WEBVTT - Divisible Love 0:00:04.519 --> 0:00:07.600 Years ago, a man I loved very much handed me 0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:11.959 a book called The Ethical Slut. It's essentially a how 0:00:12.000 --> 0:00:17.200 to guide for non monogamous relationships. This title was emphatically 0:00:17.320 --> 0:00:20.920 not on my Christmas list. This man and I had 0:00:20.920 --> 0:00:23.599 been struggling for a long time to try to sort 0:00:23.600 --> 0:00:29.440 out a viable relationship. We were on again, off again tears, ultimatums, 0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:31.720 and I could not believe he had the goal to 0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:35.760 hand me this book. Weren't we working through trust issues already? 0:00:35.880 --> 0:00:39.800 Hadn't we just started to see a therapist, and with 0:00:39.880 --> 0:00:41.920 so much work to do, he's out here looking for 0:00:41.960 --> 0:00:45.680 permission to get something on the side. I felt like 0:00:45.720 --> 0:00:47.600 I'd gone to a tea party and been served a 0:00:47.680 --> 0:00:52.479 Molotov cocktail. The man, on the other hand, seemed to 0:00:52.520 --> 0:00:58.960 think this book could actually help us. When my temper cooled, 0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:03.200 which it did at geological place, I reassessed the situation. 0:01:03.920 --> 0:01:07.560 I had several well adjusted friends in non monogamous arrangements. 0:01:08.000 --> 0:01:10.400 Some cultures even expect people to have more than one 0:01:10.480 --> 0:01:17.600 mate at a time. Okay, I got ahead of myself. High. Hello, 0:01:18.160 --> 0:01:21.920 I'm Dessa. This is deeply human and together we are 0:01:21.920 --> 0:01:26.319 going to rummage around your intuitions about romantic love, monogamy, 0:01:26.360 --> 0:01:39.720 and its alternatives. For the word Nerds in the room ahead, 0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:43.759 put your hands down, I see you. Yes. Monogamy strictly speaking, 0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:47.280 describes being married to only one person, but we're using 0:01:47.280 --> 0:01:50.480 it here as we do in casual conversation to describe 0:01:50.520 --> 0:01:53.560 having a sexual relationship with only one person at a time. 0:01:55.640 --> 0:01:58.920 Monogamy is definitely the norm where I grew up, But 0:01:58.920 --> 0:02:03.000 why should romantic relationships be exclusive when other relationships don't 0:02:03.000 --> 0:02:05.840 have to be? Like, we can love more than one sibling, 0:02:06.320 --> 0:02:09.160 more than one parent, and if we run into a 0:02:09.200 --> 0:02:11.280 friend having lunch with someone else, we don't flip the 0:02:11.280 --> 0:02:14.240 table over. So why was I so reluctant to even 0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:20.320 consider a more open relationship? If you're committed loving relationships 0:02:20.360 --> 0:02:23.359 have been exclusive. Is that the product of a conscious 0:02:23.440 --> 0:02:27.680 choice or just social conditioning? Why do our relationships have 0:02:27.760 --> 0:02:32.920 to be one at a time? First, let's talk about monogamy. 0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:35.160 We need to talk about it the way we talk 0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:38.440 about sobriety. You can fall off the wagon, sober back up, 0:02:38.480 --> 0:02:41.200 and get back on the wagon. And I'm here to 0:02:41.240 --> 0:02:43.280 tell people, and I'm often in the position of having 0:02:43.320 --> 0:02:47.360 to tell people in monogamous relationships, that it's the person 0:02:47.400 --> 0:02:49.320 you were with for forty years only cheated on you 0:02:49.360 --> 0:02:52.519 once or twice. They were good at it, not bad 0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:54.800 at it. They were good at it, good at monogamy. 