Is monogamy dead?

[Spinrad]

Here is my belief about marriage. Humans are evolved for 30 years of reproductive life, more or less. Marraige is a compromise that was reached as a result of the importance of raising a generation of children to be able to carry on genes. Modern humans gain no real natural benifit from monogamy, however. Children are, dispite the propaganda, fairly easy to raise and don't really require the kind of protection they would have in early human history. But we are evolved this way. We have a certain amount of instinct to reproduce with one partner and see the children through to about adolescence. Which would be about when an ancient human would have been adult. Then the parents would die. We now extend life far, far beyond the natural limits, and we can raise children relatively simply. The natural imperative for monogamy is greatly reduced, so the other powerful instinct - to reproduce as often and with as many partners as possible - becomes the the more powerful imperative. The answer is to make marriage and child rearing a contract instead of a covenant, with definate goals and responsibilites clearly stated. Serial monogamy. Solves the real problem. Social stigma.

 

[StormyOne]

We have a certain amount of instinct to reproduce with one partner and see the children through to about adolescence.

Which is about the point that most kids are about tired of being raised... at least my kids tell me that..... They are (or believe they are) ready to be on their own, seeking their fame and fortune...

 

[Spinrad]

Which is about the point that most kids are about tired of being raised... at least my kids tell me that..... They are (or believe they are) ready to be on their own, seeking their fame and fortune...

An dlet's be clear: at that point they are ready to go on hunts, collect roots and berries and fashion tools. They ARE ready to be "on their own". But there is this problem of civilized society that humans are not naturally evolved to deal with. This is why we have extended childhood so far into early adulthood, and why we have so many sexual problem with young people.

 

[Viola_Strange]

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.

Like that scene from Annie Hall. Best romantic scene ever.

I don't know about the rest of the world, but I don't really care, I'm not going to sit around and let my husband / boyfriend sleep around while still with me. I wouldn't want a guy who would let me get away with it either. You cheat = Street. I have very little sympathy for cheaters. As a girl who used to cheat on her boyfriend, I see it as the most pathetic & weak excuse to get out of a relationship. If you want out, go. Don't make a big scene. Don't turn it into a glorious production. If you want to see other people, tell them. And don't expect them to be okay with it. No one can be. No matter how many times they say otherwise.

Does this make me too demanding? Is loving me so hard? :cryemotears:

It may be in some species nature to be polyamorous, but monogomy exists in the animal kingdom too. Then again, I don't like to use animals too much to compare to human nature. On the one hand, I do believe in evolution. I mean, how can you not? But, for example, so dogs aren't monogomous? Dogs also eat their own poop. I'm not saying there's a superiority, but, you can't deny the differences. Different species, different standards.

Just trying to put things in perspective.

 

[Nightson]

Come gather round people, wherever your roam
And admit that the waters around you have grown
Accept it that soon you'll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth saving

Then you better start swimming or you'll sink like a stone
Ohh the times they are a changing....




(Not that polyamory is right for everyone, and cheaters should still get the boot as far as I'm concerned)

 

[Verv]

Monogamy is fading as a phenomenon; the explanations behind it are clear, to me, that it is a direct result of people being raised without a lot of the values that many people from conservative backgrounds take for granted.

Being raised in a two-parent home, I can assure you that the idea that committing adultery to me has never once appeared as a moral choice, but based on other soldiers that I have been around, not only do they justify it, but they actively commit it as if it is no wrong.

People have become more self-centered and have lost touch with the idea of obligations that they have to their spouses, and to others as a whole; people have become overly individualistic and think that they can justify having multiple sexual partners and strike balances along those lines, when in reality it leads to a fundamental instability in our society and our nation, in our way of life, and becomes the epitome of irresponsibility.

I have witnessed many youths who become confused and lead inappropriately chaotic lives due to the indiscretions of their parents who have affairs, and I feel that the death of monogamy will be a wake-up call to many of the people who are out there.

 

[Nymphalidae]

Humans are not a monogamous species. I suggest you all stop stressing out about it, and tend to more important concerns than who your neighbors are doing.

 

[""]

Monkey see, monkey do?

I'm not a primate. They do it like they do on the discovery channel, because they're animals, and it's instinct. We have more going for us then instinct. We have reasoning skills beyond that of the animal kingdom. We may not always use the best reasoning when choosing a mate, but we do know that cheating on a spouse only brings heartache. We know it's wrong to cheat, so why is promoting anything outside of monogamy ok?

There are some cultures where monogamy is not the standard. It is also true that in biblical days (OT, not NT) men had many wives. Frankly, I wouldn't mind being wife number 3 or 4....somebody else to share the household chores, somebody else to talk to, and women are just fun to be around... but it's not legal. This is not to say that I want to promote infidelity, because I do not. I am wholeheartedly opposed to infidelity.

I am also opposed to the idea that mankind CANNOT be loyal to their mate. Men can be loyal to their wives, and wives can be loyal to their husbands. I can name many who have, and continue to do so. I can name many who did, but who have long since passed on. I can name myself. I would, if I were married again (not even ready to contemplate it at this point... still missing my lovely husband, who I want to declare as a very faithful and loving man... can't say anything more then that.. still too raw) I would undoubtedly be faithful to my future husband. It is in my nature. It is what I desire to do. I am also very good at reading people, so I doubt that I would choose somebody who wouldn't give it their best to be faithful to me.

