Marriage/monogamy and promiscuity seem to be the extremes. The term promiscuity seems to be used by the marriage/monogamy extremists to define the group they disagree with and the term marriage/monogamy seems to be used by the promiscuity extremists to define the group they disagree with. Loveless and passionate marriages or attempts to find the ideal partner are as meaningless as having sex for the sake of saying that one is capable of performing the act. Maybe, like with anything else, the extreme becomes meaningless. It’s nice to try different kinds of chocolate, but eating them for breakfast, lunch and dinner every single day, seven days a week, would not help one appreciate their flavors or make one aware of new sensations. It would dull the senses and it would become impossible to notice new flavors. Similarly, if one has never tried any chocolate one could not determine what flavor one likes or if one likes chocolate at all.
As long as we don’t act out of fear, anxiety or peer pressure but because of our own true volition then then hey each to his own. The problem, I think, like I said about some other topic, don’t remember what it was, is that it seems it’s impossible for humans to create their meaning without opposing some other meaning.
We seem to invent and develop ourselves and our entire existence in order to oppose sets of signs, symbols, and systems we cannot accept (there are many different reasons why we are unable to accept them and why we are unable to determine that we are creating our meaning by opposing that which we cannot accept but that would take a couple of chapters), rather than inventing and developing ourselves in order to experience life and our true selves. (The self that is not designed to exist in order to oppose everything that exists outside of it.) This seems to be a big problem our civilizations does not seem to be able to resolve because it refuses to create a more universal form of language precisely because nations and their members (people) are afraid they would lose their identity precisely because they are unaware they cannot lose it because it is universal (I am talking about humanity of course). A catch twenty two.
The marriage/monogamy and promiscuity terms seem to be the extremes of the language promoted by the extremist parties struggling to disprove one another rather than definitions of natural human desires or behaviors or needs or wants or urges or whatever you want to call them. I guess the question is why marriage/monogamy and why promiscuity.