0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:58.520 My name is Dan Savage, and I write Savage Love, 0:02:58.520 --> 0:03:01.120 which is syndicated sex and or relationship and ice column 0:03:01.120 --> 0:03:04.119 that I've been writing for thirty years, and I also 0:03:04.160 --> 0:03:06.440 host the Savage Love Cast. And a lot of people 0:03:06.480 --> 0:03:08.520 are interested in what Dan has to say on this 0:03:08.560 --> 0:03:12.119 stuff because podcast is crazy popular. He's written a best 0:03:12.120 --> 0:03:15.200 selling book, and what he says is that our understanding 0:03:15.240 --> 0:03:20.639 of monogamy is in serious need of an overhaul. Western 0:03:20.680 --> 0:03:24.840 convention usually presupposes that love and monogamy go hand in hand, 0:03:25.160 --> 0:03:28.080 like if you love someone and the relationship is serious, 0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:32.400 you're exclusive and if someone cheats, well, that's grounds for 0:03:32.600 --> 0:03:36.720 media termination. We ask for perfect fidelity, but we don't 0:03:36.720 --> 0:03:40.240 expect perfection from our partners and other aspects of the relationship. 0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:44.720 And Dan thinks that's sort of absolutism about monogamy, sort 0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:49.720 of heartless. If you're with somebody for ten twenty years, kids, 0:03:49.720 --> 0:03:54.240 you merged finances, social networks, families, and it comes out 0:03:54.280 --> 0:03:57.080 of your partner has cheated on you five years ago 0:03:57.840 --> 0:04:00.720 and you find out about it, maybe that's something you 0:04:00.720 --> 0:04:03.920 should be able to get past. By placing so much 0:04:03.960 --> 0:04:07.800 weight on sexual fidelity, monogamists might set themselves up to 0:04:07.840 --> 0:04:11.240 throw away a good thing if somebody misses up. Dan 0:04:11.360 --> 0:04:13.760 himself is married and he's been with his husband, Terry, 0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:16.359 for a very long time, and over the course of 0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:19.800 their relationship, they revised the terms of their arrangement. My 0:04:19.920 --> 0:04:24.279 relationship with Terry twenty years ago, we were mostly monogamous. 0:04:24.279 --> 0:04:27.520 When we were having sex. It was almost always usually 0:04:27.600 --> 0:04:31.040 with each other, but sometimes, you know, when the planets aligned, 0:04:31.400 --> 0:04:34.839 we could have sex with other people together or separately. 0:04:35.680 --> 0:04:38.320 But as an out gay couple in the middle of 0:04:38.360 --> 0:04:41.839 the marriage equality debate and as parents, when we told 0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:44.920 people we were in, you know, not monogamous, people made 0:04:44.960 --> 0:04:49.359 assumptions about troops of men, strange men coming in and 0:04:49.360 --> 0:04:50.840 out of our house at all hours of the day 0:04:50.880 --> 0:04:53.560 and night. You know, it feels like like the mainstream 0:04:53.640 --> 0:04:59.240 popular imagination we conceptualized like the opposite of monogamy as 0:04:59.279 --> 0:05:05.000 either jact loneliness or NonStop promiscuity. Oh my god. Yeah, 0:05:05.000 --> 0:05:07.360 that's why I coined the term monogamoush I kept saying 0:05:07.400 --> 0:05:11.159 mostly monogamous, and so I just thought we were monogamous 0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:21.800 with some squish. There are so many terms for the 0:05:21.880 --> 0:05:24.960 many ways to have a modern relationship. If you found 0:05:25.000 --> 0:05:27.919 yourself referencing a dog eared copy of Urban Dictionary to 0:05:27.960 --> 0:05:30.920 decipher the acronyms on Tinder, you might have also run 0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:34.640 across E n M or ethically non monogamous, or words 0:05:34.680 --> 0:05:38.280 like polyamory or open relationship where everybody's got permission to 0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:42.279 see other people. When Dan talks about non monogamy, he 0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:45.880 doesn't sound like a hedonist throwing weekday orgies. He sounds 0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:51.400 kind of prim When will we stop pretending that relationships 0:05:51.960 --> 0:05:54.760 have to be defined by the sexual connection that may 0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:57.840 have brought that relationship together at the start? When will 0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:01.920 we stop putting so much emphasis on sucks? But I 0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:04.240 feel that you do you due diligence to say, like, 0:06:04.279 --> 0:06:06.880 you know, I'm a favor of monogamy if you choose