What it all comes down to though is will. Not desire. Will can over power desire. You can be tempted to be with another. You can even desire them with your heart (which according to God is adultery), but you can will yourself (and ask God for help) not to do it. You can turn away from it. Even non-christians will tell you that they have walked away from the opportunity to cheat. Monogamy IS natural. It's just that the desire to have more then one is appealing to many people. So is the desire to have a little on the side, if you can do it without being caught. That doesn't mean it's how we were created to be.

There is a difference between cheating and having several wives (according to the laws of your land) imho. When I think about that, it's always one man and several wives. Still.... imagine the looks you'd get, if it were one woman and several husbands (not boyfriends, but husbands). Society isn't ready for that. I can't think of a culture in the world that would allow it. Not that it hasn't crossed the mind of many women. I wouldn't want that for myself though. One man is more then enough for me.

 

[Verv]

Humans are not a monogamous species. I suggest you all stop stressing out about it, and tend to more important concerns than who your neighbors are doing.

In nature, mankind does desire to engage in sexual activity with multiple partners. However, this has historically been suppressed by societies because it is viewed as inappropriate and fundamentally chaotic; it goes against how humans should have their societies because it conjures feelings of jealousy and ends up creating an unpleasant environment for children to be raised in.

Overall, it is not the best way to have a society behave; monogamy and family-based households are the ideal way to exist.

I think that there would be too large of a lack of values and a lack of permanence in the lives of children if they do not have the nuclear family or extended family structures to grow up in.

It is natural for man to commit crimes like murder, but by all means, we resist it from happening.

 

[""]

It is natural for man to commit crimes like murder, but by all means, we resist it from happening.

Just wondering why you think it's natural for man to commit murder.

 

[Nightson]

Monogamy is fading as a phenomenon; the explanations behind it are clear, to me, that it is a direct result of people being raised without a lot of the values that many people from conservative backgrounds take for granted.

Being raised in a two-parent home, I can assure you that the idea that committing adultery to me has never once appeared as a moral choice, but based on other soldiers that I have been around, not only do they justify it, but they actively commit it as if it is no wrong.

People have become more self-centered and have lost touch with the idea of obligations that they have to their spouses, and to others as a whole; people have become overly individualistic and think that they can justify having multiple sexual partners and strike balances along those lines, when in reality it leads to a fundamental instability in our society and our nation, in our way of life, and becomes the epitome of irresponsibility.

I have witnessed many youths who become confused and lead inappropriately chaotic lives due to the indiscretions of their parents who have affairs, and I feel that the death of monogamy will be a wake-up call to many of the people who are out there.

Do you consider polyamory to be immoral?

 

[Im_A]

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

i think this is a negative assumption because we see people doing stupid things. i see your point here i do. but we can't judge the whole idea of monogamy based on people's ill actions.

couples need to realize that they make choices, and they need to do whatever it takes to make it work, period. no more exscuses. no more misusing scripture to justify breaking up or divorcing. you make a choice, you stand by it, period. you make the nesseccary changes to keep it working. something our grandparents got a hold of quicker than a lot of people today.

i don't buy into modern ideas of soulmate, or the modern phenmenon of Christian divorcing with using scriptures to back them up, (unless it's granted under scripture, which i guess people debate about even that.)

 

[meebs]

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.

makes sense to me!

anyway i cant imagine having several relationships at once, sounds like waaaay to much hassle!

One at a time is enough!

 

[Im_A]

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.

i agree with you.

i just dont' buy into modern ideas of compatibility/soulmates or whatever other term one descided to put into it. marriage states till death do you part. so i figure, death is the only way we will have emperical evidence of knowing that person is our "soulmate" or whatever sappy cliched term one wants to put with it. and in that meant, people actually making all efforts, no matter what standing by their mate, no matter what making the nesseccary changes to benefit the futhering of the relationship, or the lifelong relationship.

i get tired of hearing exscuses by people. now i mean i'm not going to judge every relationship or anything, but what i don't get into is, stupid reasons of giving up on one another (that includes a lot of Christians reasoning from walking away from their mate. because in all reality there is no difference in reasons, just different terminology.)

 

[Im_A]

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.

keep it coming teddy! great stuff!!!

and if i may add to your post, if there is such a thing as soulmates, i believe that the "soulmate" is the one we choose to actually go through thick and thin with.

 

[Nymphalidae]

I don't care what other people do. They can be monogamous, or polygamous, or whatever. It just isn't my business. The idea that I or society could be harmed by people choosing to live their lives in a non-nuclear family is laughable.

 

[meebs]

How about legal Polygamy? But limiting the amount of spouses you could have? And the women can have more spouses too, its not just the men who are allowed more wives. Lol - this is not original idea - well i saw it on Enterprise But it makes sense to me.

However if you want monogamy thats ok too. Personally i just want one husband.

 

[Verv]

Do you consider polyamory to be immoral?

Immoral may not be the right word.

It falls inbetween 'misguided' and 'wrong.' I think that in the case of polyamory, being that the fundamental beliefs of the people involved is that they are not to do harm, and they seriously are only doing harm to themselves and the children caught up in this, so I am not sure where to place it.

Yes, it is wrong, and yes, the resulting actions are immoral (confusion for children and a lck of structure, misguiding people on the truth, etc.).

I think that it is a very wrong philosophy and I will argue against it, but I do not know if it is right to make it sound so vilified when we are trying to engage in a rational dicussion of it.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Still.... imagine the looks you'd get, if it were one woman and several husbands (not boyfriends, but husbands). Society isn't ready for that. I can't think of a culture in the world that would allow it.

I remember hearing of ONE society like that, somewhere in Asia, I think.

 

[seebs]

Polyandry is rare, but I don't see anything wrong with it.