Is monogamy dead?

[butterfoot]

A look at the influence of 'non-connected sex,'

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9117931/





I read this article yesterday. It got me thinking about human instincts and survival.



We hear how in situations humans revert back to their animal instincts. We know that survival is an instinct regardless of species. So is having sex with just anyone a survival instinct or is it more of a psychological need? We are a very needy species and contact with others plays an important role in our lives. Love is a very important emotion to us and I believe that Humans aren’t sure what love is. I know that when growing up I had a distorted view of what a loving connection with the opposite sex was. I think this actually hurt my future relationships weather they were based on sex or whatever, I didn’t treat the relationships correctly. I think this happens more often than not. Sex is an important emotional connection you have with someone but it is not the entire relationship and I think that a majority of the people in the U.S. and the world think it is the majority of the relationship. This is probably why when the least little thing goes wrong in the relationship the easiest way to make yourself feel better is to have a physical connection with someone else. I think that in the society we live in today we turn the other cheek when it comes to seeing others being promiscuous. I think that we need to take a proactive role starting with our children that Monogamy is the way we should live our lives. That we choose one partner and make sure that we are compatible with that person by dating them without sex being involved for a period of time. Why? We will have stronger mental relationships with our partner, and not just a sex based relationship.




-cw

 

[Ledifni]

Why? We will have stronger mental relationships with our partner, and not just a sex based relationship.

I have never seen any credible evidence that sex before marriage results in "sex-based relationships" or that abstinence results in a stronger mental relationship with a future permanent partner. Not only so, but my personal experience has been quite the opposite.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I think that we need to take a proactive role starting with our children that Monogamy is the way we should live our lives. That we choose one partner and make sure that we are compatible with that person by dating them without sex being involved for a period of time. Why? We will have stronger mental relationships with our partner, and not just a sex based relationship.

Are you advocating serial monogamy? If so, I tend to agree. I don't think that sex must be held off until marriage, but it may be a good idea to hold off for a while so that one gets to know one's partner before intimacy, and to have only one partner at a time. I personally think this increases the romance and depth of the relationship from what would otherwise be likely.

I'm sure that there will be people who will disagree, but this view makes the most sense to me.

 

[levi501]

In my experience it's been the exact opposite as well...
A strong mental connection is a result of communicating and expressing yourself openly and freely with another person. While lack of physicaly intimacy doesn't hinder this, the inhibitions are all too often mirrored in with other reserved interactions.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

A look at the influence of 'non-connected sex,'

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9117931/





I read this article yesterday. It got me thinking about human instincts and survival.



We hear how in situations humans revert back to their animal instincts. We know that survival is an instinct regardless of species. So is having sex with just anyone a survival instinct or is it more of a psychological need? We are a very needy species and contact with others plays an important role in our lives. Love is a very important emotion to us and I believe that Humans aren’t sure what love is. I know that when growing up I had a distorted view of what a loving connection with the opposite sex was. I think this actually hurt my future relationships weather they were based on sex or whatever, I didn’t treat the relationships correctly. I think this happens more often than not. Sex is an important emotional connection you have with someone but it is not the entire relationship and I think that a majority of the people in the U.S. and the world think it is the majority of the relationship. This is probably why when the least little thing goes wrong in the relationship the easiest way to make yourself feel better is to have a physical connection with someone else. I think that in the society we live in today we turn the other cheek when it comes to seeing others being promiscuous. I think that we need to take a proactive role starting with our children that Monogamy is the way we should live our lives. That we choose one partner and make sure that we are compatible with that person by dating them without sex being involved for a period of time. Why? We will have stronger mental relationships with our partner, and not just a sex based relationship.


-cw

Excerpt:
"But, Potts argues, once we do marry, we tend to try to make those marriages work and we are probably better parents than we used to be because we’re more mature. We’ve gotten a lot of play time out of our systems. As a result, he says, “I do not know that we have any firm evidence that there is more extramarital sex now than 50 years ago.”

Monogamy in marriage, he believes, is all about the kids. Both men and women have an interest in making sure children are protected and nurtured, and straying makes that task more difficult, so most of us don’t do it."

What a load of manure that is even refuted by the plain statistical evidence.

What Potts is ignorant in addressing is that during the developmental stage of an adolescent, if the reinforcement (training) is sex without commitment, without consequences are reinforced and a presence of clear, strong role models is absent, there is no reason why when older, having a ring on the finger and a piece of paper stating "married" is going to suddenly instill a sense of commitment, integrity or duty for spouse, much less offspring. Perhaps the increased single parenthood, abuse, abandonment, teen pregnancy and abortion, etc. are simply 'another issue'.
It must be nice living in la la fairytale land, but I want to know where Potts is hiding that magic wand that he waves that makes the subject 'educated and committed' after a life of debauchery.
Man! And the people that deal in this sophistry dare say that Christians are the ones burying the head in the sand.

