[weblinks]

Does anyone think monogamy is natural? I was reading that some animals like gibbons mate for life.

http://www.northrup.org/photos/gibbon/

Now people are not gibbons, but I wonder why most humans don't want to have affairs, either. Although I would like to cheat and have done so in the past, I am so eaten by guilt that I don't think I can do it again.

I don't think a single player who has a confident personality is wrong to seduce girls, but I think people in relationships shouldn't cheat.

What do you think?

[speakeasy]

The answer is simple, if you don't think you can stop chasing tail, then don't get in a relationship.

[thegmanifesto]

'Does anyone think monogamy is natural?"

No.

[Rocco81]

I think that the human male is made to reproduce and spread his seed. You should follow your instincts and do not try to settle into monagamy until you are ready, in most men's cases probably when you are older.

It is good and healthy for a man to atleast think of straying, but we're not just apes who can or should go around trying to impregnate everything that moves. I think that monogamy is what has built society and made families and economies stronger etc. It's what seperates normal productive families form bastard kids in trailer parks with several sinlings from various fathers. One might yield productive members of this world and the other most likely will yeild a meth addict.

[thoughtgypsy]

It's an interesting question. I don't think either males or females are naturally inclined to be monogamous for the rest of their lives, but it's possible given the right environmental and social conditions. I think it's important to understand the evolutionary theory behind relationships to better judge their dynamics. Devlin wrote a summary that I feel describes female sexuality and relationship dynamics pretty well. It can be read here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23724929/Sexua...wer-Devlin (Devlin appears to be some sort of white supremacist, but either way, it plays minimal influence over his writings on feminism and female sexuality.)

Essentially, men are inclined to fuck and impregnate as many women as possible in order to propagate their seed (preferably with the most attractive women). Women have much less eggs than men have sperm, so they are much less picky. They also have to be essentially immobile for months, so their goal is to tie down a man long enough so he can provide enough resources for her and the child to survive during the developmental years of the child's life. At the same time, a man has to restrict his fucking around during a lot of this time. It's a set of conflicting genetic goals, but marriage created a social enforcement that allowed both sexes the ability to spread their genes successfully.

Women could now have a form of official commitment from the guy, making him more likely to guarantee resources to her and the children. Because women would become outcasts for terminating marriages, most would stay in their relationships for life, and more women would increasingly be taken off the market. The ones who weren't married off yet would seek out partners (including betas). Under 'natural' pre-marriage social conditions the less attractive would not be able to reproduce. I think this social pressure to stay together shamed people away from cheating as much as they normally would, and created a situation in which they were more likely to stay together for the rest of their lives.

So, in short, I would say that it's not natural. I think that women are more inclined to be monogamous because they require a man to provide resources during the pregnancy and developmental stages of reproduction, but after the child is relatively self-sufficient, this inclination declines rapidly and she is more likely to seek out other partners to bring diversity to her genetic offspring. I think that any shame from cheating is based on the culture of the society (in our culture, women have an enormous social influence on our concept of morality, and they fear men not committing their resources.)

On the other hand, seeing that marriage (in some form or another) is widely practiced in most areas of the world, it may be an evolutionary innovation allowing most people to successfully reproduce. While it might still be extremely difficult to remain monogamous for the remainder of their lives, there are certain conditions that can make it easier to happen and they don't all come down to shaming from society. In relationships where the male is higher status than the woman, both of them are likely to stay together as the man fulfills a role of dominance and the woman continues to highly regard the man. Also, in rural areas there are much less people with which to cheat, and much less social opportunities to meet or gather with people. Another aspect of having less options which is confirmed by psychologists is people are happier in an environment with minimal options. People are more satisfied with their choices because they don't wonder as much about what would have happened under the circumstances of choosing another option. Under very precise conditions I think a monogamous lifetime relationship is possible, and perhaps even a natural progression given the circumstances.

[speakeasy]

(04-23-2010 01:26 PM)thoughtgypsy Wrote:  

Essentially, men are inclined to fuck and impregnate as many women as possible in order to propagate their seed (preferably with the most attractive women). Women have much less eggs than men have sperm, so they are much less picky. They also have to be essentially immobile for months, so their goal is to tie down a man long enough so he can provide enough resources for her and the child to survive during the developmental years of the child's life. At the same time, a man has to restrict his fucking around during a lot of this time. It's a set of conflicting genetic goals, but marriage created a social enforcement that allowed both sexes the ability to spread their genes successfully.

What's interesting too is I read a study that a man's testosterone level drops when he holds a baby. That may be nature's way of keeping the man around.

[hydrogonian]

(04-23-2010 10:09 AM)weblinks Wrote:  

Does anyone think monogamy is natural? I was reading that some animals like gibbons mate for life.

http://www.northrup.org/photos/gibbon/

Now people are not gibbons, but I wonder why most humans don't want to have affairs, either. Although I would like to cheat and have done so in the past, I am so eaten by guilt that I don't think I can do it again.

