This post is not quite sexually explicit, but it does involve some sexual topics that may be NSFW.
Monogamy is a term that refers to a special arrangement of unimale monogyny, a primate relationship involving one male and one female. In the arrangement of monogamy, a strictly human dynamic, unimale monogyny is upheld through fidelity, loyality between partners established through integrity, or goodwilling honesty that establishes trust. Monogamy is, of course, the norm in Western societies as well as across the world.
Various forms of non-monogamy exist. Among these are varieties of multimale monogyny, known also in human societies as polyandry, wherein multiple men—typically brothers—share a woman, usually honored as a wife, as well as varieties of unimale and multimale polygyny, also known as polygamy, or “multiple wives,” especially when involving a fidelitous arrangement. Polyandry is rather rare, typically being practiced only in harsh climates, such as among the Drokpa of Tibet. Polygyny is much more common, though it is typically practiced only by social elites in a society (except where the society is very warfaring and wives or “wives” are gained by way of conquest). For instance, among hunter-gatherers the practice is fairly common, but typically only enough “extra” wives are available for a headman and perhaps a noteworthy second or so, and these often result from the women having been widowed by warfare, wild animals, or disease.
Among primates engaging in polygyny, the group of females is known as a harem, and the same is true with human women. Among apes, harems are claimed through agonistic behaviors such as violent competition, which is accompanied by a pronounced sexual dimorphism in size, muscle development, and canine size among males. However, the harem has a choice in ratifying the male’s claim, and can reject him, even if the victor. With humans, whose sexual dimorphism is greatly reduced, things are slightly different, though the harem is typically understood to belong to the husband, and refers to that portion of his household reserved for his “wives” and children. Political and economic coercion exists such that these arrangements cannot be considered to be truly fidelitous, but arise at least as much from duress, similar in some respects to the ape harem but without the official veto power. Indeed, however, the harem has often been a locus for coups or “palace revolutions” to take place. Nonetheless, there have been examples of polygyny or polygamy taking place voluntarily, and this is often afforded by and compounds the prestige of the man of the house. There have also been examples of voluntary polyandry taking place, though this typically reflects a dearth of available women and the desperation of the men involved.
Between monogamy and the various forms of non-monogamy there exists a gray zone or gradient area that blurs their lines some. And I am not referring to the fact that most unimale polygynous relationships are temporary—most young people go through a series of unimale polygynous sexual relationships before marrying—, or that serial monogamy, or a series of marriages, is now as common as lasting fidelity. Instead, I am referring to what has been called monogamish, apparently first by Dan Savage. Savage may define it in a particular way, but in the vernacular it has come to refer to any arrangement that is typically monogamous, but which has features of non-monogamy. This may involve couples who draw the line at flirting with others of the opposite sex, or fantasizing about situations, allowing for that but no more. Others may allow for other activities, even including sex.
Importantly, monogamish couples are generally not engaged romantically with their non-monogamous flirting or sexual partners. This would push it toward polyamory, meaning “multiple loves.” That’s generally considered something different. People in polyamorous relationships are generally characterized by tolerance of their partner’s sexual tastes and explorations, if not shared satisfaction from them. As polyamory is about love, and not just sex, its motivations are typically rooted in mutual concern for one’s partner as well as for oneself, and especially as it relates to the need to share love and lust. A particularly civil approach to polyamory, largely experimental but promising, is polyfidelity, or “group marriage.” Those into polyfidelity find interest in the economic and interpersonal benefits of group marriage as well, believing that a large family unit can harbor an abundance of mutual adoration, reduce living costs, bring about domestic efficiency and specialization, and increase income relative to expenses (especially where a family business is pursued). Importantly, the “marriage” is typically not a true marriage under the law, which forbids bigamy, but is instead a fidelity group. Among polygynous-leaning monogamish arrangements, there appear to be four different types, according to motivation. These include the arrangements of swinging, voluntary cuckoldry, hotwifing, and “greedy girl” fantasies.[1]
Simple swinging or, sometimes, wife-swapping, is the having of sex with outside singles or couples or the trading of wives for a short time. The motivation behind this is often for the mutual benefit of being able to experience the sexual company of others. Couples engaged in swinging are tolerant, but may not be enamored, of the fact that their partners enjoy having sex with other people, but engage in the practice so that they, themselves, may be allowed also to enjoy having sex with others.
