Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Is monogamy natural?
- Thread starter jd_uk
- Start date
i dont think social practices can be described as natural or unnatural.
id like to compare monogomy to anal sex....is it ideal for the success of our species? probably not...but people do it, and it works, and makes some people happy.
in modern day society, id say it does work, and can be considered "natural" depending on both partner's lifestyles and preferences.
id like to compare monogomy to anal sex....is it ideal for the success of our species? probably not...but people do it, and it works, and makes some people happy.
in modern day society, id say it does work, and can be considered "natural" depending on both partner's lifestyles and preferences.
KillahBee
New member
absolutely not. in the sense of "what do I want to do and what makes me feel good". however, we weren't born into a "do what makes you feel good" society. it's a "do what you're supposed to do".
also, I'd argue that monogamy provides the best chances for survival, which is a leading factor in its current existence.
also, I'd argue that monogamy provides the best chances for survival, which is a leading factor in its current existence.
jd_uk
New member
No, cheating is lying and i would never lie to a partner.
I just had this discussion the other day and was amazed by how many people think that it's actually what nature intended and not just a consequence of social conditioning as to what is morally right.
I think women usually think it is more natural than men, perhaps because by nature it's more in a female's interests to invest time in one partner than it is for a man to.
jd_uk
New member
I know what you're saying but I'm talking about what is natural as in what nature intended. Why do we go against the grain?
calveless wonder
New member
good post bro.
i think you nailed it. from a biological/evolutionary standpoint, no...but social influences/practices can alter our behavior despite our hardwiring.
Personally, I think the vast majority of humans are hardwired to be, at the very least, serial monogamists; from an evolutionary perspective this makes sense, stay with each other willingly until young are raised, then go your separate paths if the spark has died out. Jealousy seems to be too ubiquitous to make polygamy a naturally evolved state for our species.
There are enough people who are very content to be monogamous, in fact crave that bond, that I think it goes beyond culture. You have to know people who are a bit older and happy in their long term relationships to believe this exists though
Our bodies actually secrete natural chemicals, triggered by close physical contact with your significant other, that reinforce the pair bond.
There are enough people who are very content to be monogamous, in fact crave that bond, that I think it goes beyond culture. You have to know people who are a bit older and happy in their long term relationships to believe this exists though
Our bodies actually secrete natural chemicals, triggered by close physical contact with your significant other, that reinforce the pair bond.
jd_uk
New member
So you're saying that social brainwashing from the time we're born is the reason we go against what is biologically natural?
jd_uk
New member
Personally, I think the vast majority of humans are hardwired to be, at the very least, serial monogamists; from an evolutionary perspective this makes sense, stay with each other willingly until young are raised, then go your separate paths if the spark has died out. Jealousy seems to be too ubiquitous to make polygamy a naturally evolved state for our species.
There are enough people who are very content to be monogamous, in fact crave that bond, that I think it goes beyond culture. You have to know people who are a bit older and happy in their long term relationships to believe this exists though
Interesting points but in my opinion jealousy is the fear caused by the knowledge that what we are taught is ideal (i.e. to be wholly committed to one person), is not natural and for that reason, will always require work to continue making it a reality. What I'm trying to say is that i think jealousy is a result of this tension we place upon ourselves trying to achieve something which really is quite unnatural to us. Of course, there are plenty of happy, old, monogamous couples that wouldn't change a thing but not one of them could truthfully tell you it hadn't required some serious work at times along the way.
Sometimes I think we consider ourselves to be more intelligent and more distinct from our animal instincts than we actually are.
captainahole
New member
No it creates a type of ownership a nicer word is love which is a way of justifying monogamy.
I am still all for it though.
I am still all for it though.
Having been in two long term, committed relationships, one that seethed with jealousy and the other that does not, I can tell you that my personal feelings are that jealousy is an extremely immature emotion that springs out of severe insecurity, it's tatamount to a 2 year old screaming "MINE."
My ex husband was horribly jealous with me, he was also possessive and obsessed. Hindsight being 20/20, I really do believe if you were to pump him full of truth serum and ask him what he felt about me, he would say I was his possession, I belonged to him, like his video games, baseball cards or comic books (and he didn't feel like he really deserved me). Essentially, jealousy is dehumanizing, turning the the one who is the object of the jealousy into property (he also had unreasonable expectations about my appearance and yet never took me anywhere, fucking weird bastard).
