Non-Monogamous Desires

[DISCLAIMER]

Having been raised with Judeo-Christian values, which included active practice of faith-based tenets for over half my life, I once subscribed to dogmatic beliefs—established conclusions held definitively and without the possibility of reform, and which are considered to be true.

For instance, I was taught the Ten Commandments (understanding that there are 613 in total). As an example, Exodus 20:14 states, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” Here, it’s important to understand what adultery means.

Adultery is defined as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than that person’s current spouse or partner. As such, adultery is an act—the doing of a thing. What then was I taught about lust (usually intense or unbridled sexual desire)?

Exodus 20:17 states, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor’s.” To covet is to desire (what belongs to another) inordinately or culpably.

Whereas committing adultery is an action one does with the body, coveting is done with the mind. Therefore, biblical demandingness (i.e., “shalt not”) required that I maintain physiological and psychological purity. Thus, I was taught Genesis 2:18-24, regarding the proper order of life:

18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.

20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh.

22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

Per my religious views at the time, I was imparted the value of monogamy—the state or practice of having only one sexual partner at a time, or more specifically, the state or custom of being married to only one person at a time. For proper living, I was taught (and believed) these verses.

It wasn’t until I was 23-years-old and living in Rio de Janeiro, Brasil that I gave non-monogamy a try. I had a girlfriend who worked in the United States (U.S.) consulate that I guarded and a girlfriend who worked at a gas station down the street from the Marine house in which I lived.

That was around the time that many of my religiously-founded beliefs were challenged in a number of ways. Worth noting, my consulate girlfriend (17 years older than me) knew about the other woman. She stated, “All Brasilian men cheat, so I wouldn’t expect you to be any different.”

My gas station girlfriend (closer to my age) suspected that I had another woman, as she used open, honest, and vulnerable communication about the many men who were also said to have propositioned her. On a number of occasions, I saw firsthand what she was reported.

As an example, we walked along the street one evening and a group of Brasilian men cat-called her with one guy stating something along the lines of, “Oi, gatinha, estou tesão!” It translates to, “Hello, kitty, I’m horny!” (Literally calling her a cat, hence he cat-called my girlfriend.)

Back then, I didn’t know about Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) and how the process of self-disturbance occurs when one uses irrational beliefs during such an undesirable event. To calm my angry disposition, my girlfriend used logic and reason.

What she stated translated to something like, “My love, be proud that other men desire me, but only you have me.” It’s worth noting that in order for a proposition to be considered rational it empirically must remain in accordance with both logic and reason, as illustrated by a syllogism:

Form (hypothetical) –

If p, then q; if q, then r; therefore, if p, then r.

Example –

If other men want me, then I have worth even though I’m yours. If I have worth even though I’m yours, then you retain someone of value. Therefore, if other men want me, then you retain someone of value.

I agreed with her rational proposition and we carried on about our way. However, I ultimately found the balancing of two lovers at one time to be a somewhat tedious affair (no pun intended). Thus, I decided that one woman at a time was preferable for me.

Of course, there was the matter of another Marine’s date in Lima, Peru who liked me more than him, and who became my rave partner while my fellow jarhead self-disturbed with irrational beliefs about the matter. Nonetheless, I didn’t date anyone else when dating her.

By the time I was stationed at my last military post, in San Diego, California and at the age of 25, I met a female Marine who was married while physically separated from her Marine husband, as they were pending a divorce. She and I then began an “inappropriate relationship.”

That’s how the Marine Corps characterized our intimate partner relationship. Technically, she was involved in a non-monogamous exchange while I was in violation of the dogmatic religious beliefs up with which I was raised. As well, we were both in violation of military law.

If I had it all to do over, I think I would’ve otherwise made rational choices. However, that’s an unfalsifiable statement that proposes a counterfactual argument which isn’t worth entertaining any further. (It’ll never happen, because the past is passed.)

Eventually, that woman and I married and subsequently divorced. The entire time I was with her, I was faithful. Marriage was something that I took seriously, as monogamy was the fundamental principle upon which my marital union to her was based. (My interest wasn’t shared by her.)