Edit to add:
Ah, the bias is evident in Potts statement here~
"The idea that we’re becoming a nation of orgiastic libertines is, of course, one of the animating ideas of the Christian right. They’d like to take us back to a mythical time when there was no porn, no sex before marriage, no straying once you were in that marriage."

 

[TeddyKGB]

I think we do relationships a disservice by putting so much emphasis on love. We are two-faced about love: It is allegedly a requirement for long-term stability, yet we resolutely refuse to define it or specify how one might find it.

We tend to treat love like a toggle switch; it is either on or off, and when it is off, we fall "out of love" and the relationship cannot continue without it.

Don't even get me started about the "soulmate" or the "one" or whatever pithy name you might have for the single person out of 6.5 billion who is purportedly your ideal relationship counterpart.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

I think we do relationships a disservice by putting so much emphasis on love. We are two-faced about love: It is allegedly a requirement for long-term stability, yet we resolutely refuse to define it or specify how one might find it.

We tend to treat love like a toggle switch; it is either on or off, and when it is off, we fall "out of love" and the relationship cannot continue without it.

Don't even get me started about the "soulmate" or the "one" or whatever pithy name you might have for the single person out of 6.5 billion who is purportedly your ideal relationship counterpart.

Humph... I find myself somewhat in agreement with you on much of that, TeddyKGB.
Go figure...

 

[BarbB]

Humph... I find myself somewhat in agreement with you on much of that, TeddyKGB.
Go figure...

Me too! Kudos Teddy!

 

[skinner]

I think we do relationships a disservice by putting so much emphasis on love. We are two-faced about love: It is allegedly a requirement for long-term stability, yet we resolutely refuse to define it or specify how one might find it.

We tend to treat love like a toggle switch; it is either on or off, and when it is off, we fall "out of love" and the relationship cannot continue without it.

Don't even get me started about the "soulmate" or the "one" or whatever pithy name you might have for the single person out of 6.5 billion who is purportedly your ideal relationship counterpart.

I think you're right, to a point. It all depends on what we define as love. Once upon a time the goal of a marriage was to stay together no matter what. There will be days when one doesn't feel warm fuzzy feelings towards their spouse, in fact, quite the opposite.
But, we have so romantisized relationships that people seem to think "Hey, I've lost that lovin' feeling (ohhhh, that lovin feelin' ) so, that's it, it's over, baby.
Love is a decision we have to make over and over. If we do, the relationship does grow deeper. If we choose to satisfy only our own selfish desires, it will soon crumble.
I think that with the right attitude, you could make it work with almost anyone, within reason.

As far as the original question, ideally you spend several years being best friends and one day you realize you want to live with this person forever. God's design of sex after marriage is still the best. At the least, you're not competing with all the other lovers your spouse has in his/her past.

 

[benjdm]

God's design of sex after marriage is still the best. At the least, you're not competing with all the other lovers your spouse has in his/her past.

No, then you're competing with all the lovers in the movies.

Anyhow, I think monogamy works great for some who have the temperament for it, and is impossible for others. I have been fortunate that my parents have had a healthy >30 year marriage to provide a good role model. Monogamy suits me fine. But I know many others whom it doesn't seem right for.

 

[AdamAnderson21]

It's about time, I've been waiting to...

 

[Spinrad]

Is monogamy dead?

If not we should kill it.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

If not we should kill it.

Tempting, but I'll pass on that bait.

 

[lawtonfogle]

As long as its values live in the hearts of one person, it is not dead. It will not die, till at least the day I do. I shall never reliquish its values. If you do not agree with it, you must then not understand it. Its values also apply to other things. The more you wait for one, the more special it is. This I know for a fact.

 

[StormyOne]

The question assumes that it was alive at one point? I think and there is probably info to support this, people have had relationships on the side while in a primary relationship since time began..... So when were humans monogamous?

 

[Druweid]

We hear how in situations humans revert back to their animal instincts. We know that survival is an instinct regardless of species. So is having sex with just anyone a survival instinct or is it more of a psychological need?

If you're looking for a single "blanket" answer, you're in for a disappointment. Each occurance of sex between two people is unique unto itself with each side contributing. Trying to pigeon-hold it into one category will (imho) only lead to greater misunderstandings.