that, 0:06:07.040 --> 0:06:10.200 and I wanted to work for you, But then I 0:06:10.200 --> 0:06:12.800 I don't believe. I feel like you talk about monogamy 0:06:12.839 --> 0:06:15.800 like a needle exchange program, like if you can't quit it, 0:06:16.080 --> 0:06:20.280 then here's the way to try to do it safely. Yeah. 0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:22.600 I guess if you're going to do this dangerous, stupid, 0:06:22.640 --> 0:06:26.200 reckless thing, you should do it as safely as possible. Yeah. 0:06:26.240 --> 0:06:29.919 I mean, I can see that there are advantages in 0:06:29.960 --> 0:06:34.440 a monogamous relationship. Also myself having been in monogamous relationships, 0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:39.760 you know a certain amount of emotional security, definitely, you 0:06:39.800 --> 0:06:42.800 know sexual safety. The monogomous relationship I was in for 0:06:42.839 --> 0:06:45.760 five years was high to the HIV AIDS epidemic. It 0:06:45.920 --> 0:06:48.160 kept us safe. It's probably one of the reasons I'm 0:06:48.200 --> 0:06:51.279 alive now. Even though we weren't perfectly monogamous, or I 0:06:51.320 --> 0:06:57.120 wasn't the entire time we together. Dan since built a 0:06:57.160 --> 0:07:01.080 life where important relationships can be plural rather and strictly singular. 0:07:03.400 --> 0:07:06.039 The first person I knew to really commit to a 0:07:06.080 --> 0:07:10.120 non monogamous lifestyle, let's call him Roy. We've had an 0:07:10.120 --> 0:07:12.600 actor voice up his bits and will explain why in 0:07:12.640 --> 0:07:16.440 a second. Roy met his now wife when they were teenagers. 0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:21.400 We've been together since we hugged in a play in 0:07:21.680 --> 0:07:25.280 high school. Wait did you hug in a play? Because 0:07:25.320 --> 0:07:29.320 that was like written into the script of the play. Yes, okay, cool, 0:07:29.600 --> 0:07:31.600 And then you were like I think also off stage, 0:07:31.680 --> 0:07:36.240 we should also just hug until um we're dead. Right. 0:07:39.280 --> 0:07:42.680 Somewhere near the end of our college years was when 0:07:42.680 --> 0:07:47.320 we decided to be non monogamous, and maybe two years 0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:51.000 after that is when we got married. The decision to 0:07:51.040 --> 0:07:53.960 open up their relationship was sparked by a request from 0:07:53.960 --> 0:07:57.160 a female friend of Royce. She was lesbian, looking to 0:07:57.200 --> 0:07:59.800 get pregnant, wanted to do with the analog way, and 0:07:59.840 --> 0:08:01.600 so she asked if roy would be willing to have 0:08:01.640 --> 0:08:05.200 sex with her. Roy said he'd consider it, but obviously 0:08:05.320 --> 0:08:08.800 he had to talk about it with this partner. I 0:08:08.840 --> 0:08:14.720 shouldn't say as a name, right, all right, my first 0:08:14.840 --> 0:08:20.559 big crush was Janine Garoffalo, so I'll say Janine. So 0:08:21.040 --> 0:08:24.200 me and Janine were out for dinner. A brief interruption 0:08:24.280 --> 0:08:26.840 for a little exposition for those of you who missed 0:08:26.880 --> 0:08:30.200 the nineties cult classic reality bites. Janine Garoffalo is a 0:08:30.240 --> 0:08:33.640 comic and an actor. Former Saturday Night Live cast member 0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:37.120 with dark hair, quick wit, expressive features. A favorite of 0:08:37.160 --> 0:08:43.800 progressive bookish boys back in high school. Roy carry on. So, 0:08:44.240 --> 0:08:47.840 me and Janine were out for dinner, and I brought up, Hey, 0:08:48.000 --> 0:08:51.040 my friend asked today if I could get her pregnant, 0:08:51.760 --> 0:08:55.160 what do you think? And it started this whole conversation 0:08:55.600 --> 0:08:58.560 and we kind of figured out like, oh, actually, like 0:08:58.640 --> 0:09:01.240 the physical part of it as an a comfortable if 0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:03.520 we're being honest, The part about cheating that we were 0:09:03.520 --> 0:09:07.000 scared of that seems the most harmful was the like 0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:11.360 lying and the sneaking about it, and if we erased 0:09:11.440 --> 0:09:14.280 that part of it, that the physical part didn't seem 0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:17.000 like it would