Sue Lani Madsen: Shifting social norms blur definition of marriage

Multiple romantic relationships while married used to be called adultery. Polyamory was outside the social norms shaping society, but those norms are shifting in the culture wars. When a local attorney’s Facebook post proudly added a polyamorous relationship to his marriage, it prompted an examination of how and why we set moral boundaries.

Attitudes around monogamy as a cultural institution are prominent in the culture wars boundary zone. FDR was apparently faithful to a mistress. JFK is now known for his promiscuity. Both publicly maintained a fiction of traditional monogamous relationships. They upheld the social norm.

It was breaking news in 1973 when media “discovered” Gerald Ford’s wife was a divorcee, but Betty Ford handled questions gracefully and the boundary moved. Nancy and Ronald Reagan were part of the cultural shift normalizing serial monogamy. Bill Clinton’s affairs were relatively public, while Gloria Steinem and other so-called feminists lobbed attacks on Monica Lewinsky whilst defending her lecherous boss. The social norms began to breakdown as boundaries blurred.

Then the definition of marriage changed, with assurances that marriage as a contract between two consenting adults would not be affected by eliminating its basis in biology, theology and tradition. The last three decades set the battlefield for the Red and Blue tribes.

Humans have an innate tendency to tribalism. In America today, our political differences are rooted in world views defined by different moral matrices. It is what makes teaching morality in today’s public schools a hot conflict zone and why campaign ads often seek to drive our sense of moral outrage.

Tribalism is an expression of Loyalty/Betrayal, one of the five pairs of moral modules identified by Jonathan Haidt in “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.” It can be positive or negative, showing up in our loyalties to sports teams, supporting cohesive work groups and is the root of patriotism.

The other four modules, as Haidt describes them, are Care/Harm, Fairness/Cheating, Authority/Subversion and Sanctity/Degradation.

Gut reactions in the Red/Blue divide rest on different principles within each of these foundational moral modules. And so we have “Tax the Wealthy” versus “Spread the Work Ethic, Not My Wealth” both claiming moral high ground as righteous expressions of Fairness. One emphasizes equality and the other proportionality.

Surprisingly, Haidt found a consistent pattern across cultures, countries and continents in how left and right build their matrices. Those approaching politics with a liberal mindset rely mostly on the Fairness and Care modules, while the conservative matrix builds on all five roughly equally.

As a private citizen, one man’s decision to announce adding a second romantic relationship to his marriage is between him and the other consenting adults involved. As a candidate for public office, Andrew Biviano’s Facebook post in May 2021 “coming out” as polyamorous violated conservative social norms. Haidt’s moral matrix analysis explained why. Political libertarianism and individual autonomy is overruled by a sense of violation of the moral matrix across all five modules.

For Christians, does a negative reaction reflect a biblical definition of morality? At least in part. But God or no god, Haidt the non-theist proposes that religion evolved to reflect innate moral instincts, merely codifying that which has proven most useful to survival of the species. Multiple studies across cultures confirm protecting monogamy as a respected institution is correlated with healthier societies.

It wasn’t data-driven sociological research on the value of monogamy that caused Congress to require the condemnation of polygamy as a condition of Utah becoming a state. Multiple wives violated the same social norms under the Loyalty/Betrayal and Sacred/Degradation modules as today’s polyamory. Besides a betrayal of the traditional marriage covenant, it triggers what Haidt characterizes as a violation of the Red matrix sense of the sacred by seeing the body as a mere playground for pleasure. As he also points out, this sense of disgust also exists in the Blue matrix, manifesting in purity rituals around organic foods and hyper-environmentalism.

In the Authority/Subversion, Fairness/Cheating and Care/Harm modules, polyamory is a breach of the marriage contract and its non-compete clause, subverting the social order in the name of self-fulfillment. As we have moved farther from what President George Washington described in 1796 as “slight shades of difference … (in) religion, manners, habits, and political principles,” cultural warfare was inevitable.

Wars end either by one side overwhelming the other by force or when mutually agreeable boundaries are drawn. In a conflict between cultures, the boundaries are defined by moral values instead of lines on a map. The social norm of monogamy has proven its value across time and cultures, and abandoning its boundaries will have a price.

Contact Sue Lani Madsen at rulingpen@gmail.com