Is monogamy realistic anymore?

[Itchy]

Why though? There are many people totally happy with it. I am happy with it and I know many others happy with it. Saying there's nothing good about it and it's false to human nature can be seen as one-sided too.

 

I don't think I have read anyone saying monogamy isn't good, it's actually better than polygamy in my opinion. However, if you look at how many disastrous relationships there are, if you look at the sheer numbers of people having casual sex, be it one night stands with strangers they've just met, friends with benefits scenarios, open relationships, open marriages and infidelity then it's hard to say that a majority of people are monogamous and therefore monogamy is natural. I believe there are humans who are monogamous who do not do any of the things I have described, I am of one of those people, but I believe I am in the minority and do I honestly believe I am naturally drawn to monogamy? No. I think my religious up bringing has some bearing and I also believe my mind was made up when I learnt about sexually transmitted infections and the importance of contraception. I believe society has heavily influenced my decision to be monogamous much in the same way a polygamist can argue that society has shaped their belief system. After all mainstream society is very sexualised.

 

Someone else posted a statistic that stated only 42/43 of 240+ societies around the world practice monogamy while the rest practice polygamy, so which one is natural? Could it be a case of neither being natural and both being a case of humans being influenced by the societies in which they live?

 

To be honest, I find it offensive ( though I'm confident it's not meant to be) that some posters here are cherry picking specific cultures to make a point that polygamy is more natural and ancient to human kind than monogamy. There are many old cultures that have traditions of monogamous unions going back further than written histories for those people. If anything, history shows diversity of arrangements - even in societies where polygamy is the norm.

 

I don't see why in order to acknowledge one way of doing things, some folks trivialize the other.

 

I don't think anyone has trivialized monogamy, I think it's very important because antibiotics may not be able to cure sexually transmitted infections in the future because there are now reports that in the UK there has been cases of a new super-strain of gonorrhoea which is resistant to antibiotics and I suspect that super-strains of chlamydia, syphilis and HPV may occur at some point and these infections if left untreated or become untreatable will have severe ramifications for the human populace because some of these infections lead to infertility. So, I think monogamy is the better of the two choices, regardless if it's natural or not (I believe it isn't, but we'll agree to disagree).

 

I think the heart of Seymore's question isn't "does monogamy work for some people"

 

It's more along the lines of how does one find a good, committed, monogamous partner when it appears to be harder and harder to find people who value those things, based on the evidence of their behavior.

 

I agree, it's very hard to find someone like this because society today tells people "go out and have as much sex as possible, then when you're old, past your physical prime then settle down with someone, have children and live happily ever after". It's a complete fallacy that is spun by society because all it creates is damaged people who then screw up their marriages and suffer consequences as a result of blindly and wilfully following society. It's though society promotes pologamy and then says "you can switch from one to other" and I believe it's a lot harder for some people to adapt to and this is where the problem lies. Society needs to sort it self out, it either wants to promote one way of life or the other, it's promoting both and the results so far have been a total Eton mess.

[Hermes]

Itchy, that's basically it:

 

Society needs to sort it self out, it either wants to promote one way of life or the other, it's promoting both and the results so far have been a total Eton mess.

 

People want their cake and eat it......

 

At times I don't know what to think.

 

So, a couple of anecdotes.

 

A couple I know very well. Married about 25 years. Hardworking, sociable all the rest.

 

He met this woman (he travels due to his work) somewhat younger. Had an affair, which produced a female child, who must now be at least 18. Anyhow, cutting to the chase this man and his wife are together, did not go into total panic mode, he has had to give the child his surname and contribute towards her upbringing and education. That's how it is where they live. I don't judge them. He and wife seem to be happy and very engaged with each other and their work.

 

Next example: man of early fifties, married, has a brief fling with young girl 18 or 19 (daughter of a woman I know well). The girl becomes pregnant, has a male child. Man's wife decides to play it cool, as the child grows a little older she receives him at her home with her other children, the man (credit where it is due, and it has to be said, well off) pays for the boy's education, maintenance and the rest), the affair is older as the girl in question marries another man......

In other words WW3 did not break out.

 

Things happen. We can look at it how we like.....