be that much of a challenge. You know, 0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:19.959 we'd been together at that point years and years, and 0:09:20.720 --> 0:09:23.160 it felt like we had been totally honest with each other, 0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:26.720 but one conversation that we had never had was the 0:09:26.880 --> 0:09:31.760 honest I'm attracted to other people conversation. We just kind 0:09:31.760 --> 0:09:36.959 of pretended that that we weren't. We finally like admitted, like, yes, 0:09:37.360 --> 0:09:40.520 as I walk through the world, I notice other people 0:09:40.600 --> 0:09:44.840 that are attracted or that are attractive, and I am 0:09:44.840 --> 0:09:50.280 attracted to them. And so we started the conversation of like, well, 0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:53.000 what would it look like if we got to pursue 0:09:53.040 --> 0:09:56.839 some of that attraction And we talked about it and 0:09:56.880 --> 0:10:01.680 discussed and wrote and rewrote rule rules and read books 0:10:01.720 --> 0:10:05.200 for I mean probably six months or more before either 0:10:05.240 --> 0:10:07.400 of us actually went out on a date with anybody. 0:10:09.559 --> 0:10:12.920 Slowly and cautiously, they started to see other people, which 0:10:12.960 --> 0:10:17.800 at first confused the daylights out of their friends twenty 0:10:17.880 --> 0:10:20.880 years ago or whatever. It was like, it was hard 0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:23.400 to find information about it, and it was hard to 0:10:23.440 --> 0:10:25.640 like to find other people that knew a lot about it. 0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:28.960 And most people we were telling would be like, so 0:10:29.000 --> 0:10:33.360 you're breaking up and it's like no, and and they're 0:10:33.400 --> 0:10:36.520 like I thought things were okay with you guys, and 0:10:36.559 --> 0:10:38.880 it's like no, actually, like this is a sign that 0:10:38.920 --> 0:10:42.480 things are really good. That were like so comfortable that 0:10:42.559 --> 0:10:49.360 we're messing with it and like trying something else. Being 0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:52.760 very thinky people, Roy and Jeanine were deliberate about trying 0:10:52.800 --> 0:10:55.160 to make connections with people who were already living a 0:10:55.200 --> 0:11:01.960 non monogamous lifestyle successfully many years ago. We went to 0:11:02.600 --> 0:11:06.720 like a local polyamory meet up and it was at 0:11:06.720 --> 0:11:09.880 a Turtle Bread. We were sitting there and this is 0:11:09.880 --> 0:11:12.200 like where like a month then, where we haven't even 0:11:12.200 --> 0:11:15.040 started dating anyone yet. We're just looking for people to 0:11:15.080 --> 0:11:19.079 talk to and listener. I must interrupt here. Turtle Bread 0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:24.439 is like a homey, neighborhood Minneapolis bakery slash restaurant place 0:11:24.880 --> 0:11:28.160 that makes a subway sandwich shop look like Studio fifty four. 0:11:28.280 --> 0:11:33.360 It's just like very mild mannered um like mom jeans 0:11:33.679 --> 0:11:36.560 dog bowl out front. It's like norm core with carbs. 0:11:37.400 --> 0:11:40.040 So when you kiss on the mouth four people in 0:11:40.080 --> 0:11:42.760 a row in the middle of the Midwest at a 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:46.360 turtle bread, you've been noticed at that point by everyone 0:11:46.400 --> 0:11:50.920 in the restaurant, right, Like, it's a fairly public display. 0:11:51.040 --> 0:11:54.360 That wouldn't tend to happen there, And so we were like, 0:11:54.640 --> 0:11:57.800 that's maybe not our vibe. But they did end up 0:11:57.840 --> 0:12:00.480 finding other Polly friends that were a better fit and 0:12:00.559 --> 0:12:02.920 didn't creet with Tom. We kind of just like talked 0:12:02.960 --> 0:12:07.320 about like science and art and politics, and like we 0:12:07.320 --> 0:12:10.160 were just kind of we were like, oh, we're just, 0:12:10.480 --> 0:12:14.200 you know, fairly like minded and curious and interested people. 0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:17.680 In those early years, however, Roy was worried the choices 0:12:17.760 --> 0:12:21.040 he made in his private life could be professionally risky. 