Schrödinger's Monogamy

The trouble with sexual exclusivity as a metric of long term commitment is that it is entirely a matter of the here and now.

The abstraction of monogamy is an investment in a state which either is or is not true every here and now.

That means that if you are invested in this abstraction, you have Schrödinger's Monogamy.

This is why the neurotic jealousy streaking through so many modern "monogamous" relationships makes perfect sense. It makes much more sense than trust, much more sense than "secure attachment," when the foundation of the investment could topple any here and now.

It could have ALREADY toppled. You live in the abstraction of having it.

If your definition of monogamy is about the sovereign actions someone else takes, you have Schrödinger's Monogamy.

In truth I AM THE ONE who feels and/or is sexually exclusive to one person.

At any time, a partner might be cheating. One instance of that will nuke the whole thing, or at the very least shake its foundation.

If a breach of monogamy is a breach of commitment, you have Schrödinger's commitment.

If this commitment is the source of your stability, you have a life that is simultaneously stable and chaotic.

Either state is better than that, which is a neat explanation for those times I've experienced the volatility of serial monogamy, years of 3-8 month "relationships," one after the other, all attempting to build on this unknowable state.

My love, I would never tell you that you can't choose this. I simply must show you the way I view it to be a perilous construct, and why you will not convince me to adopt it for myself.

I choose to think of the cat outside the box.