My devotion to religiosity crumbled after that intimate partner relationship dissolved. So, too, did my belief in monogamy as a pragmatic approach to romantic relationships. Briefly, I considered ethical non-monogamy—broadly, having multiple consensual romantic relationships.

I had many non-monogamous desires, though I could be monogamous. In a blogpost entitled Dating, Like, Whatever, I stated, “Having rationally decided to abort pair-bonding altogether, I no longer concern myself with transactional romance, monogamy, or unrequited love.”

Ultimately, I went my own way and chose the path of celibacy. Whereas abstinence broadly refers to a temporary decision to refrain from sexual activity, celibacy is a more long-term or permanent choice to abstain from sexual activity. Celibacy isn’t appropriate for everyone.

Regarding this personal decision, in a blog entry entitled 10 Years I discussed how I’ve remained committed to a celibate path of what has now been over a decade. Sometimes I’m asked if I miss dating, sex, and other aspects of intimate partner relationships. The short answer is yes.

However, I enjoy peace in real life far more than I relished in the not-so-pleasant aspects of a romanticized ideal life. If misinterpreted, one author of Creative Marriage had a fairly scathing assessment to offer regarding people like me who’ve chosen to forgo such relations (page 182):

The only possible way for human beings to stop thinking about varietist sex relations, especially when they are raised in a culture like our own, is for them to become rigid, repressive, withdrawn, or otherwise seriously emotionally disturbed.

Stop a man or woman from being fornicative or adulterous and you have a problem, but not necessarily an insoluble problem, on your hands.

Stop this same man or woman from thinking, imagining, or fantasizing about non-marital relations, when this individual is still young and healthy enough to have efficiently working hormones, and you have a neurotic or a psychotic on your hands.

Fortunately, I don’t think I’ve misinterpreted the author’s message. He addressed people who actively suppress thinking. I’ve not done that.

Rather, I’ve merely chosen to stop the act of engaging in romantic relationships. On the following page of Creative Marriage, the author then states (page 183):

Actions may be in a quite different category from thoughts or desires. Granting that it is perfectly natural for you to have non-monogamous desires, it may by no means be sane and logical for you to give in to them on all occasions.

The author clearly delineates that physical actions are different from mental thoughts or desires. This is true of non-monogamous desires, a desire for different types of food, and other matters of cognitive functioning. Noteworthy, in a blogpost entitled Desire and Demand, I stated:

We tend to believe the words we tell ourselves. Notice the difference between expressed desire and that which is accompanied by rigid demands and extreme narratives. This is the difference between desire and disturbance.

Desire is simply a want. Demanding that our desires be filled can lead to self-disturbance. Attachment to a desire can lead to suffering.  

When experiencing non-monogamous desires while in a committed monogamous relationship, people often self-disturb when demanding that they simply must cheat, that they absolutely mustn’t have such desires at all, or so forth and so on. That’s an irrational way to live.

The key distinction expressed in Creative Marriage (using my own reframing of the matter) is that thinking about going after another pole or hole is natural. However, taking action to actually acquire another outie or innie is what causes problems in intimate partner relationships.

Pragmatically, authors of Creative Marriage state, “Every married individual has to make various important sacrifices to achieve a good, sound relationship” (page 184). Here, “has to” serves as a form of recommendatory belief (i.e., married couples should make sacrifices).

The authors add, “But if you want to do anything about your thoughts, then you take the risk of destroying your entire marital relationship” (page 184). Thus, thinking about poles and holes, or outies and innies, isn’t morally or ethically the same thing chasing after one’s desires.

Yet, those who taught me religious fundamentals would disagree. After all, Matthew 5:28 plainly states, “But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (I’ve apparently committed adultery countless times!)

When practicing REBT, I’m not seeking to provide people with a religious, spiritual, moral, ethical, or other values-based framework. Rather, much as was the case when my former gas station girlfriend talked some sense into me, I’m advocating use of rational thinking.