0:12:21.240 --> 0:12:23.320 He's worked in public service for a very long time, 0:12:23.559 --> 0:12:26.840 and over his career has been recognized with some significant accolades. 0:12:27.040 --> 0:12:28.640 I've been doing the job that I've been doing now 0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:31.680 for over fifteen years, and I think when I was 0:12:31.720 --> 0:12:34.480 newer and the world was maybe different than it is now. 0:12:35.240 --> 0:12:38.000 I was very worried that, like, if this was a 0:12:38.000 --> 0:12:41.440 public thing, it's possible I would just get fired or 0:12:41.840 --> 0:12:46.280 demoted or shelved in some way, just because like the 0:12:46.640 --> 0:12:49.320 place I work wouldn't want that kind of reputation attached 0:12:49.320 --> 0:12:52.360 to it. I mean, I think it's anyone who's doing 0:12:52.400 --> 0:12:58.080 something not heteronormative, not whatever, can be looked at as perverts. 0:12:59.080 --> 0:13:02.200 You know. For me, my life feels very very normal. 0:13:02.600 --> 0:13:05.520 But the most immediate motive for discretion. The reason we've 0:13:05.520 --> 0:13:09.200 got an actor doing Roy's side of the conversation. His family, 0:13:09.760 --> 0:13:24.280 Janine Garofalo's family is very, very conservative. It seems natural 0:13:24.360 --> 0:13:27.040 to have strong feelings about our own love lives, but 0:13:27.080 --> 0:13:30.360 we've also got such intense emotions about how other people 0:13:30.559 --> 0:13:34.640 are loving other people, even if they seem happy. Why 0:13:36.679 --> 0:13:39.920 some people react like as if my open relationship is 0:13:39.920 --> 0:13:43.960 a threat to their monogamous relationship, you know, not that 0:13:44.040 --> 0:13:46.079 like I'm trying to sleep with their partner or anything, 0:13:46.200 --> 0:13:50.559 but just like the existence of open relationships or people 0:13:50.600 --> 0:13:52.840 that might be happy in those is some sort of 0:13:52.880 --> 0:13:56.400 message of danger to the relationship they have. And I 0:13:56.440 --> 0:13:58.680 think that's true of like a lot of ways of 0:13:58.679 --> 0:14:02.560 living that have been norm When there's an alternative presented, 0:14:03.320 --> 0:14:06.280 people can be really uncomfortable with that or feel like 0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:09.160 it's an attack when you know it's obvious people are 0:14:09.160 --> 0:14:17.320 living their own life. Sexual exclusivity is part of the 0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:20.800 predetermined course that a romantic relationship is expected to follow. 0:14:21.720 --> 0:14:24.280 So where is this course supposed to be heading exactly? 0:14:25.200 --> 0:14:31.520 Philosopher Luke Brunning describes it as the relationship escalator. In 0:14:31.560 --> 0:14:35.240 our society, we typically think that relationships ought to deepen 0:14:35.320 --> 0:14:38.040 over time. Right that you start off, you meet someone, 0:14:38.640 --> 0:14:40.160 you might get to know them a bit, perhaps you 0:14:40.160 --> 0:14:43.640 start dating them. Then over time you might become exclusive. 0:14:44.240 --> 0:14:46.680 Then you might say, oh, now this person's my boyfriend. 0:14:47.400 --> 0:14:49.680 Then people will actually say, ah, you know, when you're 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:51.920 gonna get engaged, when you're gonna get married. Let's say 0:14:51.920 --> 0:14:53.680 you get married. Then they might start asking when are 0:14:53.680 --> 0:14:55.920 you're gonna buy a house or have children. It's on 0:14:55.960 --> 0:14:59.120 and so forth. So the relationship exclated this really simple 0:14:59.120 --> 0:15:02.400 idea that once you're in a relationship, that relationship has 0:15:02.440 --> 0:15:05.280 to sort of change and involve over time to become 0:15:05.880 --> 0:15:09.800 more complicated, more committed in a way that ends up 0:15:09.840 --> 0:15:16.560 with your lives practically and often legally. Entwined Luke is 0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:19.320 a lecturer at the University of Birmingham and the UK 0:15:19.720 --> 0:15:24.400 who researches personal relationships and the philosophy of emotions. I 0:15:24.440 --> 0:15:27.880 asked how popular monogamy is these days, like who's doing 0:15:27.880 --> 0:15:31.040 it and where. I'd say that as an ideal, monogamy 0:15:31.120 --> 0:15:33.840 is kind of spread around the world, so