As monetary and sexual temptations grew over time, the words monogamy and morality began to more often come up together in conversation.  A person’s morality was supposedly the force to keep them monogamous when without their partner.  When a person was caught cheating, that person’s moral standing was compromised.  They were then considered shameful, and likely ostracized.  Perhaps a look at the definitions of those words can help explain why:

monogamy  1. the practice or state of being married to only one person at a time  2. Rare the practice of marrying only once during life  3. Zool. the practice of having only one mate

morality  the character of being in accord with the principles or standards of right conduct; right conduct; sometimes, specif., virtue in sexual conduct

Monogamy is “the practice of having only one mate.”  We assume for now that Webster’s Dictionary meant “having only one mate” to mean having only one sex partner in a given period of time—say, in a given month.  Whether or not a person made an actual promise to be monogamous is not at issue, it boils down to whether a person is actually practicing monogamy.  Morality is about the “principles or standards of right conduct.”  What exactly does the word conduct encompass when it comes to sexual partnerships?  Does it strictly prohibit all non-monogamous behavior, or does it simply prohibit being dishonest about non-monogamous behavior?

In America, the elimination of any real limits on acceptable annual sex partner counts for either gender, and the prevalence of overlapping partnerships, has led to record levels of hormonification and biased dishonesty.  Even so, many apparently still place the blame for their infidelities on their own life experience, which may be anything from a harsh breakup to the influence of others, including the media.

Basic common sense says that by the time one reaches age twenty-five, there are no longer any excuses to being immoral about sex.  Most people in America by that point, have had almost ten years of sexual activity and experiences to learn from, and all have absorbed a great amount of information on the negative impact of undisclosed cheat events.  By age twenty-five, there is no longer any room for doubt or excuses.  If one has sex with a third party person, to not disclose this fact while promising monogamy is immoral, no matter how you look at it.

This leads to one of the most important new concepts in Last Call.  The combined term moral monogamy will now be used to describe the promise to refrain from having sex outside the partnership, plus to come clean within twenty-four hours if one does.  This honesty-stimulating new concept is not implying anyone will have third party sex.  It is just a guarantee that if they do, the cheated-on partner will be one of the first to know about it (recognizing that they cannot be the first, for obvious reasons).

Of course anyone can still make the choice to stick with the non-guaranteed monogamy promise.  But with the momentum of the heterosexualist movement’s grassroots effort across America, one could quickly find themselves the exception against the rule.  And yes, “loving someone so much” and using that as the excuse for cheating and then lying about it is out the door as well.

Last Call will strengthen the moral monogamy promise by identifying clearly marked boundaries—not rules, but cascaded boundaries that a male and female can customize to define what constitutes cheating within their particular partnership.  While they won’t guarantee someone won’t go out-of-bounds, universally recognized boundaries definitely allow a person to respectfully acknowledge when they have crossed the line.  Without clear boundaries, the power of human morality is useless.