I feel that there is a natural territoriality that comes with being part of a bonded couple, but excessive jealousy is a sign of other "issues," if you get my meaning. I should have chosen my words more carefully with my previous post but I stand by my statement that I believe humans are wired to be essentially monogamistic, even if it is serially.
Grumpy Old Man
Grumpy Old Biker Bastard
Those that feel monogomy is not for them should continue on their own path.
Everything else you said I have seen many times before and I agree with your statements. Jealousy is one of the worst behaviors a human can exhibit. There are serious issues with men/ women that are jealous....
you cant really say natures "intention", unless you mean how "god made us".
fact is we adapt to our environment and social norms is a product of this adaptation. for one reason or another monogamy became somewhat standard for the stability of a modern family unit...so that would make it natural. but its still common and functional to have many partners...
similar to how we stopped eating raw foods, and started cooking...nature didnt "intend" us to learn how to cook our food and adapt to that...it just happened, and stuck. but people still eat sushi and steak tartar...
jd_uk
New member
Yeah jealousy is horrible behavour and honestly if i had a partner that was jealous it wouldn't last. Like you, i find it immature and not particularly attractive and you're right that it does stem from insecurity. I've been the jealous partner a long time ago and will never be like that again.
What I mean though is that if monogamy was just natural to us then people wouldn't ever have any real triggers to make them jealous. An insecure, possessive person will get jealous because he/she knows there's always a chance that their partner will be sexually or emotionally interested in someone else. If TRUE monogamy were natural then these worries wouldn't exist.
I watched a documentary recently on supposed monogamy in the animal kingdom and the researchers said that even the very small minority of species that were thought to be monogamous, actually weren't because if there was the opportunity for that animal to spread it's genes without the current relationship being affected then they would do it.
jd_uk
New member
I like your thinking.
I don't feel that this is an example of us adapting to our environments as such, but more an example of us adapting to what society sees as morally correct. You only have to look in celebrity magazines to see how much the average woman will detest a man who is a 'cheater'.
you could be right, but part of our hardwiring, and nature, is our ability towards logic and reason, as well as guilt and all sorts of crazy shit that is used in shaping our social norms.
so maybe we "out-think" our hardwiring, but to be able to do so is still a natural part of us. and proves that our brains and ability to think is the most natural of them all.
and this is what weve come up with!
PS: some people are so in love with their significant others that they even have problems getting hard for the best lap dancers (im not that person btw, i cant get hard for anyone)
Bikini Mod
New member
This isn't necessarily the case outside of the US. Cheating men (and women) are near EXPECTED in societies that are not as sexually repressed as the Americans are.
Everyone is free to do what they wish. A piece of paper or a ring or any other ceremony (civil or religious) will not dicate a person's behavior... EVER.
I have a very different opinion of fidelity. For me it has NOTHING to do with morality and everything to do with POWER.
1. If I remain faithfull then I will never put myself in the position where I will have to beg my partner's forgiveness for doing something that most feel is reprehensible. Even in the societies where people tolerate it (or aren't so offended by it) it is TOLERATED and ACCEPTED but not something that the parties engage necessarily LIKE. I would much rather be the one who is being begged for forgiveness.
2. If I sex a man who is NOT my partner then I will have immediately blew that man's ego up because "he just *had* my man's woman". I have too high of an opinion of myself to EVER lower myself in that fashion just to increase the ego of some random dewd. I just send these men on their happy way to find a chick who enjoys being used in this way.
^^^puts a bit of a different spin on the matter.
Bikini Mod
New member
Interesting that as a man ages his dick will become more selective. When he is in his teens to early 30's the wind will blow and he is ready to nail nearly any warm, moist hole. Once he passes that threshhold it's true, there will be very little (if any) movement in his pants unless he is VERY connected to that female on many levels. And as he ages this is exponentially multiplied. That is MOST men. Not all, but MOST. Which seems to be VERY "natural" IMHO. When a man is young and on top of the world, other than making money and chasing nani what concerns does he really have? As his body ages and his life gets shorter he realizes that *maybe* he should put a little thought into who will stay beside him to wipe the drool from his chin and notsomuch how smokin hot her warm, moist hole is.
jd_uk
New member
While most older men would be selective with choosing a partner for the rest of their life, they still wouldn't give up good sex if they 'knew for a fact' that it wouldn't affect anything else. It's still in his instincts to want to spread the genes on.
I hear what you're saying about different countries views on polygamy though. If anything that only goes to show what a social idea monogamy is.