it's practiced 0:15:34.280 --> 0:15:38.240 fairly widely. There are some exceptions, but even in countries 0:15:38.400 --> 0:15:42.040 in the Middle East or some parts of the African continent, 0:15:42.520 --> 0:15:46.280 monogamy is increasingly taking hold as a romantic ideal am 0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:48.000 I think of it sort of as a as one 0:15:48.040 --> 0:15:50.800 of many cultural exports. You know, is it like the 0:15:50.840 --> 0:15:53.760 new Drake record spreads around the world, or is it 0:15:53.800 --> 0:15:56.440 the fact that you have communities that are landing on 0:15:56.560 --> 0:15:59.360 this form independently of one another. I think the answer 0:15:59.360 --> 0:16:02.200 would be a bit of It's certainly something that's been exported. 0:16:02.320 --> 0:16:06.280 Christian miscenaries and colonizes in general have done a lot 0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:09.400 to help promote this as an ideal. I don't spend 0:16:09.440 --> 0:16:12.080 a lot of time kicking it in missionaries circles personally, 0:16:12.560 --> 0:16:15.400 but while monogamy is an ideal may be spreading around 0:16:15.440 --> 0:16:18.960 the world. In practice, Americans anyway, may be more likely 0:16:19.040 --> 0:16:23.600 to try other models. Researchers from the Kinsey Institute and 0:16:23.680 --> 0:16:28.760 Chapman University in the US surveyed single Americans about polyamory. 0:16:29.080 --> 0:16:31.880 One out of six people expressed a desire to engage 0:16:31.920 --> 0:16:34.760 in polyamory, and what out of nine said they've done 0:16:34.800 --> 0:16:38.800 it at some point in their life. But in trying 0:16:38.800 --> 0:16:41.040 to sort stuff out with the X who handed me 0:16:41.120 --> 0:16:45.080 that book, I remember wondering if a predilection for monogamy 0:16:45.320 --> 0:16:48.320 was just sort of baked into some people and not others, 0:16:49.120 --> 0:16:51.840 and if so, asking someone to change seemed at best 0:16:51.920 --> 0:16:57.040 feudal and at worst like proselytizing. Luke says that modern 0:16:57.120 --> 0:16:59.640 lifestyles may have something to do with the kind of 0:16:59.640 --> 0:17:03.600 relayation ships who find attractive. Today. For example, many young 0:17:03.680 --> 0:17:06.119 people are living less settled lives than they used to. 0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:08.600 They don't live in the same place for a very 0:17:08.720 --> 0:17:12.040 very long amount of time. The idea of owning a 0:17:12.040 --> 0:17:15.720 house with a picket fence and a garden full of 0:17:16.320 --> 0:17:18.480 you know, goats and vegetables and the and their their 0:17:18.520 --> 0:17:22.080 single partner is something that many people just find very 0:17:22.119 --> 0:17:25.560 hard to envisage at all, Right, And that's not because 0:17:25.560 --> 0:17:29.160 they can't imagine it, but because they think it's inaccessible 0:17:29.200 --> 0:17:32.280 for them. People are much more sort of networked individuals 0:17:32.320 --> 0:17:36.600 these days, drawing sources of kind of emotional, social, cultural 0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.399 satisfaction and stability from all kinds of different people in 0:17:39.440 --> 0:17:41.560 their lives. I just want to make sure that there 0:17:41.640 --> 0:17:44.680 was one moment that I heard correctly. Did you say 0:17:44.680 --> 0:17:48.600 a house with a picket fence and a garden and 0:17:48.680 --> 0:17:54.119 a goat? Yes? Okay, cool, thank you. That says a 0:17:54.160 --> 0:17:56.639 lot about me. I gotta up my own. I gotta 0:17:56.800 --> 0:18:09.600 up my own fairytale game. Monogamy is embedded in the 0:18:09.680 --> 0:18:13.520 very first stories we learned about love. I think fairy 0:18:13.520 --> 0:18:17.880 tales Cinderella is essentially monogamy as foot fetish. But are 0:18:17.880 --> 0:18:21.399 those norms as relevant and resonant for someone like sexpert 0:18:21.480 --> 0:18:27.520 Dan Savage in the same sex relationship in heterosexual land? 0:18:27.600 --> 0:18:30.400 I think like commitment and monogamy are often like this 0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:35.160 two for one bundled package. Does that work similarly in 0:18:35.200 --> 0:18:38.480 the gay world? No, and it never has. I'm fifty 0:18:38.520 --> 0:18:40.240 six years old. I came out when I was sixteen 0:18:40.280 --> 0:18:45.040 