Whatever happened to the virtue of self-restraint?
That’s so old school, Wesley! Just ask the psychology establishment that apparently wants to corrode the venerable Judeo/Christian moral norm of monogamy in favor of a hedonism in which people are encouraged to indulge their impulses and sexual desires with multiple partners (all consenting adults, of course) because great sex rules all!
As I noted a bit ago, a division of the American Psychological Association has boosted polyamory as just another healthy choice about which there should be no “stigma.” And now, Research Digest, published by the British Psychological Association, cheerily reports on a study cheerily claiming that “polyamory offers a ‘unique opportunity’ to enjoy prolonged passion and enjoy closeness in romantic relationships.” From the report:
“These findings have broad research implications for the study of romantic relationships,” the researchers write. “The belief that monogamy is superior to other relationship orientations is a fundamental and often unquestioned assumption underlying contemporary theories of the development of romantic relationships and intimacy.” And yet, they go on: “The findings suggest that polyamory may provide a unique opportunity for individuals to experience both eroticism and nurturance simultaneously.”
The study also claims that a spouse who allows his or her romantic partner to screw around with others “is arguably a more supportive individual in the first place,” than someone who expects, you know, fidelity.
If this ongoing push to celebrate and grant moral permission to indulge in polyamory succeeds in increasing the number of people who yield to such desires — as I suspect is the goal — it will also lead to the spread of STDs, family discord, divorce, more unwanted pregnancies, abortions, screwed up children, increases in sex and porn addiction, and a less stable society.
But on the positive side, it will mean more people will need psychologists!
Editor’s Note: The article discussed herein was originally published in Social Psychology, a journal of Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, which is not affiliated with the APA. The earlier task force was a project of an APA division, not of the national organization. An APA spokesman writes that “divisions are affiliated with APA and allowed to use our name, but they have their own members, who are not required to be members of APA.”