Bikini Mod
New member
I don't necessarily agree with this statement. I know several men that have been married to their wives for 25+ years and I have a hard time believing that they would be unfaithful to their spouses even if they knew they could get away with it.
I also know for a fact that my husband wouldn't cheat on me even if he knew that I would never find out for the simple fact that HE WOULD KNOW.
The older a man gets the easier it is for him to be faithfull as I do believe he realizes how much more he has to lose for *a moment of great sex*. I mean, if he loves and respects his partner (if a man doesn't realize what love is after he's been through a lifetime with his partner then guess what - he NEVER will. I am not talking sex. I am talking LOVE - all the ups and downs of a lifetime and they are still KIND to one another and the best of friends) I find it hard to believe that he would even WANT to share any part of himself with a female who was NOT his life partner.
I do know of at least one man who does NOT fit this mold and the interesting part of that equation is that he and his wife have been through a lifetime and they truly enjoy one another's company both in and out of the bedroom. Yet he is openly having at least 2 affairs and keeps giving his wife the whole, "I love YOU but I am confused and don't know WHAT I want." She is DEVASTATED but she stays because she really doesn't see a way out, meaning if they legally divorce her lifestyle will be greatly impacted. They are both retired and live very modestly but spend their money on travel and what brings them enjoyment (in other words they aren't flashy or excessive though they could be). Additionally she truly LOVES HIM and only him and just can't figure it out. She KNOWS it is NOT HER (which is a good thing) but my husband and I are absolutely mystified at his behavior.
If MY HUSBAND (the man who has boned more women then most men could imagine to bone) can't figure this guy out then maybe there is some validity to your theory that monogomy may NOT BE *natural*.
I am of the opinion that a body (male or female/hetero or homo doesn't matter) is either wired to be faithfull or they are not and that to go against this personal wiring is not fair to anyone involved.
Bikini Mod
New member
Now that I think about it, I guess the Reader's Digest condensed version of my answer to the original question is:
*Natural* is dependent on the individual. For some it IS their nature, for others it is not.
*Natural* is dependent on the individual. For some it IS their nature, for others it is not.
Bikini Mod
New member
Wearing pants and using indoor plumbing isn't "natural" either. Some of us (though not all) have moved beyond semi-intelligent apes, however.
LOL What he said. ^^^
Having said that, seriously I do believe that it is really an individual thing. Some people won't stray regardless of what opportunities present themselves and others will FIND opportunities to stray.
Agreed. And some people won't wear pants and chose to defecate in public, too. We just lock these people up and pretend they no longer exist. Likewise, we should take all the other people who don't like the modern world and designate them an island like austraila or something. Here they can roam freely, clubbing females to take back to their caves to sex, all to their hearts' content.
jd_uk
New member
Wearing pants and using indoor plumbing isn't "natural" either. Some of us (though not all) have moved beyond semi-intelligent apes, however.
I'd consider them natural in that it helps our chances of survival and therefore makes the passing on of our genes more likely.
Monogamy, as unnatural as it is, only inhibits our ability to pass on our genes.
jd_uk
New member
Ah but that's called having a social conscience. The physical urge would still be there and that is what I'm talking about (although admitedly probably not explaining very well). An old guy will still have that urge to 'spread the seed', he might just deny himself that opportunity if he's committed to another person as he knows it's socially unacceptable and would feel guilt as a result of the hurt it would case his partner if she knew. That guilt would hurt him too. But aside from the emotions based on what is socially correct, the physical urge would still be there, so if he really knew that it wasn't wrong in the slightest then he'd act on his urge.
I always remember going for regular dinners with my grandad...so funny seeing all the old guys drooling every week as the 19 year old waitresses bent over to clear the tables.
Not exactly true. We have quite suitable genetic variation.
I, however, have no interest in working and paying to support children that are not mine. Pretty sure most other males feel this way, too. Just how will all these bastard children get paid for? Hey, if you want to pass on your genes everywhere, go for it; enjoy paying 20 child support checks a month.
I really can't see how this part of modern society will change, save more males wanting to whore aroung and, consequently, more males bitching on the internet about paying child support. Funny how that works.
(Notice how this argument is pretty sex-based? Probably because monogamy, it its basic form, is for the male provider/protection of the unit while the female rears the offspring which take a long fucking time to develop. I'm sure there's more to it, but I'm not an evolutionary biologist.)
jd_uk
New member
I, however, have no interest in working and paying to support children that are not mine. Pretty sure most other males feel this way, too. Just how will all these bastard children get paid for? Hey, if you want to pass on your genes everywhere, go for it; enjoy paying 20 child support checks a month.
