Cheat-Sheet: were we meant to be monogamous? (part one)

Monogamy. The question that is the key to ninety-five percent of relationships has actually been here for centuries: can we really, truly be monogamous? Were we meant to?
In Ancient Rome, wives used to send slaves in for their husbands to have sex with --they would only be offended if their husbands had sex with women of their own rank. At the time of Alexander the Great, men slept with other men, other women, had orgies --nothing was considered too much. And in Tudor England (16th Century), King Henry had mistresses and bastard children right left and center.
Today, we're a lot more taboo, conservative, and monogamous. I could never imagine myself sending my husband a prostitute just because I don't feel like having sex right now. Imagine that!
But the way sexuality used to be does give us a moment of reflection here. Maybe they had it right and we have it wrong. Not that I want my man to sleep with hundreds of women and come back to me at night... But maybe, if we all accepted that the concept of monogamy cannot exist realistically, then we'd all suffer a lot less.
What's funny though, is that I never really heard of women sleeping around with hundreds of men and it being okay with the husbands...
Nowadays, people try all kinds of modern relationships to try and curb monogamy, and "make it" as a couple. Open relationships, swingers, threesomes, and I'm sure a dozen other ways I've never even heard of. And it might work out for some of them. But I believe most of us women aren't wired to be "just fine" with having the person we love being with other women. And I definitely don't think men would be "just fine" with their wives sleeping around. 

When I was 13 years-old, my mother told me something that really shocked me. She said her friends wondered how she could live with my father traveling for such long periods of time --wasn't she afraid he was cheating? She said, as long as she didn't feel like he was any different with her, then she wouldn't go looking for the problem. In other words, what she doesn't know can't hurt her.
I didn't get it then, but I get it now.
At the time, I remember thinking "is she crazy?" My mom was a very strong, independent and rational person, so I couldn't fathom how she could possibly accept the possibility of being cheated on. But now I know.
The reality is, boys will be boys. And it might be cliche as hell, but it's also true, and we're all better off being realistic about our expectations from the beginning. 
In my book, if he plays by my rules, I can handle it. But there are rules, even when cheating.
My top priority is respect. If my man cheats on me, I don't want to know. For the very simple reason that even if I will want to forgive, I will never forget. The image of him cheating will keep replaying in my mind, over and over again, and it will never be the same. And I don't want anyone else to know either. Because if his friends know, they will loose all respect for me, and forever look at me with a smirk, or worse, pity. And if the girl in question knows me or anyone I know, she will feel above me. Like she shares a secret with my own boyfriend. And that is just more disgusting to me than any sexual act.  I actually don't know how women who were publicly humiliated by their husbands can actually move passed it and forgive. Hillary, Sienna, I really don't get you. I'm more likely to be in the Elin Woods, Sandra Bullock, Jennifer Aniston camp. But I wonder what would've happened if these couples weren't famous, and their love lives were kept private. If the whole world knows your man cheated on you, that's the kind of the disrespect you can't forget --that being the understatement of the century.
But I do believe a man can love you and still cheat. But if he does love you, he will not want anyone to feel above you in any way. That kind of cheating obviously excludes anything more than a one-night-stand. If my man is in-love or has an actual relationship with someone else, then yes, I want to know and I want to get out PRONTO.