[TMifune]

I agree, it's very hard to find someone like this because society today tells people "go out and have as much sex as possible, then when you're old, past your physical prime then settle down with someone, have children and live happily ever after". It's a complete fallacy that is spun by society because all it creates is damaged people who then screw up their marriages and suffer consequences as a result of blindly and wilfully following society. It's though society promotes pologamy and then says "you can switch from one to other" and I believe it's a lot harder for some people to adapt to and this is where the problem lies. Society needs to sort it self out, it either wants to promote one way of life or the other, it's promoting both and the results so far have been a total Eton mess.

 

Not to mention the part where we try to shame people for not wanting to "settle down" with someone who spent their youth rejecting people exactly like you while bouncing between numerous short-term sexual relationships. Then everyone screams "You can't judge someone for their past" because they want to be able to be careless with the gifts they've been given while their young, and still get a quality partner after they've had their fun.

[Itchy]

Not to mention the part where we try to shame people for not wanting to "settle down" with someone who spent their youth rejecting people exactly like you while bouncing between numerous short-term sexual relationships. Then everyone screams "You can't judge someone for their past" because they want to be able to be careless with the gifts they've been given while their young, and still get a quality partner after they've had their fun.

 

I don't agree with shaming of any kind and I honestly believe it shows a lack of tolerance of differences. This whole "settling down" thing really irks me, nobody should settle for anybody, settling means you accept less than you probably want and less than you might deserve and this is where I think some issues stem from.

[Blue Ridge]

Would you agree that a person could feel that monogamy is natural for them, AND also have a high sex drive?

 

You weren't asking me, but I feel monogamy is natural for me, and I have a very high sex drive. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[TMifune]

I don't agree with shaming of any kind and I honestly believe it shows a lack of tolerance of differences. This whole "settling down" thing really irks me, nobody should settle for anybody, settling means you accept less than you probably want and less than you might deserve and this is where I think some issues stem from.

 

Except many, many, many people have a deeply skewed version of "what they deserve". You know if you ask 100 people to rate themselves 1-10 on attractiveness more than half will rate themselves between 6-8. If you ask 100 people if they're good drivers, I forget the numbers, but the majority say they're better than average. People have a tragically skewed and ego-driven vision of what they "deserve".

[Fudgie]

Not to mention the part where we try to shame people for not wanting to "settle down" with someone who spent their youth rejecting people exactly like you while bouncing between numerous short-term sexual relationships. Then everyone screams "You can't judge someone for their past" because they want to be able to be careless with the gifts they've been given while their young, and still get a quality partner after they've had their fun.

 

Don't get me started on people who have spent their younger years sleeping around and other such things and then they get older and demand a partner who didn't do that and will accept them fully. HA. I would never be with someone who has had casual sex. Yet there are people out there who think that they 'deserve' someone who hasn't done the things they've done. It boggles my mind. People are warped.

[Hermes]

Seymore.

 

I was just re-reading your OP. You know what. None of us are in any position to throw the first stone (you know, people in glass-houses and all that).

 

I have seen so much, heard so much, and you know what......people are complicated.

[Itchy]

Except many, many, many people have a deeply skewed version of "what they deserve". You know if you ask 100 people to rate themselves 1-10 on attractiveness more than half will rate themselves between 6-8. If you ask 100 people if they're good drivers, I forget the numbers, but the majority say they're better than average. People have a tragically skewed and ego-driven vision of what they "deserve".

 

I can't argue with any of that.

 

Don't get me started on people who have spent their younger years sleeping around and other such things and then they get older and demand a partner who didn't do that and will accept them fully. HA. I would never be with someone who has had casual sex. Yet there are people out there who think that they 'deserve' someone who hasn't done the things they've done. It boggles my mind. People are warped.

 

I notice this nonsense seems to be more prevalent in men. Some men seem to think they can sleep around and their wife must be a virgin or have a very low count. The hypocrisy can leave me feeling a little nauseous from time to time.

 

Seymore.

 

I was just re-reading your OP. You know what. None of us are in any position to throw the first stone (you know, people in glass-houses and all that).

 

I have seen so much, heard so much, and you know what......people are complicated.

 

I beg to differ, I am far from complicated, I am just a little...weird.

[Hermes]

Wasn't referring to you Itchy. Heh heh

 

What I was referring to is the fact that maybe...people who have had adventures in their youth have no right to enter a marriage or long-term partnership? Then there are some who, due to circumstance, may have had lots of adventures in their youth but happen to meet someone who, also due to circumstances, didn't have all those adventures (the wild oats kind...). So, those two should NOT get married enter a long-term partnership.