It’s a rational matter to understand that monogamy might not be the default setting in nature, as fallible human beings aren’t immune from this supposition. Nevertheless, in the interest of rational living, refraining from acting on desire may be preferable.

Make no mistake; I’m well aware that much of the societal messaging within the U.S. supports the notion of instant gratification. Some people strictly follow the axiom, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” However, authors of Creative Marriage state (page 186):

To live successfully in society, we must consciously suppress many acts we would like to perform—such as, walking naked in the streets when it is very warm, or killing our boss when he unjustifiably gives us a hard time. But to deny that we have the wish to walk naked in the streets or the desire to kill our boss at times—that is unconsciously, shamefully to repress our thoughts.

Even when I was married, faithfully devoted to the fundamental principle of monogamy, I had desires for other women. However, what one does isn’t the same as what one thinks. Reflecting this sentiment, authors of Creative Marriage propose (page 187):

The honest monogamist is one who soundly thinks through the problem and truly convinces herself that, in her own particular case, monogamy is the better part of valor: that it better befits her own goals, ideals, and preferences.

Remaining faithful to my wife was aligned with my desire to stay married. Thus, my goal was never to cheat on her. I succeeded with that objective. Ultimately, I concur with what the authors of Creative Marriage state when concluding (page 189):

Non-monogamous desires are perfectly normal, natural, and expectable, and should freely be faced and acknowledged […] To be or not to be monogamous—rather than to think or not to think monogamously—is the real issue, and one which can be effectively answered if one is ruthlessly self-honest.

While I understand that some people will inevitably self-disturb with unhelpful beliefs about the idea that their special someone (i.e., spouse or partner) likely has non-monogamous desires for someone else; religion, moralizing, and other such matters do little to suppress these thoughts.

All the same, it isn’t truly the thoughts one has that matter. (Otherwise, you may as well be condemned to Hell for the content within your dreams.) If unconditional acceptance of the lesson outlined herein is a significant challenge for you, then I look forward to hearing from you soon.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

Photo credit, fair use

References:

Ellis, A. and Harper, R. A. (1961). Creative Marriage. The Institute For Rational Living, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/creative-marriage-e184052310.html

Hollings, D. (2025, February 5). 10 years. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/10-years

Hollings, D. (2023, March 14). A patchwork quilt. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-patchwork-quilt

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, September 30). Bed rotting. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/bed-rotting

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2024, November 1). Counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, March 20). Dating, like, whatever. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/dating-like-whatever

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2024, October 21). Desire. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/desire

Hollings, D. (2022, May 28). Desire and disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/desire-and-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2024, March 16). Disturbed. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disturbed

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Empirical should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 11). Fallible human being. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fallible-human-being

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2025, March 5). Five major characteristics of four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/five-major-characteristics-of-four-major-irrational-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2024, September 22). Hermit life. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hermit-life

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Hypothetical syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hypothetical-syllogism

Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, June 3). Neurosis. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/neurosis

Hollings, D. (2024, July 7). Non-dogmatic preferences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-dogmatic-preferences

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Open, honest, and vulnerable communication. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/open-honest-and-vulnerable-communication

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2024, March 6). Psychopathy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychopathy

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2024, May 15). Rational living. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-living

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Recommendatory should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/recommendatory-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2023, September 6). The absence of suffering. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-absence-of-suffering

Hollings, D. (2025, February 13). The past is passed. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-past-is-passed

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2024, October 20). Unconditional acceptance redux. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-acceptance-redux

Hollings, D. (2023, October 22). Unfalsifiability. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unfalsifiability

Hollings, D. (2025, February 9). Value. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/value

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Values. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/values

Imgflip. (n.d.). Guy holding hand with girl and looks back template [Image]. Retrieved from https://imgflip.com/memetemplate/120546520/guy-holding-hand-with-girl-and-looks-back

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Repression (psychoanalysis). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repression_(psychoanalysis)

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Street harassment. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_harassment

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Thelema. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelema#:~:text=The%20True%20Will%20is%20essentially,Thelema%20as%20the%20Great%20Work.