seventeen years old. And monogamy was always the conversation, it 0:18:45.119 --> 0:18:49.960 was negotiated, it was opt in, and for straight people, 0:18:50.000 --> 0:18:53.640 monogamy has always seemed to be a default setting from 0:18:53.640 --> 0:18:56.520 the very first night a couple spends together. Dan says 0:18:56.560 --> 0:19:00.600 that gay relationships necessarily involve a lot of talking. When 0:19:00.840 --> 0:19:02.680 a man and a man are going to bed together 0:19:02.720 --> 0:19:05.679 for the first time, they don't get to consent and 0:19:05.760 --> 0:19:08.960 stop communicating. They get to consent, yes, let's have sex, 0:19:09.040 --> 0:19:11.000 and then they keep talking because what's going to happen 0:19:11.040 --> 0:19:14.360 next isn't obvious, can't be assumed. You have to talk 0:19:14.400 --> 0:19:16.439 about what you want to do, what your desires are. 0:19:16.960 --> 0:19:23.480 Straight people avoid that conversation. Straight couples might just presume 0:19:23.600 --> 0:19:26.680 they agree with sex should be what a relationship should be, 0:19:27.119 --> 0:19:29.800 whereas gay couples don't have the same scripts to lean on, 0:19:29.920 --> 0:19:32.399 so they got to negotiate every step. What do you 0:19:32.400 --> 0:19:34.840 actually want out of this? What should we build together? 0:19:37.480 --> 0:19:40.360 Dan Savage is one man leading one life who has 0:19:40.400 --> 0:19:43.600 not been elected official representative of gay people around the globe, 0:19:44.080 --> 0:19:47.560 but in his worldview, monogamy is just not the gold 0:19:47.640 --> 0:19:50.879 standard of romantic connection. I don't think gay men are 0:19:50.920 --> 0:19:53.400 failing at monogamy. I think gay men are succeeding at 0:19:53.440 --> 0:19:58.520 relationships and non monogamy. Okay, enough about love for a minute, 0:19:58.880 --> 0:20:04.520 let's talk money. It's time for econ. I'm Marina at Shade. 0:20:04.560 --> 0:20:07.840 I'm assistant professor at the Vancouver School of Economics at 0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:11.040 the University of British Columbia, and my specialization is the 0:20:11.080 --> 0:20:14.960 economics of sex and love. So from the economic vantage points, 0:20:15.880 --> 0:20:20.000 what are the incentives for monogamous relationships? Well, throughout history, 0:20:20.440 --> 0:20:23.760 there's been a lot of incentives for monogamous relationships, particularly 0:20:23.840 --> 0:20:27.920 from men. Men in general historically haven't been big fans 0:20:28.000 --> 0:20:30.880 of putting their resources into children that are not their own, 0:20:31.600 --> 0:20:34.240 and so there's been a lot of incentive for women 0:20:34.280 --> 0:20:37.880 to be monogamous so that men are raising other men's children. 0:20:38.480 --> 0:20:41.880 And then the idea of like institutionalized monogamy, like living 0:20:41.880 --> 0:20:45.200 in a society that really really frowns upon people having 0:20:45.280 --> 0:20:48.679 multiple sexual partners, That really comes out of the idea 0:20:48.760 --> 0:20:51.120 that you know, you can't supervise somebody all the time, 0:20:51.400 --> 0:20:53.679 So what you do is you set up a system 0:20:53.680 --> 0:20:56.320 that is either system of just like social norms or 0:20:56.440 --> 0:21:01.320 religion or laws. The great that structure so that when 0:21:01.400 --> 0:21:04.560 you're not around the other person, mostly the woman here 0:21:05.080 --> 0:21:08.640 is not off having sexual relationships with other people. Marriage, 0:21:08.680 --> 0:21:13.480 it's worth noting, hasn't always been considered a fundamentally romantic endeavor. 0:21:16.520 --> 0:21:20.760 In the past, marriage was much more of an economic relationship. 0:21:21.240 --> 0:21:26.760 People got married to produce a household, essentially to produce children. 0:21:27.119 --> 0:21:30.760 But in much of today's world that's changed more hallmark 0:21:31.160 --> 0:21:34.399 less labor forced marriage started to being about other things. 