 

Gimme a break here!!

[IAmFCA]

You weren't asking me, but I feel monogamy is natural for me, and I have a very high sex drive. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

I agree 100%

[Itchy]

Wasn't referring to you Itchy. Heh heh

 

What I was referring to is the fact that maybe...people who have had adventures in their youth have no right to enter a marriage or long-term partnership? Then there are some who, due to circumstance, may have had lots of adventures in their youth but happen to meet someone who, also due to circumstances, didn't have all those adventures (the wild oats kind...). So, those two should NOT get married enter a long-term partnership.

 

Gimme a break here!!

 

I know, I know, I wanted to lighten the mood.

 

People are entitled to their opinions, I don't really care if a woman I meet has had adventures in her youth providing she can present a clean bill of health which is documented by a GP.

 

My only reservation would be can a person that is strictly monogamous be happy with someone who isn't? Can they co-exist? Will there be conflicts of interest? Is the person who has sowed their oats in many fields able to adapt to a different lifestyle? There are more questions that could be asked and I guess the answers will differ from person to person. There is of course only one way to find out and that's by giving the person the opportunity in the first place. They may disappoint or it could turn out be a formidable match, it's just a form of risk management, I guess.

 

I have to confess I probably wouldn't let the woman in fully to my world, I'd be very guarded around her, I don't think I could trust the woman 100% if I am honest, but that can change with time.

[lukeb]

Would you agree that a person could feel that monogamy is natural for them, AND also have a high sex drive?

 

 

I don't actually believe monogamy is natural for anyone but it is easier for some people to maintain than others. Monogamy may feel natural if with someone that you are really into sexually, especially during the initial part of the relationship, "honeymoon" phase. It could feel natural for some people who have a very low sex drive and are just emotionally committed to their partner and sex is not a big deal for them, so they are actually just not interested in sex with anyone. For people with a high sex drive generally speaking the odds are stacked against you, but some people I am sure have beaten the odds and been successful. I would agree that it could be possible.

[lukeb]

In biology there is ample evidence that monogamy is much more difficult to maintain for men than it is for women mainly because of something called the Coolidge effect which is much stronger in males than in females. The Coolidge effect is where sexual arousal is much more pronounced when introduced to new experiences and sex partners. This is actually something someone literally doesn't have control over.

[IAmFCA]

I don't actually believe monogamy is natural for anyone but it is easier for some people to maintain than others. Monogamy may feel natural if with someone that you are really into sexually, especially during the initial part of the relationship, "honeymoon" phase. It could feel natural for some people who have a very low sex drive and are just emotionally committed to their partner and sex is not a big deal for them, so they are actually just not interested in sex with anyone. For people with a high sex drive generally speaking the odds are stacked against you, but some people I am sure have beaten the odds and been successful. I would agree that it could be possible.

 

I am amused that you are confident in your knowledge of what feels natural to others. I have lived a variety of lives and am confident about what feels natural for me. Not what is possible, what feels natural. Monogamy feels the most natural, even over time. At the points in my life I have not chosen monogamy, and it has felt more chaotic and less like my true self. I am a self made woman with both a quiet and checkered past, depending on which past we are talking about. I've testep assumptions, followed my instincts, and analyzed all of it ad nauseum since I was a kid.

 

Given my experience in deciding who and how I want to be, I am hardly willing to cede authority of what feels natural for me to someone else. I know what it means to be monogamous as a natural, easy response.

 

It doesn't feel like giving up sex with strange or others. I know that sex with strange is not nearly as good physically or sexually, not for me.

[lukeb]

I am amused that you are confident in your knowledge of what feels natural to others.

 

Like most I am confident in my beliefs mostly informed through life experience. Beliefs are not the same as knowledge, what we are talking about aren't exactly things you can know. Being successful at monogamy is not necessarily objective proof that this is something that comes naturally to someone so I don't think these are things I can know because there is no way to get objective proof on the subject.

[Batya33]

In biology there is ample evidence that monogamy is much more difficult to maintain for men than it is for women mainly because of something called the Coolidge effect which is much stronger in males than in females. The Coolidge effect is where sexual arousal is much more pronounced when introduced to new experiences and sex partners. This is actually something someone literally doesn't have control over.

