policywank
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 3,241
I think it made sense back when it was a social contract and we didn't convolute it with romance. I mean... it's a holdover from a time when women were basically chattel and were traded for livestock, but there was a chunk of time there when you married someone as part of a contract, you both achieved social standing, and proceeded to fuck whoever you felt like.
I have a sneaking suspicion the main reason someone put the kibosh on that was because someone didn't like the idea of women being allowed to have sexual freedom... but I tend to think that's the reason EVERYTHING happens.
Your last point is a critical one and I am going to use it to wander off topic.
There are many arguments for and against marriage and for and against monogamy in a marriage. The considerations extend well beyond sex and I think each person has to come to their own conclusions.
However, it is damn near impossible to have a truly objective view of the possibilities, trade-offs and implications because so much of our perspective is rooted in the historical need to control women and reassure men.
Why? Because women are sexually superior. Every man knows deep down that his wife is more than capable of sexually satisfying the whole neighbourhood if she so chose. She wouldn't be ruined or dirty or unable to walk the next day. With basic conditioning she could fuck them all, take a quick shower and carry-on with her day and her man wouldn't be any the wiser. For men who feel the need to be in control this is a frightening vulnerability over which they have no control.......other than to try to make all of society their wife's chaperone.
Moreover men do not have the same opportunity - neither the physical capacity nor the receptive audience. In a sexually open world it would be a buyer's market for women and men would have to wait their turn.