Cuckoldry properly refers to a situation in which a male is cheated on and raises the offspring of another male, but in regard to human fantasies or fetishes refers to the practice of a wife being shared with other men with certain defining characteristics. Cuckolds want their wives to cheat on them, and often give license to do so. In this situation, the wife or the “other guy” is really in charge, and that is what the husband gets off on. Dominance over the husband is the goal. Cuckolding often involves an observing and demeaned husband, but can also involve the husband in the activity, as with a threesome or group sex.
Hotwifing likewise refers to the sharing of a wife, but in this case the husband is in charge, and the wife is used as a tool to express his superiority over other men, who desire his wife but can only have her if he allows it, or for knowing that other men find his wife sexy and that she still is seen by others as sexually desirable. This is a form of wife-sharing used largely to dominate other men or else to seek their approval, whereby men show their wives off as a sign of their prestige and power. A hotwife is often given license to have a night without the husband, but may be limited to having threesomes or group sex with the presence of the husband and under the husband’s control.
A fourth form of wife-sharing might be called greedy girl fantasies or fetishes. The name greedy girl is actually derived from gangbang events held in sex clubs in the United Kingdom, wherein a woman is made the center of sexual attention and engages in simultaneous or serial sexual play with a group of men or couples. In the case I am speaking of, however— referring to the practice among married parties, my original use of the term, I understand—, it refers to the motivation of a husband who shares his wife so that he can see her “go wild.” The greedy girl arrangement—which may involve a basic romp with another, a double blowjob, or even go as far as double penetration, gangbanging, or bukkaki— is about the wife being unleashed to experience her fantasies or fetishes and the bodies and semen of other men (and sometimes women), all also for the pleasure of the observing husband. This is not about domination, but instead about compersion, a term used in polyamory to refer to the pleasure of seeing one’s horny partner living out their desires and being satisfied by the sexual company of others.
The corollary exists for women as well. The opposite of the cuckold husband is the cuckqueen. The opposite of a hotwife is a hothusband. And greedy boys are certainly more prevalent than greedy girls, and sometimes have enabling wives who eroticize seeing their husbands satisfied. And while I have presented these four types as aspects of being monogamish, they can also be motivations in polyamory. Further, it is imaginable that there may be categories of overlap between some of these groups, the most virtuous of them likely being some mixture of mutual swinging and mutual greediness— but certainly no more virtuous than polyfidelity or monogamy! While the corollaries exist for women, I will continue to speak primarily of the men’s angle for simplicity’s sake, but please account for the existence of the women’s as we proceed.
While cuckoldry, hotwifing, and their androcentric correlaries are clearly about domination, and are more closely related to mental illness or maladjustment than to altruism, swinging and the greedy girl fantasy, to the degree a genuine expression of sexuality, have been argued to be examples of feminist or post-feminist sexual expressions that fall outside of the hotwife and cuckolding paradigm of patriarchy. Hotwifing is really for borderline or agonistic homosexuals anyway—gross!—, and cuckolding for sissies. But greedy girling falls outside of patriarchy as well as the pornocracy of cuckoldry! Setting horny wives loose is not about domination, the way that leveraging them against other men or letting them wear the pants is. And giving license to receive license is likewise something different. Swingers are not cuckolds.
While the low prevalence of polyandry might suggest that women are predisposed to desire a single male partner, there may be complications to this, such as matters of practical life involving norms and cultural expectations. In such a case, swinging or the greedy girl fantasy would be an escape from these outwardly-imposed limitations. Nonetheless, it is important to be sure that there are no mechanisms of oppression that would force a woman into such a position, as this might constitute rape or its equivalent to manslaughter. This need not always be the case, as there are many socially-stable women who have enjoyed the attention of multiple men, whether as tolerated by their husbands or as eroticized by them, and even unfortunately sometimes against their will or knowledge.