 

Of course all people have control over how to react to sexual arousal unless they are drugged. That is the only relevant point -the choice that is made. Otherwise, a rapist (of any gender) could claim that she "literally didn't have control".

[lukeb]

Of course all people have control over how to react to sexual arousal unless they are drugged. That is the only relevant point -the choice that is made. Otherwise, a rapist (of any gender) could claim that she "literally didn't have control".

 

Agreed we have control over how we act to sexual arousal.

[IAmFCA]

So I am losing track of the premise - is it that (1) as mammals we naturally will be aroused by stimuli from multiple sources, and that (2) we want to act on that stimuli, and that therefore, (3) monogamy is unnatural?

[Lester]

Pick any historical point you like, then put yourself in that persons shoes. (The web can take you there, but don't expect kardashina style entertainment.)

 

Stop listening to persons, whom for reasons of desperation, have something they feel they need to sell.

Even if you buy, they'll still be miserable.

[lukeb]

So I am losing track of the premise - is it that (1) as mammals we naturally will be aroused by stimuli from multiple sources, and that (2) we want to act on that stimuli, and that therefore, (3) monogamy is unnatural?

 

I would say although natural/unnatural are somewhat subjective words with vague definitions that yes if you are going to be aroused sexually from different sources that can put a challenge on staying monogamous. There is a reason why people would want to say monogamy is natural for them because it is seem as something virtuous. That may not be proof that monogamy is definitely unnatural, but it is a reason to be skeptical.

[journeynow]

There is a reason why people would want to say monogamy is natural for them because it is seem as something virtuous. That may not be proof that monogamy is definitely unnatural, but it is a reason to be skeptical.

 

No, not about virtuousness, speaking personally. I honestly didn't think it particularly natural until I lived it. Was in a 30 year marriage, and sure there were attractions to others, but my committed relationship overshadowed those, because it was a much bigger more meaningful thing. So from Experience, not theory, I'd say it is realistic for me. Sure, it might have been easy enough to go with the flow of feelings and to cheat, to put attraction and sexuality above all else. Maybe it's semantics, but its about meaningfulness to me, on my terms, and not about virtuosity for the sake of a moral high ground. It's a choice. Simple, but not always easy. Maybe people equate "easy" with "natural" or "realistic"?

[Batya33]

I would say although natural/unnatural are somewhat subjective words with vague definitions that yes if you are going to be aroused sexually from different sources that can put a challenge on staying monogamous. There is a reason why people would want to say monogamy is natural for them because it is seem as something virtuous. That may not be proof that monogamy is definitely unnatural, but it is a reason to be skeptical.

 

I agree with Journeynow's natural/unnatural distinction. If you want to be skeptical, you'll find a reason to be, of course. For me, monogamy makes life much more fun -I get to be married, have a child, be with one person who is my partner in crime and otherwise, etc. I know I wouldn't find casual sex fun or even the opportunity to have more than one partner fun. Not about "virtuosity" for me. I'm not sure I would describe it as natural in general -who cares, really?

 

Lots of challenges come with attaining goals -think of keeping fit/slim, holding down a challenging job, etc. Even having a child is not "natural" in the sense that you have to retrain your body and mind to be up for sleep deprivation, constantly attacked by various bodily fluids/germs ,etc.

[gigiselle]

I think some people are not monogamous, not because it's natural or unnatural. Most people would'nt marry if they didn't believe they could be monogamous. People have different reasons for parting ways from their significant other or spouse. Often those reasons are incapability to compromise, incapability to contain sexual desires, lack of intimacy, ineffective communication, etc....I've been monogamous my entire marriage. I was not monogamous in my previous relationships. I think one has to be ready to commit to a relationship for it to work. Infidelity in my opinion is simply a manifestation that the unfaithful person isn't ready or willing to do the work required and that they'd rather escape.... I read somewhere that relationships are like yards....you have to keep weeding, feeding, watering, sculpting. But--if you realize most yards are the same(having inherent needs and requiring special care) then you decide to care for your own yard. There are people who simply don't require that sort of connection, don't want the upkeep or responsibilities and fare rather well in a condo. You have to know what you want and wether you're willing to put in the work required for success. ...Also--patience is a requirement. I've read married people can fall in and out of love through the their marriages. But--it's that /understanding, hope/faith and commitment that sustains a marriage through turbulent times.

[gigiselle]

Also--people can be in love and still separate or divorce....