why are humans drawn to monogamy?
 

Why are people drawn to having sex with only one person for the rest of their lives? Why do we want one exclusive person? Is this something we have been conditioned for, or is it in our genes?

When I think about it, I dont have just one friend. I have lots of friends, and I'm friends with all of them for different reasons. Why dont humans seek our sexual and romantic partners in the same way? Why do we reserve these functions for only one person? I mean, dont humans require the same sexual and romantic variety as they do for friendship?

Tell me your thoughts.

I believe monogamy has a stabilizing effect on a civilization. Two people marry each other and have children, providing a basic structure for the rest of the civilization. Without monogamy, we'd probably have never evolved into what we have today.

Well, humans aren't monogamous by definition; there are many cultures where polygyny or polygamy are practiced (not just the mormons!), though the majority do believe in monogamy. The idea that monogamy makes a culture 'stronger' is open to debate, but most professional anthropologists disregard it.

If you take an evolunistic view of psychology, being monogamous is the best way to ensure survival, especially from a female's standpoint. If your man is only with you, then he is only focusing on providing for you and your family. The more other people he's with, the greater the chances he's going to have to spread out the support you're getting.

In supporting amonkie’s argument, I feel biologically men are designed to be with as many “mates” as possible, thus the huge amount of sperm for males and so few amount of eggs for the female. As far as monogamy bringing stability to our culture or evolution, I can see it both ways; yes because of building a foundation for the family structure, but no because we see so many people cheating or leaving their spouse.

This is a great topic you’ve brought up. I will discuss this with more people and see how they feel about it.

simply put, "WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN"

Well I know quite a few of my guy friends who would consider seeing other girls while they are currently involved with someone. Aparently for them they are not really drawn to monogamy. For me, however, I have no desire at all to be with anyone else other than my girlfriend. We are in love with each other, and neither one of us could bare the thought of the other one having sexual relations with someone else. We're not saying that we are going to be together forever - you have to be realistic about that kind of stuff when you're 18, but both of us care too much about each other to want to be with anyone else.

surprisingly though, there are some animals taht are monogamous. penguins, some other birds, i think some apes and monkey's are, and some insects (although that's usually because the female kills teh male after mating :)).

just something to think about... monogamy could be a social construct, but it could also be more hardwired in.

The value of monogamy is determined by the value a society places on monogamy. It isn't inherent, it's just currently more advantageous in our culture.

Maybe because there's about a 1:1 ratio of men to women?

If there were 1:100 ratio of men to women, I doubt we would be monogamous.

you never know... we have almost 1:1 right now, and people choose same sex relationships... maybe at 1:100, same sex would just be the prodominant type.

Because we're gluttons for punishment.

Evolutionary psychologists would disagree with you, saying that those who live in very secluded areas away from a "society" structure and influence would still choose monogamy based on inherent and biological influences.

in many cases if the animals were monagamous, their species would die out, I don't think humans will have that problem any time soon.

There's many that would say the same is true of human females, whole they may noy physically kill the male, they surely suck all the life out of them :D

Humans are monagamous more than likely is because society tells us we should be. Financially it'd be touch supporting more than one family, but what's actually wrong with polygamy, Barney says sharing is caring.... As loing as all concerned parties agree.... who really cares.

Monogamy is a concept created by religion and society. We aren't drawn to it naturally. We're just as animalistic as the next species.

/begin slightly off topic rant

not to sound like a square (though using this term from 1962 probably insures it) I've known many people who are living in polygamous or "open" relationships and while i have no problem with this in theory it often seems like the individuals advocating that we leave monogamy behind are just people who can't make a relationship work, no matter how many people are involved.

/end slightly off topic rant

I don't believe that humans are inately monogamous or polygamous but that we develop sexual relationships based on the patterns we have been indoctrinated to. since our society has set monogamy as the norm for good or for ill the majority of people emulate that pattern.

From an evolutionary standpoint animals choose monogamy or promiscuity based on their which has a more positive effect on the ability to continue one's genes. Humans do too. If we had a society in which promiscuity is advantageous, than we'd tend towards promiscuity.

In some ways, the promiscuous have a distinct advantage over the monogamous in majority monogamous societies. The advantage lies in the fact that it is very possible to for a male, by way of adultury, to trick another male into raising his child. This is quite common in birds, and probably less common in humans.

There's a great book on the subject called "Why Is Sex Fun?: The Evolution of Human Sexuality" -- by Jared M. Diamond. I highly recomend it.

Interesting point. I wouldn't have thought of that. Thanks for the post.

Maybe the 1:1 ratio is this way because we're monogamous...

If we were all polygamous maybe the ratio would be different.

Really? Wouldn't a female survive better with two males taking care of her, rather than one?

In the past, you would be correct. But I don't think monogamy is most advantageous today, at least not from the standpoint of individuals.

