Traditional marriage has always had its opponents. But in recent years, marriage has become less of a priority for men and women. Much of this is due to a focus on career and life experiences over family and children. But part of it is the shift in sexual ethics. Our culture has ever-expanding definitions for sexuality and gender, and confusion abounds.
A March 2024 Gallup poll revealed that 7.6% of American adults identify as “LGBTQ+,” up from 5.6% in 2020. But growing numbers of sexual and gender identities aren’t all that we are told to accept. It’s clear that there is a push to make polyamory more mainstream.
HOW DIVORCE REDEFINED MARRIAGE
New York Times articles such as “How a Polyamorous Mom Had ‘a Big Sexual Adventure’ and Found Herself” and “Lessons From a 20-Person Polycule” and a piece at the Atlantic titled “Polyamory, the Ruling Class’s Latest Fad” aren’t meant to horrify but to spur curiosity and acceptance. Polyamory is being sold as not much different than monogamous marriage. In fact, it’s often sold as better because polyamory is supposedly more exciting and, by extension, “liberating” than a conventional relationship.
An article by the Institute for Family Studies argues that polyamory is not only not liberation, but it is not the structure by which happiness is obtained: “The data has long shown that Americans who are married — still legally defined in the U.S. as a contract between only two people — report the highest levels of personal happiness.”
And a key factor, sexual satisfaction, is a major part of this: “… an Institute for Family Studies report by sociologist Nicholas Wolfinger found that married men and women were most likely to report being ‘very happy’ in their marriages when they only had one sexual partner — their spouse.”
It’s unsurprising that a marriage involving one partner is much more likely to be happier than one in which multiple adults are invited into the bedroom on a rotating or concurrent basis. Our culture continues to peddle the idea that a big “body count” makes you cool or satiated. This is false advertising. It’s the kind of attitude that treats sexuality as a casual commodity, not an intimate expression of love.
One of the goals of marriage is to establish family units. These are the cornerstones of any flourishing society. There is a mountain of data to show that two-parent homes, where the parents are married, are not only more secure in the immediate, but also give lasting advantages to the children.
The current push for and nonchalant presentation of polyamory is a covert attempt to pass off selfishness as good. Polyamorous couples aren’t more enlightened than the rest of us. Instead, they’re trying to blend the carefree patterns of dating with some form of long-term commitment. It doesn’t work well because it’s not supposed to work well.
Having multiple partners in a bedroom and in a home will only increase tension and instability. Worst of all, it’s an unhealthy example for children growing up in such an environment. It’s the kind of example that can sully young people’s understanding of love, commitment, and family structure.
Polyamory is embraced by liberals as being the next logical step in modern-day sexual evolution. In fact, some see it as a sort of new civil rights movement. This is what happens when you relax what should be strict definitions. Suddenly, every adult desire is branded as worth protecting.
DO NOT ASK AI FOR MARRIAGE ADVICE
Given the amount of social contagion that is spreading, polyamory is sure to grow in popularity. Nearly 1 in 4 young adults in Generation Z view themselves as LGBT. The natural progression is that these perspectives will go on to shape societal norms further. Some day, those of us who prize traditional, two-person marriage will be labeled as bigots for saying harmful things are harmful. That day is not too far away.
Polyamory isn’t beneficial for adults, children, or those who witness such arrangements. It can damage a participant’s physical, emotional, and mental well-being. It’s worth drawing a line and placing aberrant behavior on one side, where it belongs. The stakes are too high.
Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner‘s Beltway Confidential blog and the Magnolia Tribune.