I don't think a single player who has a confident personality is wrong to seduce girls, but I think people in relationships shouldn't cheat.

What do you think?

So, there are two parts to your question, first, that of biological imperative and, second, morality.

1.

I don't think monogamy is natural for a man. In my experience, the eye always starts to wander after some time, no matter what. The biological urge to have sex with other girls will always be there. I cannot imagine that my urges would be different from any other guy out there.

Therefore, because the urge to have sex with multiple partners is present, then monogamy is not natural. The only thing that keeps it from not wandering is when you are with a girl that is such high quality that you have a hard time finding anything that compares in your environment. However, if a better woman were to come along, then the urge would return.

Granted, all of this pertains to men with high testosterone output (ie: young guys, and healthy old guys). If a guys testosterone is low, then the urge to fuck other women can dissipate. Also, moral principles (committment) can alter a guys psyche, to a point, to where the 'natural' desire to cheat dissipates a little. This is likely a mans natural mechanism that stops him from desiring what he can't have, like when his attractiveness to other women decreases.

This could be one bio-psychological reason why beta chodes tend to fall in love easier than players. Players can have their choice of women, and chodes cannot. Therefore, the chodes brain likely decreases their testosterone and increases the chemicals that make him want to commit. This is just a hypothesis though.

2.

I don't think that cheating in a monogamous relationship is moral. Therefore, I believe in keeping relationships non-exclusive if one wants to fuck other women.

This also tests a mans skill, as most women won't hang around a guy for long periods of time, or they will cheat on him, if there is no commitment made. Therefore, the non-committal man MUST have the ability to source new women on a regular basis.

I do think that society is held together through the family unit, but society is a creation of man. Therefore, I don't think that there is a supernatural morality in place that says that we HAVE to start a family. We have a the moral freedom to decide if we want to be monogamous or not.

I read some history once that stated that marriage was a creation of early society kings who didn't want every man in the kingdom wildly spreading his seed. The kings seed was superior, and the king needed to know that he could dominate the genetic pool of the kingdom, especially with the most desirable women. (an instinctual notion, of course, not based on knowledge of genetics). Therefore, every man was compelled to take one woman for life. I'm not sure how accurate this history is, and wikipedia says that there is little evidence that primae noctis (the right of nobles to take the virginity of every woman before her wedding night) existed. But interesting nevertheless.

In short, do what you want, and as long as you aren't lying, then there isn't any moral or natural compulsion to be monogamous.

[Lumiere]

hell no

[Vacancier Permanent]

Might be, but at least not at this stage in my life.

[weblinks]

Deep thoughts. You guys are intelligent.

I do think there is a moral question about cheating if you are religious. I also think
being loyal is hardwired into our brains (or at least mine).

This is a little off-topic, but I have noticed that when I go out with my girlfriend, I get a lot my more
looks from other women than when I am alone. While my girlfriend and I are not good-looking, sometimes girls will come up to me and stick their breasts in my chest when I go out with her. Maybe I
should be flattered, but I just feel offended that they are so disrespectful of us. I feel like a woman sometimes when I am ogled. Although in theory I would like to cheat again, I don't think I could.

[sramosobriant]

(04-23-2010 10:09 AM)weblinks Wrote:  

Does anyone think monogamy is natural? I was reading that some animals like gibbons mate for life.

http://www.northrup.org/photos/gibbon/

Now people are not gibbons, but I wonder why most humans don't want to have affairs, either. Although I would like to cheat and have done so in the past, I am so eaten by guilt that I don't think I can do it again.

I don't think a single player who has a confident personality is wrong to seduce girls, but I think people in relationships shouldn't cheat.

What do you think?

Natural? Biologically no. Both men and women are polygamous, promiscuous, and sexually profligate because we are biologically capable of it. If the sheer amount of cultural, religious, and even judicial energy spent on controlling women's sexuality were reduced, females would act more forthrightly on their sexual impulses.

Most humans are tribal, and have developed cultural norms based on the preservation of property. In other words, we are culturally influenced and marriage helps conserve and transfer property.

If the culture made it easier for women to care for their young, as in some Scandinavian countries, more women would rely less on men.

Also, one must factor in the people, both female and male who not only take charge of their own sexuality, but also of their fertility. Play all you want, just don't reproduce. If you do, then take responsibility.

[Quasi]

I think its a matter of trade off, sometimes monogamy is the best, other times being a cheater or single fucking around getting women pregnat all over the world oooor sperm donator is the best ; its just evolutionary strategies...

[weblinks]

Other than the moral, natural, and pregnancy questions regarding monogamy, monogamy is good
for reducing STD's.

I think culture does play a large part in monogamy. Girls in North Korea and Saudia Arabia are generally much more conservative than in Sweden, for example. I personally think traditional chicks make better wives.