I really can't see how this part of modern society will change, save more males wanting to whore aroung and, consequently, more males bitching on the internet about paying child support. Funny how that works.
All of that is not what this thread is really about. Laws in the western world are in place to support what is considred to be morally correct. i.e. the monogamous lifestyle. I'm talking about before all that.
I don't think it is completely sex based although there are differening reasons as to why it makes biological sense for males and females not to be mongamous. It's also probably true to say that monogamy will protect a female more than a male during the time of raising her offspring but there are still reasons why it makes natural sense for a female to have sex with multiple partners.
That documentary on sex in the animal kingdom showed that even in a rare, supposedly monogamous species of penguin, the female would secretly mate with other more healthy males while her own partner was away collecting stones for the nest. As long as he didn't know it was all good for her. Also they found that the male penguins would actually 'pay for sex' with stones collected (which were needed to make a nest). Amazing really, how similar that behaviour is to us.
Bikini Mod
New member
Do you think that the *old women* are thinking anything different about the young boyz who are parking the cars or bringing them drinks?
"Ssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! don't speak, just eat my pussy. If I am especially horny, I may LET YOU fuck the pussy. As soon as I get there from here - get THE FUCK OFF and find the front door. Don't call me or blow my cell up because brother, it t'weren't all that. I just had an itch that you were lucky enough to be able that I allowed you to scratch. T'weren't love, just an itch. Feel me?"
Women are far dirtier than any men. Only young men dispute this.
Bikini Mod
New member
Are you suggesting that a penguin would have the ability to be "jealous"?
Do you realize that the concept of love was only introduced to matrimony in the 1900's? Before it was all about business. A man valued virginity (and fidelity) because then he would be "guaranteed" that HIS LINEAGE would be secured while the female got to financially secure the future of HER offspring.
In my culture there is an expression: You can have a thousand fathers.... but only ONE mother.
As I said before, I do believe that some are wired to be faithfull and others are not. I think that each *choice* is natural to that individual. There are social/economic consequences for every person within the confines of their particular agreement.
I do believe that the only agreement that is UNNATURAL is when either party withholds their prediliction from the other party as at that point you no longer have "two consenting adults"... or either one or both parties are too young to be consenting adults.
Grumpy Old Man
Grumpy Old Biker Bastard
Those that feel the way you do have a natural selection process regardless of how society feels. They breed with anyone that they can.
I don't understand why you feel that it is necessary to breed and pass on your genetic material. Do you feel your progeny are superior? If we go back to your mindset you would have to be dominant over other males.
I would like it to be true. It would make life simplier.
However ... it isn't. Not a week goes by that I don't meet someone I'd not
only want to have sex with, but to even have a child with.
However ... it isn't. Not a week goes by that I don't meet someone I'd not
only want to have sex with, but to even have a child with.
Bikini Mod
New member
Interesting point of view... I knew a very few men that were of this mindset. What do you think makes YOU think this way?
jd_uk
New member
I still pretty much conform to what society sees as correct. The way society judges and legislates to support monogamy makes it easier to be like that.
It's not my opinion that I'm better than anyone else, I wouldn't walk around thinking "my genes are better than yours" - but it's more in my biological interests to want to reproduce as much as possible to pass my genes on. That's the way we're made. Realistically, every time I see another female who i find sexually interesting, I'm denying myself that natural urge to spread the seed, purely based on the fact that it would be 'wrong' for me to do so given that I'm already in a relationship. (and because my gf who's sitting here now has just told me she'd beat me up!...in the most understanding way possible.)
nimbus
New member
kids from a monogamous relationship are probably more likely to survive, and definitely were at some point in the past.
I think monogamy has been favored by evolution in many circumstances.
so i think a desire for monogamy is instinctive and 'natural' for many people, and not just conditioned by society
I think monogamy has been favored by evolution in many circumstances.
so i think a desire for monogamy is instinctive and 'natural' for many people, and not just conditioned by society
jd_uk
New member
Why is it not favoured by 99.9% of animal species?
broonzy
New member
Didn't read the whole thread so not sure if someone else mentioned this or not, but after thinking about it, I would have to say that Monogamy is not natural.