0:21:34.840 --> 0:21:37.879 It started being about more about love and companionship and 0:21:37.920 --> 0:21:41.800 about the joy of spending time with another person. And 0:21:41.840 --> 0:21:46.120 then once you make marriage more about those things, then 0:21:46.160 --> 0:21:49.040 it opens it up to other possibilities because it's no 0:21:49.119 --> 0:21:52.920 longer and economic relationship. If it's just about love and companionship, 0:21:52.960 --> 0:21:56.560 then why not have a triad? Right dang Marina, quick 0:21:56.600 --> 0:22:01.000 turn on that one. Also, technological and inss have changed 0:22:01.040 --> 0:22:04.720 our attitudes about how sex and relationships fit together, and 0:22:04.760 --> 0:22:08.960 so as birth control technology comes better and better, then 0:22:09.000 --> 0:22:12.119 the incentives change. Right, You're less concerned that your partner 0:22:12.160 --> 0:22:13.720 is going to go off and have a baby with 0:22:13.760 --> 0:22:16.960 someone else if she is sexually active with another man, 0:22:17.640 --> 0:22:20.320 and so that will erode away some of the incentives 0:22:20.320 --> 0:22:24.959 to enforcing monogamy and relationships. If our incentives for sexual 0:22:25.000 --> 0:22:28.320 exclusivity of a rooting, does that mean that monogamy is 0:22:28.320 --> 0:22:31.000 on its way out and rom coms are dead and 0:22:31.080 --> 0:22:34.600 Cinderella just stays out all night barefooted and abisa phone party. 0:22:35.480 --> 0:22:38.120 M h, not yet. I know. We see a lot 0:22:38.119 --> 0:22:40.679 of studies where we say that young people, you know, 0:22:40.720 --> 0:22:44.639 the next generation that's coming up, is kind of less 0:22:44.640 --> 0:22:47.840 tied to the idea of monogamy. They're more open to 0:22:47.880 --> 0:22:51.560 having relationships with multiple people. Um, it's gonna be really 0:22:51.560 --> 0:22:53.680 interesting to see once they get a little bit further 0:22:53.760 --> 0:22:56.680 on in their lives and their children become involved, whether 0:22:56.760 --> 0:22:59.000 or not they'll be as receptive to those ideas, and 0:22:59.040 --> 0:23:03.920 that I think we still have to wait and see. 0:23:05.920 --> 0:23:09.280 When I took honest stock of my own resistance to polyamory, 0:23:09.440 --> 0:23:11.800 at least a part of me was concerned about being judged. 0:23:12.400 --> 0:23:15.159 I worried what people might think, which is allows you 0:23:15.200 --> 0:23:19.119 a way to make big and fundamentally personal choices, and 0:23:19.200 --> 0:23:21.200 I want my decisions on who and how to love 0:23:21.359 --> 0:23:23.280 to be based on the gossip at in neighbor's house. 0:23:23.960 --> 0:23:26.760 But people do pass sweeping judgments on other people's love 0:23:26.840 --> 0:23:31.000 lives Roy was worried about it. Dan Savage, the Love 0:23:31.040 --> 0:23:34.640 and Sex columnist, says his relationship has been dismissed out 0:23:34.640 --> 0:23:38.119 of hand for not adhering to convention, like it just 0:23:38.119 --> 0:23:42.199 wouldn't count. It used to only be people who are 0:23:42.200 --> 0:23:44.440 monogamous telling those of us who are not a monogamoust 0:23:44.440 --> 0:23:46.720 that we were doing love wrong, or that we weren't 0:23:46.760 --> 0:23:48.760 in love, and that if we were in love, we 0:23:48.840 --> 0:23:51.240 couldn't do this. I don't look at monogamous people and 0:23:51.280 --> 0:23:53.879 say you're not in love, because if you were really 0:23:53.920 --> 0:23:56.400 in love, you'd be having three ways. I never say 0:23:56.440 --> 0:24:00.560 that to monogamous people. It's the mixing monogamy love that 0:24:00.560 --> 0:24:05.040 that really harms, not open relationships like mine, but monogamous relationships. 0:24:05.720 --> 0:24:10.400 Dan suggests that monogamous arrangements actually de emphasize the sexual 0:24:10.480 --> 0:24:13.840 aspect of a relationship and in doing so, can strengthen 0:24:13.880 --> 0:24:16.639 the emotional connection that so many of us seem so 0:24:16.680 --> 0:24:20.639 concerned about. And as for him and his husband Terry, 0:24:21.040 --> 0:24:24.960 they are salad. We've been together almost thirty years now, 0:24:25.520 --> 0:24:28.879 and yet despite having been together for three decades, I 0:24:28.920 --> 0:24:32.080 have been in the position a numerous occasions where someone 0:24:32.119 --> 0:24:34.800 will look at me and say, as we're talking about relationships, 0:24:34.800 --> 0:24:37.560 I could never do what you and Terry do because 0:24:37.560 --> 0:24:41.159 I value commitment too highly. All of my marriages have 0:24:41.280 --> 0:24:46.160 been monogamous. Unpack that, like Terry and I've been gether 0:24:46.240 --> 0:24:49.040 for three decades, we aren't committed to each other. And 0:24:49.440 --> 0:24:51.600