[samsamsam]

An article today titled "5 Compelling Reasons Why Marriage Wasn't Meant to Be Monogamous"

http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/5-compel...00966.html

1. Marriage as we know it is a fairly recent invention.
2. Doing it like they do on the discovery channel = not monogamous.
3. Couples that reproduce together, stay together.
4. Society rules?
5. To each his or her own.

Those were the 5 headings.

[kinginthenorth]

Monogamy can be great, depending on where you are in your life. Right now I'm too focused on travel to focus on a monogamous relationship, but in the future when my focus shifts to creating a family and other areas of my life, monogamy could be awesome.

[Gator_McKlusky]

(06-05-2013 12:38 PM)kinginthenorth Wrote:  

Monogamy can be great, depending on where you are in your life. Right now I'm too focused on travel to focus on a monogamous relationship, but in the future when my focus shifts to creating a family and other areas of my life, monogamy could be awesome.

Nailed it. In my 20s, hell no. Too busy seeing the world and meeting new women. Now that I'm settled down and in one place, sure, (serial) monogamy is kind of nice.

[lurker]

It doesn't smell as nice as cedar, but it builds great home furniture. Too bad it's so expensive.

[A War You Cannot Win]

I confess I do not know if it is natural,but its a fundamental tenament present in most successful societies. One of the constant and key pre cursors heralding the fall of any society has been the increased promiscuity of the women in the doomed society.

99% of the things in our lives aren't natural, yet they irrevocably grant us a better living experience. Just because its natural, doesn't mean it's good, or bad. It is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less.

I feel those that argue that because monogamy may not be 'natural' it is therefore wrong and stupid is a dangerous sentiment to express. As you can see in the US, as more women abandon monogamy in favor of the prestigious cock carousel while the backbone of our society - the betas stand confused and embittered... It won't take Miss Cleo to predict this will only end in misery.

[Nomad77]

5 Compelling Reasons Why Marriage Wasn't Meant to Be Monogamous

http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/5-compel...00966.html

[JJ Roberts]

Monogamy is nothing more than a word and a concept and a new one at that

It is only 300 years old as a word and as a concept it is not something that human beings have ever practiced on a widespread basis - we just pretend to and engage in shaming behaviour if we are not seen to be following the script

[Que enspastic]

monogamy is unnatural; it's a social construct, not a biological impulse.

women have a dual mating strategy, not to hate on them, just how it is. according to their menstruation cycle they either go for the masculine alpha with strong genetics or the beta provider who is likely to care for them and a child.

conversely, men will stick around to help raise a child if it is their own but after that the oxytocin wears off and it's time to spread seed elsewhere. the penis is shaped like a plunger to extract other men's sperm from a vagina. why would it have that function if we never cheated on one other and stayed in natural monogamy?

monogamy stands its best chance of success once both partners' sex drives die away and their relationship is more a deep friendship than sexual.

on a sexual level, monogamy is naturally hard to maintain for more than several years at most.

[pegador]

I believe Gene Simmons said it best, something like "we produce billions of sperm everyday and you (meaning the woman) think they're all for you?"

If you look at history, the higher status the man had, the less monogamous he was: Kings, wealthy aristocrats, tribal elders, etc. Perhaps a man goes after or indulges in what his options are. Monogamy may be the norm because that's all that the average man can afford. Wives and girlfriends take up a lot of time and resources.

Maybe it's me or just I've been around the wrong girls, but monogamy at this point in my life would be illogical. I'm more focused on my life and career when I'm not in a relationship, and this benefits not only me, but others around me. When I was younger, I thought differently. But now, especially knowing that women love sex so much (and that they in a sense are also bound by societal constraints to act a certain way), I consider it my duty to bang them. When I'm banging her well, I like to think of it as doing my community service. It's not right for her to be so selfish and keep me to just one girl!

For me, I think that she has to be so amazing and earn the right for me to be monogamous with her, as it takes effort on my part being a man who adores women. It's a huge sacrifice to be monogamous. Monogamy simply for the sake of monogamy is pointless and counterproductive.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Quote:

1. Marriage as we know it is a fairly recent invention.

How is it recent, unless at least 3000 BC counts as recent? These people are trying to take something practiced by Egyptians, Hindus, Chinese, Romans, Assyrians, Mayans, Aboriginals and whatnot, and frame it as a passing fad like a corset.

"But humans were polygamous!"

Genetically as looking back to our earliest days as a species yes but, in all major civilizations, a vast majority of men did live monogamously. A polygamous (polygynous) society where a few Alphas hoard most women is fundamentally unsustainable because (unless slavery on a massive scale is practiced) it crushes the motivation and livehood for Betas left in the dirt (like it's starting to happen today), making rebellion and implosion certain to happen down the line.

This is not some ancient and unobservable occurrence. For example, there is a reason why the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has never become a significant force. It is, unlike marriage, always a passing and unsustainable fad. Heck, even in Saudi Arabia, the most polygamous modern state, 86% of men still have only one wife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_(...mentalism)