The Player vs. The Serial Monogamist
Several nights ago, I spent the evening with a friend who was nursing a broken heart. Sometime during their four hour break up conversation, my friend's ex said "I guess I'm just a serial monogamist."This statement made her angry, but she was angry about so many other things that it just sort of went unaddressed.*
This led to a conversation about the term, Serial Monogamist**.
In my recollection, this term is just a couple of years old. I think I first remember hearing it being spewed from various "dating experts" and psychologist types. At first, I think that "experts" used it as another way to say commitment-phobe.
Recently, it seems the term has evolved. I've begun to hear men refer to themselves as a Serial Monogamist. Like it's a good thing, that at best deserves a little pity. "Isn't it sad that he just likes to go from relationship to relationship?"
I'm finding this a bit perplexing. Serial Monogamist as good guy. Let's look at this...
The Player, on the other hand, is clearly painted as the bad guy. They don't usually practice monogamy and indiscriminately wander from woman to woman. How cold, how callous. Right?
What if we place the good guy and the bad guy side by side:
The Player
sleeps with a lot of women
smooth, charismatic
at least reasonably good looking
cheats
lies
tells the woman what she wants to hear
has great "game" and knows exactly how to manipulate
does whatever he can to make the woman feel great in the short term
makes no promises
doesn't stay around long
The Serial Monogamist
has had a lot of long term relationships (6 mo +)
prefers to sleep with one woman at a time
sweet, smart, funny, successful
sometimes at least reasonably good looking
never cheats
rarely lies
treats women very well, romantic and thoughtful
appears to be great boyfriend material and perhaps husband material
is vocal about his desire to find a long term mate
Now on the surface, it seems clear. Player= bad. Serial Monogamist= good. I think I beg to differ.
Most women after the age of 21 can recognize a player from 50 yards away. We know how they act. We know what they say. But even as they try their charm on us, even while we think to ourselves "What a player!", we smile. Sometimes out of flattery, but often out of amusement. So while engaging in flirtatious banter with a player, it is highly possible that the women is thinking "OK, I'll play this game." And choose to be played. No, I don't mean choose to be manipulated, lied to, cheated on. I mean choose to hang out with, have fun with, and perhaps sleep with, this particular player who thinks they are being manipulative. Knowing full well what she is getting into.
Here's the rub: Serial Monogamists are harder to spot. They appear to be great catches. They are open to having relationships. Usually they don't reveal themselves until after the woman is emotionally involved. So there is much more potential for pain and for damage at the hands of a Serial Monogamist. And the fact that they come out of it looking like a good guy is kind of like salt in the wound.
*No, my "friend" is not me :)
**Serial Monogamists can be female of course, but I can only speak from my perspective.

10 Comments:
I think that this is very insightful. At least with a player you know what you're getting into and can make an informed decision. It's so much worse to be taken by surprise.
The sad truth is that you can become emotionally involved with a player. There is something almost alluring about the fact that commitment won't be an issue because HE won't be asking for it and then you suddenly realize you have fallen for this jerk. You hope often in vain that he will decide to give up a life of roving and choose you when in fact it just isn't in the cards.
I'm wondering if the whole AIDS epidemic was partially responsible for the growth of serial monogamy. There is much less to worry about (for both partners) when it's one at a time.
In either case, the cold realization that the relationship is doomed SUCKS! No one likes to be rejected under any circumstances.
I hope your friend finds someone who is neither of these types. There are plenty of good guys out there.
There is so much to think about in this post.
If "players only love you when they're playing," what about the serial monogamists? Do they love you at all or are they in love with the idea of being in love, of being in a relationship?
Serial monogamists make me feel like an interchangeable cog.
mg!-yes, I would much prefer to know the risk I'm taking...
barbara- falling for a player could be a tough thing- it's fragile ground to date a player. But again- at least you know what you are signing up for! And good point about the AIDS epidemic...but I'm not sure that's what keeps SM's from being players. I think it's because they enjoy the fun, easygoing, yet comfort of an early relationship vs. always going out to get another notch.
Kristin- EXACTLY! You nailed it.
I love the picture you put with this posting! You are one smart cookie.
Your definition for a player corresponds to that of a psychopath.
I beg to differ on your term, I think it should be serial polygamist. Monogamy implies single attachment and devotion – which these people are definitely not doing. From my point of view, they are involved in multiple relationship temporally spaced apart.
Here's my theory. I'm not sure human beings are usually monogamous by nature. If we were, the word "monogamy" wouldn't even exist.
In this time, in this culture, we've set ourselves up by creating the idea of partnership for life with just one other person. Sometimes it happens, but it's far from the norm. Why do we expect ourselves and others to rise above human behavior and suddenly become what we're not.
Clearly I am not monogamous. I never have been. I don't think I'm defective though, or lacking in ethics (except when I've lied about it) or immoral.
So sorry your friend's heart is broken, though. It's always so hard to part from someone who has been a lover, even if you're not monogamous. My heart has many scars.
hmm interesting definitions, but then somehow I dont believe men just fit into these two categories.
i BEGIN TO SEE WHY I'M A SERIAL SINGLE WHEN A LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP IS NOW DOWN TO 6 MONTHS. dOES THAT MEAN ITS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE TO HAVE 4 LONG TERMS IN 2 YEARS?
I MUST BE REALLY HARD TO GET ALONG WITH, BUT I GUESS I KNEW THAT!
I was in a gay relationship and dumped by what I now consider a serial monagamist. Everything was going well and then out of no where he breaks up and then provided lousy excuses as to why it wouldn't work. This follows the same pattern as his father and he was emotionally abused by his second father. Lastly his previous boyfriends confirm the identical same thing happened to them as well.
Post a Comment
<< Home