"Hey Niels, you're here too!" Over the last few weeks I have received pieces by Simone van Saarloos from different parts of my circle of friends and acquaintances. On thinking about monogamy. And indeed. These pieces fit perfectly into my thinking about this particular phenomenon. Well, my thinking. I think both Saarloos and I are addressing a thorny issue that may be dominating our zeitgeist. Is monogamy still in step with the times? Today, men fuck all the whores there are. A visit to a sex club and then with friends to nearby prostitutes.

Saarloos

Don't misunderstand Van Saarloos. Monogamy can still work well nowadays. Several long-time happy couples are examples of this. On the other hand, more and more people are choosing to live alone. Either because of divorce, death of a partner or because they prefer to live with one person. Nevertheless, a large part of our society is determined to live life as a couple. Anyone who has ever been alone in a restaurant knows the uneasy feeling that creeps in as soon as the waiter asks if you would like something to drink beforehand while you are waiting for your date. A shared house is particularly attractive to couples because it offers them many advantages. And the constant questions from uncles and aunts as to whether you have found someone to share your life with in the meantime - what self-centred single person is not fed up with this? We take it for granted that cohabitation is the norm. Anyone who deviates from this is wrong.

Polyamour

But is it really wise to live together as a couple? Van Saarloos tries to illustrate this with fragile systems. Suppose an elephant has to carry a tree through the jungle. On the way, it encounters many dangers. It could lose the tree, encounter an obstacle, get injured or not survive. What if we split the tree and move many mice? Along the way, one mouse will probably be killed, another will get lost. But most of the group will make it to the end point. Van Saarloos seems to be saying: for a good life, spread your social contacts as widely as possible. Distribute fragility over several people - create an antifragile system - love more than one person. Polyamory is a lifestyle that protects against setbacks, whereas a monogamous life makes one dependent on one person.

Monogamy

Because that is what happens in many cases in a monogamous relationship. You meet, get into a relationship, rent or buy a house to live together, have children, raise them and die. Meanwhile, other contacts are diluted. You have less time to take care of friends and acquaintances and focus mainly on maintaining family happiness in the hope that this will make your life happy. It can. But in just as many cases, think of the elephant, something goes wrong and you find yourself without relationships, children and friends and you have to rebuild everything. Why stake everything on this relationship when you can live your life differently and have many relationships?

Friendship

And in many cases aren't we already doing that? Don't we already enter into other intimate relationships such as friendship, with father or mother or brother or sister? Van Saarloos seems to want to elevate the importance of such relationships, while we place that one love relationship a little further down the list. In doing so, he eliminates the rigid separation between a love relationship and a friendship relationship. Both are important. According to Van Saarloos, what makes a person exclusive, sexuality, need not be limited to that one love relationship. Why not strengthen relationships in other relationships by focusing more on physical contact? Is sexual exclusivity necessary in a monogamous relationship? What is wrong with physical interaction in intimate relationships?

Prescribe

Despite all these questions, Van Saarloos does not want to prescribe to others how they should form their relationships any more than I do. The philosopher's job is to make people aware of things they consider common and familiar, but which are not necessarily so. So if your answers to Saarloos' questions lead you to a monogamous relationship, there is nothing wrong with that. By thinking about it and formulating an answer, you make a conscious decision on how you want to live. And whether it is monogamy, polyamory or self-chosen singletons is not at all important to Saarloos and me.