Japanese, leave it to them (and no, that's not a racist comment -- that's just me [agreeing with my Japanese friends] that if there's a gizmo someone hasn't dared to try to make yet, they will do it!), have already started, with the French kiss:

 

link removed

 

After belly-laughing my way accross the room hearing about this because it seems like such a ludicrous proposition that anyone would want to do that....I had to ask myself if all the ENA mature virginal men here who are desperate about not knowing what sex feels like and desperate to lose their v-card, so as to feel less petrified about lack of experience, wouldn't really benefit drastically from this. I thought, hmmm. This could come in VERY handy. I say, don't stop at the French kiss -- make everything possible and lifelike as possible, hook up your junk, and have a full-on simulated session of every act you desire, replete with interactive, "Oh yeah, Sugar, you know what I like, you know where I want it"s, and position-switching -- only the STD warning conversation would end. You wouldn't need a prostitute or drunken hook-up -- you'd just need the right adaptors and ports. And then, you could practice to your little heart's desire and for all intents and purposes...tell women you are not a virgin. And it'd be anyone's guess, in the world of the future, whether that meant you'd had sex with a real person, or a bot your first time.

 

PROBLEM SOLVED!

 

The problem that would remain is -- what about real intimacy? What about the dating process and becoming socially viable? What about conquering your fears of rejection and learning that life involves risk? What about the experience of letting your guard down and feeling vulnerable, mutually? What about the healing nature of feeling accepted? What about the dialogue and the things you whisper to eachother that only a human mind attuned in the moment to another can achieve, when you know someone really well? What about feeling total connection to someone who you are physically holding? What about coming to love their scent and associating it with them and all the rest about them? What about shifting your gaze accross the room during a stuffy party and catching their eye, and knowing that hours before, you reached new ground with some sweaty deed together, and loving that secret? What about love in a look?

 

So....techno non-virgins would still have that to write threads about. But that's the way it is now anyway. It would be nice to take the mechanics off the table though, so they could see for themselves that after that...all the rest is still missing, and they're back to the same concerns. I wonder if they'd still be asking if they were a virgin, because they had not done it with a REAL woman, when in fact a live prostitute gives you nothing but a sensory/mechanical experience, and everything about this was lifelike? Kind of an interesting question, I think.

 

There are some things that technology can't threaten, because those things will always be in demand. Human touch will never go out of style, even if it does. What will happen in that case is that something will "snap", and people will return to what they need, because systems tend to correct themselves, even if in the process, they've gone to near self-destruction or extinction. (and this happens to be a basic Taoist principle, for anyone who cares.)

 

I bow to technology (which is not a forte of mine -- I'm actually quite bad with machines) for bringing me some things I never could have otherwise, including deeply personal and intimate relationships. So it's not always a divider, it can be a uniter.

 

As in all things, though, there is a point at which things go so far that you start to see imbalances and detractors of that phenomenon. Even drinking too much water is not good. Even exercising too much is not good. So the same rule holds for technology: if you allow any one thing to overtake your life and not balance it out with other ways of relating to the world, or managing your body-mind, you're going to create something unhealthy for yourself. So it's up to every individual to weigh out all the things they need to keep healthy -- and to become aware of being hypnotically drawn into a lifestyle that is destructive in any way, shape, or form. If the lure of technology leads to isolation, you probably had something going on in your life that drove you to that already, just as someone who abuses alcohol is drawn to that. Anything can ruin a life if a person needs to escape from their life. The medium is a secondary issue.

 

Even though I've said all that, though, I see a lot of ill effects coming out of technology. While people have always been addictive, they were not killing other people in reckless car accidents before, because of texting at the wheel. And a friend of mine -- a psychiatric nurse -- told me that studies show the stunting of children's brains now, due to the advent of texting. I think people are fast becoming so lazy, even college graduates don't know how to spell anymore. I and teachers I know see an unprecedented apathy in the younger generations -- and an emotional desensitization. I think there's more ADHD from the constant bombardment of digital media. I even feel the effects of this myself. Something has shifted for the worse. I'm not as able to stay focused as I used to, and my handwriting has gone from elegant penmanship to frightful scrawls because I've lost the eye-hand coordination of writing longhand. So I think our faculties are being challenged and lost in ways that I find detrimental. I think we are in the process of losing many things to our "gains." So the net result is worrisome to me, all things considered.

 

Do I think cyber-cheating is the last straw? Well, I think the discussion really boils down to how you feel about monogamy, which is a whole discussion of its own (rendering this whole paragraph a tangent). I've had to ask myself why I am monogamous, when I am against restricting my partner or being restricted in interactions with the opposite sex and don't consider myself terribly sexually jealous (in that I'm okay with sexual stories, thinking my partner actually had sex with other people before me, etc.) There are only a few species on earth that stay together monogamously, and primates are not among them. So for me, it's a matter of feeling I have a superlative connection to someone. I respect polyamory (loving many people simultaneously -- it's far more in-depth than just "open relationships" with hook-ups allowed), because why should people restrict how much they love and express love, if they can pull off loving more people in more ways? More power to that, I say! So why can't I do it? I think I just want to know that I've focused my attention and care in a unique way with one person, and that there is nothing rivaling that, and that we have continuity over time -- not just a here-today-gone-tomorrow experience. I think people seek continuity and building on what we invest in. Otherwise, why invest in anything? And having more than one for me is like too many cooks in the kitchen.

 

So I think that if my SO needed to divert some of his sexual energy and time to a computer interface with another person, I'd have to ask, how is this enhancing either of our lives? What are you getting from this? It's not real and totally empty as experiences go, so sexually, I'd have to ask what's missing in our bedroom that you need this. If they needed the real live person to get off with, I'd consider that a statement of some dissatisfaction and need for variety, and that would indeed approach a non-monagamous dynamic minus flesh. If it became an emotional investment as well, then yes, that would be no longer monogamy, but polyamory (or cheating, if dishonesty was involved). And I am monogamous.

 

If it was just advanced masturbation with a virtual bot, I'd think it was kind of funny, but again, how is that not superfluous? But then again, masturbation is not superfluous and I wouldn't expect him to give up masturbation just because I can give him handjobs. So then that would come down to something I'd find repugnant for the sterility of it and just kind of a stupid way to spend his time, which would be a turn-off.

 

"Hon! Dinner's ready!"

 

No answer.

 

*goes downstairs into the study, sees SO humping his computer for everything he's worth, while its canned moans and perfectly-programmed, randomized gasps throttle the speakers*

 

Appetizing!

[tiredofvampires]

I always find it interesting to hear what other people consider cheating. For me, it's somewhere around the human interaction line, even in electronic form.

 

I agree with this. Once it becomes interactive, it's a sexual ENCOUNTER.

 

But I'm bothered at the way the word "cheating" is thrown around. It's not "cheating" unless someone is lying and deceiving. If you're open with your SO about web cams, and cybering and sexting, that's not deceitful and therefore not cheating.