Correct. As I understand, there are biological imperatives for both monogamy and promiscuity, depending on the situation. Though very, very, few species are monogamous. And few human cultures are completely monogamous throughout history.

I think monogamy is useful for raising children. But because of contraception now ideas, not all relationships are going to involve children. If there are no children, what is the point of monogamy?

In my various intellectual meandering, I have come to the conclusion that polyamory makes the most sense nowadays. Check out "The Ethical Slut" by Easton and Liszt, and "Against Love" by Laura Kipnis. Andhere is an interesting article on polyamory. I am happy to explain some of these basic arguments and the problems with monogamy...

If anyone's watched Sally Jesse, Montel, Ricki Lake, Jerry Springer you know that this happens alot more than you think. :)

"I done know that he be the fat'er of my baby, I lovd him that one night, than I neve' saw him again. buts I know he be my baby's daddy!"

I think we are hardwired with the need to stay in a monogamous relationship, through years of Religion, social exiles, and threats of damnation if we stray from the "pack" (society’s social norms). 200 years ago you could have been burned at the stake for being "promiscuous" outside the normal 2.5 kids, white picket fence, husband and wife family. Now-a-days with the AIDS scare and kids being forced-fed absence from 3rd grade to graduation, it's harder to see that kind of relationship appearing in society.

I think the harder society presses down on keeping the number of sexual partners you have, the bigger the backlash. Look at the 20th century, from the days of the Flapper's in the 20's and 30's, to the repressed social life of the 50's, to the flower power and free love for all of the 60's and 70's, to back to the 90's and today.

We also need to think about how society views the number of sexual partners for each sex. Males are more inclined to "get away" with having many different sexual mates. He's looked at as "cocksure", a "player", or a pimp. He's not looked down upon for his lifestyle, he's even envied for it (Man, I wish I could hook with girls like so-and-so does, he gets all the girls). Women on the other hand shouldn't have as many sexual partners as their male counterparts, as it is looked at as "trashy", sluttish, whoreish, or made to look like she will never "settle down". Women who fill "free" with their sexual activates don't feel they are being "bad", but feel it's just their way of life. Society expects men to "sow their wild oats" and women to wait until they find the right man to settle down with and be with him till death do them part (or the courts).

It's really a battle within ourselves, society vs. nature. Our social norms fighting against our own sexual energy and cravings.

For me, I never really liked sex without emotional attachment and I've never been able to share my feelings easily so monagamy is the only way I can go. Also, I'm not a "regular joe" sort of guy so finding a woman I can get along with and can get along with me proved to be a trying proposition. At age thirty five I finally found someone I can stand to be around so monagamy it is for me!

Monogamy is definitely enculturated. There are all sorts of personal and ethical reasons for it--all of which are inculcated through cultural means. Monogamy is "right". It's "good". It's "how it was meant to be".

Except that if you look at lots of other cultures, polygamy and/or polyandry are very much the norm. I grew up in Salt Lake City, I can say a few things about this. The early Mormons didn't experience polygamy as transgressive in the slightest. It was an expression of their religious beliefs--a man was saving those women's souls by marrying them! It was the right thing to do!

In my own life, I once believed strongly in monogamy, and now I no longer do. I'm in an incredible, amazing, passionate relationship with my wife, and we are in a wonderful, fulfilling, enriching friendship-and-sexual-relationship with another couple. While I definitely don't recommend it for everybody, it's working pretty damn well for us.

I can say this, though: deeply ingrained cultural beliefs can be difficult and painful to peel away. The layers of jealousy and struggle that the four of us have broken through individually and collectively are amazing. Usually it's one of the girls... though the most recent one was me. :rolleyes:

Monogamy/polygamy are interesting things to explore. What hasn't been mentioned is all the other human societies that allow polygamy and relationships like that, are all just for the men. I don't know of any human societies that allow women to be polygamous and marry more than one man. Can't wait for that sexual revolution!
There are biological reasons why it's more logical for men to have multiple partners and women to be content with just one. So maybe that is the evolutionary logic. It just makes me wonder what the point of marriage is once you start having relationships that encompass multiple partners for both the husband and wife. What remains special between the one you marry and yourself if you have that kind of relationship with several women/men? I'm not saying that in a derrogatory way, either. Maybe we are moving toward a marriage-less, polyamoric society?

Intimacy. I'd like to one day know the ins and outs of one single person and know them completely and vice versa. This cant happen with multiple partners.

I'd also like to spend the rest of my life with someone i'm 100% comfortable with. I think you get where im going with this.

Some people have said that monogamy is the only way to have intimacy and emotional attachment. Ummm, why would that be so?

I would think that a long term polyamorous relationship (like the one ratbastid describes) could be infinitely more intimate than the type of serial monogamy that goes on in mainstream culture. Neither marriage nor monogamy guarantee intimacy. As I understand it, intimacy is based on the connection between two people. Why would it have anything to do with whether they had additional partners at the same time? It is perfectly possible to be intimate with multiple close friends. Why should it be different when sex is thrown into the equation? Meeting new friends doesn't make it harder to be intimate with the friends I already have...