I have suggested that mutualist men have an opportunity afforded by the low moral quality and generalized economic poverty of our present society to start practicing polygyny; it is my belief that female sexual selection will tend to favor the wholesome qualities of mutualists to the perversions of non-mutualists (including especially fake mutualists, or neo-mutualists). I have also suggested an arrangement for young men to have or share “wives” in a polygamous or polyamorous family unit, should this be more executable, called henofidelity. Where truly voluntary and free from oppression and economic pressure, “greedy girling,” like “greedy boying” and swinging, is an arrangement that is compatible with my vision for henofidelity. The same cannot be said as fully of cuckoldry or of hotwifing, though some of them may persist for some time because motivations are hard to know and to prove.
Henofidelity is, of course, an arrangement whereby one begins in a polyfidelity arrangement but can break off from there into exclusive subgroups or else monogamish or monogamous couples, and is offered as a fidelitous alternative to social isolation, involuntary celibacy, serial monogamy, the atomic family, and catastrophic divorce for those who want it. Of course, for those who want it, traditional monogamy is also held to be sacred in henofidelity, and perhaps even the end goal for many if not most of its participants! But for those who cannot live in a mansion, there should be an apartment available. And sometimes even mansioneers want to rent a cabin! Henofidelity is compatible with polygynous polyfidelity, swinging, sexual greediness, and traditional monogamy, and is unlikely to, though may, include polyandry and hothusbanding, but ideally excludes cuckoldry and hotwifing (especially when not overlapping with some greediness on the part of the hotwife)[2] as these are not to the mutual benefit of the dignity and flourishing of involved parties.
Right now, serial monogamy is the norm. People have multiple partners already, just over a span of time. Some ask, why not at once? I think mutualist men who want it have a fleeting opportunity, afforded by a degenerate culture, to regularly have sex in loving, fidelitous relationships with multiple women, at the added and beneficial expense of non-mutualist men, who, as far as I am concerned, should be widely seen as unlovable. There are enough women for at least some mutualist men, like headmen of old, but especially while young and otherwise single or serially monogamous, to gain access to the affection of a number of beautiful women, and especially if they can tolerate some compersion in the process. And where a group of henofidelitous mutualist men exist, there exists also a fine pool from which to choose among sexually-satisfied (and so well-grounded and more mature and respectful) and -experienced men. With the right ones, pair-bonds can be established, and a monogamous husband can be selected for the long-term, making it an excellent choice for women looking to find a happy someone worth settling down to raise kids with while having some fun in the process.
Henofidelity has the capacity to exert tremendous eugenic influence through organized sexual selection. Fidelity units can establish standards for personal hygiene, fitness, normality, and character, as well as for more subjective criteria such as general aesthetic or attractiveness. Polyfidelitous groups can also have an influence not only within their own family units, but on the world at-large. By establishing a competition for not only better sexual partners, but better family members with better values, evolutionary pressures are wielded against unhygienic lifestyles, obesity, queer perversions, bad temperament, and ugliness overall. While unfortunate for a monstrous few in the short term, perhaps, this would be to the benefit of everyone else, and fewer monsters would be left to suffer through the lives of future generations.
Ladies, the harem has always been under your control. As apes, you denied alpha primates control and as humans you have carried out palace revolutions. It is you who ultimately determines what it means to be an alpha male. Right now, you have decided to uphold a pornocracy to the benefit of the kakistocratic synarchy, and are wed to the state, but you can do better than that! Henofidelity is an experimental model that offers you an opportunity to be true to yourself and share your bed with upright and good-natured mutualist men, who also aren’t sissies or pussies. They’re smart, have good values, and are good with money. By selecting sexually in favor of such men, whether you procreate with them or not, and whether you share them with other women or not, you improve the world and reward decency. Start with the bunch and then, if you want, take your pick!
[1] Not here referring to another sexual fetish involving food and obesity
[2] It is more natural for women to tolerate or even celebrate sexual activity on behalf of their husbands than it is for men to do so with their wives