We are a very needy species and contact with others plays an important role in our lives. Love is a very important emotion to us and I believe that Humans aren’t sure what love is.

I quite agree, and would add that there is significant confusion between 'intimacy' and 'sex.'

I know that when growing up I had a distorted view of what a loving connection with the opposite sex was. I think this actually hurt my future relationships weather they were based on sex or whatever, I didn’t treat the relationships correctly. I think this happens more often than not.

Yes, this has become quite prevalant in our society. People's relationships suffer for lack of a good example.

Sex is an important emotional connection you have with someone but it is not the entire relationship and I think that a majority of the people in the U.S. and the world think it is the majority of the relationship.

Here I feel I must strongly disagree. Sex is not, in any way, shape, or form, an emotional connection. It is a physical connection. It may be a vehicle for an emotional connection, but then it can be a vehicle for great many other things as well. And it's not that people think sex is the majority of the relationship, it is simply the portion of the relationship with which they are most concerned.

This is probably why when the least little thing goes wrong in the relationship the easiest way to make yourself feel better is to have a physical connection with someone else.

Actually, there is probably a lot more to this. People have a tendency to react to anxiety, stress, depression, etc., by engaging in destructive behavior. Drinking, drugs, over-eating, and, of course, promiscuity. Note, however, that each of these behaviors has a quick, superficial pleasure attached to it as well. This is where I think the greatest of misunderstandings occur; that quick and easy solutions are viable alternatives to the sincere and substantial.

I think that we need to take a proactive role starting with our children that Monogamy is the way we should live our lives. That we choose one partner and make sure that we are compatible with that person by dating them without sex being involved for a period of time. Why? We will have stronger mental relationships with our partner, and not just a sex based relationship.

Certainly I agree that monogamy should be taught as the best approach to a relationship, and for many other reasons other than what has already been stated.

I have never seen any credible evidence that sex before marriage results in "sex-based relationships" or that abstinence results in a stronger mental relationship with a future permanent partner. Not only so, but my personal experience has been quite the opposite.

With all due respect, I have to wonder, at your age, how extensive that "personal experience" really is. Hmmmmm?

In any case, I do not believe it is simply the practice, or absence, of physical relations that dictates whether a relationship is sex-based or is mentally stronger, but rather, it's the reason you are practicing or abstaining.

Bottom line? I do not believe monogamy is dead, although the great majority of people I know are doing their best to bludgeon it to death. I think (or at least, I would like to think) that even today, if you were to encounter a couple who have been together, happily and faithfully, for the past fifty or so years, regardless of your beliefs or creed, that you could not help but be duly impressed. Such a couple is well-deserving of deep respect.

Just my opinion,
-- Druweid

 

[Druweid]

The question assumes that it was alive at one point? I think and there is probably info to support this, people have had relationships on the side while in a primary relationship since time began..... So when were humans monogamous?

That may be true, but as long as there is one couple alive who is in a successful, long-term, exclusive relationship, then monogamy still lives.

-- Druweid

 

[StormyOne]

That may be true, but as long as there is one couple alive who is in a successful, long-term, exclusive relationship, then monogamy still lives.

-- Druweid

How are we to define "successful?" How do we know they were exclusive during all that time? I don't know how we can ever really know that.....I do think that people can believe in the concept and strive to live by that value even when mistakes are made....

 

[Spinrad]

As long as its values live in the hearts of one person, it is not dead. It will not die, till at least the day I do. I shall never reliquish its values. If you do not agree with it, you must then not understand it. Its values also apply to other things. The more you wait for one, the more special it is. This I know for a fact.

A fact? How?

 

[chessterbester]

Monogamy is not dead. In theory, I think people still want to be monogamous, but because divorce is a cultural norm, marriage has turned into "i'll love you forever, until it gets too hard". It is a tug between people wanting a relationship with their life partner and wanting to advance in their economic situation.

Further more, it is not a religious thing. Divorce rates among Christians are comparable, if not higher then the reat of the populations. I don't believe that this is because of Christianity, but because often Christians marry younger. I will find my source (i was reading it a few days ago), that people who marry after the age of twenty are more likely to stay together. Not to mention, people are less mature at 19 then they were a hundred years ago. THeir responsibilties through their midtwenties are totally self absorbed (school grades, etc.) for the most part. Teenagers aren't required, for the most part to contribute to the family, so regardless of the example set by their parents, are not ready to dedicate themselves and work for someone else. Many can't look past their gratification. When people are self absorbed, the marriage won't work. My generation, the one before me is extremely self absorbed.