I think its not so much as sex with one person, but more of just BEING with someone for the rest of our lives. And because of our society, being with someone (usually) means being monogomous.

If you're into Science Fiction and have a generally open or positive mind about polygamy, you should read some Robert Heinlein. Most of his books involve some sort polygamous relationship that is open, kind and loving. Obviously, not reality, but a good read.

Like communism, its probably good on paper, but is VERY difficult to implement with human nature in the way...

I saw a thing on tv a long time ago about a polyandry culture in northern india (not sure exactly where), where the norm is for a woman to marry a man and how ever many brothers he has. As long as she visits every man each night, they are all happy.

As you can imagine, four adults pooling their resources granted them a large house (in 3rd world means), a high degree of stability, and there always being a father on hand.

One of the more interesting parts about this relationship, is that the three brothers/husbands claim all of the children equally.

You're right, Jizz. I'd never heard of this before in humans, only in the animal world a couple of times.

But, I think my point is still reasonable- polyandry is VERY rare and polygyny is still the most practiced form of polygamy and historically always has been. I read somewhere that it's on the up swing, too.

I don't think monogamy should be the only option and I def don't think bigamy should be illegal. Let people sort out their sex lives how they want!

Marriage is a legal arrangement, with all sorts of tax benefits that go with it. I could just imagine the tax nightmare when someone with 4 wives and 22 kids tries to file. Ok, it's this deduction for 1 wife, this deduction for 2 wives...

If marriage is no longer a legal arrangement, where people no longer get a tax benefit, and other benefits (Gays and lesbians want the legally recognized marriage), then how can you have more than one spouse per person.?

I say don't change anything with the tax issues: if you have one wife that's all the tax nightmare you have to worry about. What I'm saying is if the people in the relationship are all OK with it, don't make it a crime for them to all be married.

It is my personal belief that monogamy is more desirable than polygamy. Just because in nature most animals have more than one mate doesn't mean that we humans should do the same. Yes humans are animals... but what differentiate us from other animals is the fact that we're capable of rational thoughts and actions that go against instincts if need be.

Maybe it's more profitable for animals to have several mates to increase their chances of producing as many offsprings as possible; but it doesn't have to be that way for us humans though.

I agree. That is why I am for polyamory, not monogamy. I think that many of the current beliefs upholding monogamy are irrational. Here are the obvious problems I see with it:

Everyone has different wants and desires, and everyone has something different to offer. It is very rare for two people to be able to satisfy each other's needs (for sex, intimacy, or other things), especially not for a whole lifetime. That is because people are different, and don't always completely interlock. Some people solve this through casual sex, one night stands, and "hooking up." These solutions are all well and good, but they don't necessarily foster intimacy. Other people solve this problem through monogamy. Unfortunately, because their desires do not match up, they may become needy and try to pressure the other person.

For instance, say a woman in a relationship wants to have a lot more oral sex than the guy does. She might end up bugging him a lot, or suppressing her own desires. Either way, when the desires of monogamous people don't completely interlock, there will be inevitable conflict. She must compromise, and make a choice: would she rather stay with the guy (who may be a perfect partner in all other areas) or break up with him and try to find another guy who likes oral? A much better solution to this problem would be for her to stay with the original guy and continue the relationship with him, AND see another guy who is interested in oral sex. That way, she doesn't feel denied, and her boyfriend doesn't feel pressured.

Long term pair-bonding is a perfectly way to handle relationships. However, it is not the only valid, or preferable relationship structure for everyone. Some people might be more comfortable with more casual interactions. It depends on the type of attraction between them, and how their desires match up. Therefore, I think it is silly that monogamy is considered the default, and only acceptable way to handle relationships.

Forcing people to have only one lover at a time is as silly as forcing people to have only one close friend at a time, or forcing a country to trade with only one country at a time. Polyamory is like free trade: everyone gets more of everything.

I agree about the differing needs deal. As a bisexual, sometimes I'm asked, "Which do you prefer?" That's just way to broad to answer. Everyone even within genders brings something different to the table. You can't just pick a favorite star.

In the hetero world, I know a guy that has a big problem. He cheats on his girlfriend. Now that doesn't mean he doesn't care for her. He loves his girlfriend deeply, and they make love. The only problem is, he loves her too much to fuck her. Whenever he cheats, it's always with the same German exchange student. He pulls her hair, punches her in the face, calls her a Nazi bitch, she digs her nails in--basically some hard fucking.

This guy needs to make love and needs to make hate. He can't do it with the same person. What does a guy do in such a situation?

Counselling.

Real men don't get couseling.

word. jail cells cost less.

THIS JUST IN!!

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/sci...ul.voles.reut/

Wow- who knew they would find the 'fickle' gene? Very cool article, ratbastid.