Lets say you are in a monogamous relationship. Then one day some really hot, sexy member of the opposite sex makes it clear that they find you very attractive. Natural instinct makes you attracted to that person and you would have to "fight" that instinct to be able to walk away and not cheat. You would have to use "reason" to override what your natural instinct is telling you to do. If monogamy was natural, it would be easy to walk away from the situation.
Lets say you are in a monogamous relationship. Then one day some really hot, sexy member of the opposite sex makes it clear that they find you very attractive. Natural instinct makes you attracted to that person and you would have to "fight" that instinct to be able to walk away and not cheat. You would have to use "reason" to override what your natural instinct is telling you to do. If monogamy was natural, it would be easy to walk away from the situation.
Bikini Mod
New member
jd_uk
New member
lol i didn't realise we didn't act like animals for the most part. I'd say we act way worse than animals a lot of the time. Jealousy is UGLY.
Bikini Mod
New member
nimbus
New member
why do the other 99.9% of species matter? we are talking about humans. our society, and what it takes to thrive in it are entirely different from other species
nimbus
New member
it is in a lot of cases because bastard children used to be scorned by society, and they'd probably become peasants. even if they did get to bang their kids would probably be even more worthless and die. With two caring parents and legitimate family name you get hooked up with status/inheritance/resources and will probably be a lot more successful. odds of reproducing, and those offspring having a chance in the world are way higher. Pair bonding is def favored by evolution in many cases.
probly not so much now, cause society will take care of an underpriviledged kid enough to make monogamy not essential. But you can't even compare success of two parent household kids vs one parent household kids in the past, not even close.
"Household"? What do "households" have to do with evolution? "Households" have existed for maybe the past 3000 years, out of the 5-7 Million Years of Human evolution. You need to look back much further than that. Civilization is a very recent development. As is marriage. Prior to the development of agriculture following the end of the last Ice Age, man lived in small communal groups. I'm not sure it's possible to know exactly what reproductive strategy these semi-nomadic bands of Humans adhered to, but I doubt it was anything resembling life-long monogamous pair-bonding.
nimbus
New member
i didnt mean a literal house, i meant a family structure.
pair bonding definitely goes way further back than 3,000 years, and would have been useful even before the development of civilization as you are describing.
it seems like common sense:
if a man helped raise a child in the past, it would have a way better chance of survival. so a man maximizes his chance of passing on his genes by raising his kids at least somewhat. a female maximizes her chance of passing her genes on by having a man help raise her child as well. So there is an evolutionary basis for pair bonding at least through the initial stages of raising a child. What further reinforces the pair bond is that a woman's chances of passing on genes is hurt by the man having and raising other kids, and that man's chances of passing on his genes are hurt by having to raise a child that it isn't his.
Well, if you look at cultures that were discovered relatively recently (e.g., some South American tribes and the Inuits) and how they lived before they were tainted by the bullshit of organized religion and western culture, they were generally what we would consider "open" relationships today. A pair bond with a relatively flexible approach to sex. Jealousy is just not conducive to a healthy tribe and sex is considered a healthy, natural part of life. The stigmas associated with sex grew out of a repressive church and the cultural mindset it promoted.
I'm not trying to drag religion into this but seriously, blame Western religion for most of our cultural hang ups about sex.
I suspect something was lacking in my childhood and I have this powerful desire to possess. Having the woman as your mate is the possession. I excuse it by being financially responsible.
Note: I do not act on all these impulses. I do know right from wrong. I find that simply having the woman want me is sufficient. That might be ego.
Monogamy isn't natural perse, but for an advanced species (as us humans are supposedly), living in an advanced society it is the better practice in the long run. Sure, it requires work but it also reinforces character and other intangible values that immature people can't quite grasp, or at the very least lack the willpower to follow through on.
There's a lot of truth in what Musclemom said about brain chemistry in the presence of an SO.
It really all boils down to whether a person will live like most any other animal or if they have what it takes to live like something more than one.
There's a lot of truth in what Musclemom said about brain chemistry in the presence of an SO.
It really all boils down to whether a person will live like most any other animal or if they have what it takes to live like something more than one.
ricco561
New member
Fuck no.
ricco561
New member
Having said that; I guess that's what I signed up for.
lolz. why dont we throw crap at walls like the other 99.9% of dutch porn monkeys
households are a product of evolution.
evolution doesnt mean sprouting an extra penis, or having the extra penis fall off so you can only fuck one girl at a time.
evolution is behavioral as well
comparing ourselves as beings now, to 5-7 million years is not very scientifically intelligent, unless you are demonstrating how weve changed...
Similar threads
