Do you think monogamy is natural?
- Thread starter MoniqueS
- Start date
magister343
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- INTP
- Enneagram
- stupid system (5w4)
Well, we are much more inclined towards monogamy than any other primates, or almost any other mammals.
I remember reading one study that found that for human males there is a strong correlation between monogamy and intelligence (as well as some other traits that tend to share a correlation with intuitive preferences). The female tendency to prefer monogamy was by contrast uniform across all IQs and socioeconomic demographics. Men with IQ around or below average tend to be averse to monogamy, but male geniuses tend to prefer it at least as much as do women. Since intelligence depends heavily both nature and nurture, it may be that the genes of geniuses don't provide as much of advantage without stable parental relationships.
I believe that I've also read a study implying that women actually lean more towards serial monogamy, and men more inclined to want to stick with a partner long term (whether cheating on her or not).
I remember reading one study that found that for human males there is a strong correlation between monogamy and intelligence (as well as some other traits that tend to share a correlation with intuitive preferences). The female tendency to prefer monogamy was by contrast uniform across all IQs and socioeconomic demographics. Men with IQ around or below average tend to be averse to monogamy, but male geniuses tend to prefer it at least as much as do women. Since intelligence depends heavily both nature and nurture, it may be that the genes of geniuses don't provide as much of advantage without stable parental relationships.
I believe that I've also read a study implying that women actually lean more towards serial monogamy, and men more inclined to want to stick with a partner long term (whether cheating on her or not).
aerosol
American trash
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 9w1
I like this.
Rasmus
Donor
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 6w2
I think Rite is Right
In addition to Lerxst's comment here are some of the animals that are famous for Monogamy (Having one mate for life).
Albatrosses
Bald Eagles
Black Vultures
French Angelfish
Gibbons
Prairie Voles
Swans
Turtle Doves
Wolves
Call me old fashion and delusional but I think it's perfectly natural to dedicate yourself to one mate and with a bit of integrity, devotion, and self control I also think it is quite sustainable.
Last edited:
- MBTI
- INTJ - A
- Enneagram
- 10000
Natural to humans: things we are well suited to, irrespective of particular cultures.
When I met my wife, I felt relief because, now that this important part of my life had been taken care of, I could get on with the other things I needed to do without the distraction of dating and all the effort that entails.
Cheating on one's partner takes a lot of energy and requires subterfuge, secrecy, and dishonesty. This is distracting and uses up a lot of time. If you're intelligent, willing to take risks, and aspire to do things of consequence, having a stable, loving, monogamous relationship provides a haven and comfort. This only enhances your chances for success in whatever field you choose to work.
donkeybals
A Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- enxp
- Enneagram
- 3
Nah, I don't think it's natural. For example why do I watch porn in my basement when my wife is mad at me? Also, why does my wife always look through the window at Javier (our pool boy) whenever his shirt is off? Why do I want to fire Javier but my wife won't let me? Stupid Javier.
Gaze
Donor
- MBTI
- INFPishy
Monogamy doesn't mean you won't be attracted to other people or find other people interesting because it isn't just about feelings, but the actual committment - being in a committment with one person at a time rather than many simultaneously. You an be attracted to someone and not want to be in a relationship with them.
Last edited:
Monogamy is probably a behavior that is culturally determined, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is "unnatural." In terms of evolution, culture has provided humans means to adapt to situations for which biology alone is insufficient. Just think about how the Inuit have survived in the Arctic environment or how Bushmen have survived the Kalahari Desert. If you doubt the powerful impact of culture, refer to the current thread on cannibalism and the extreme disgust you feel at contemplating eating human flesh. There are some cultures that, even today, consume "long pig."
donkeybals
A Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- enxp
- Enneagram
- 3
Maybe so, maybe so. Still, I have my suspiciouns Rite. I mean I did find a pair of under garments in my bedroom, I'm pretty sure they aren't mine cause they have a Mexican flag on them.
- MBTI
- infj
- Enneagram
- ....
Probably because "genius" men tend to be less physically inclined in general and get less action.
paradanmellow
Community Member
- MBTI
- ENTP
- Enneagram
- 6w5
lol, that sounds about right
however, I noticed I'm very active when I'm single and not active at all when I am not (maybe active as an attachment to the other) but don't think monogamy is what defines humans or just women; lately i found out there are many interesting people out there who match and if you end up meeting more than one it's not excluded to love them each for their uniqueness.
the tricky part is choosing one; it would be ideal to be able to move back and forth between them, but without the challenges of a monogamous relationship that holds together despite strains... one has the most chances of remaining essentially alone, immature and idealistic
- MBTI
- infj
- Enneagram
- ....
Totally, I just broke up with my gf, 14 months and nothing to show for it, now she comes by to fuck me and enjoy the ME without any commitment... I think I deserve better.
paradanmellow
Community Member
- MBTI
- ENTP
- Enneagram
- 6w5
enjoying the ME is possible in a relationship too if there's respect, less selfishness and not taking one for granted
yeah, I got my ex be nicer to me after we broke up (this summer) and even I started to see him with better eyes, but it just stays to that, cause you know it was a consumed relationship when you feel free after it's over
DrShephard
Community Member
- MBTI
- INTJ
- Enneagram
- 1w9
I would consider "natural" to mean our basic inclination at a more primal level - and to determine what our natural inclination is, I would look at how we humans have behaved in the past and currently behave.
People, for the most part, date in highschool and form relationships, then break up, then form new ones, then break up. This continues until marriage, where a lot of people still cheat on their spouse and where a large portion end in divorce. From that, I would gather that we would naturally fall in line under serial monogamy. I would count pairings lasting for a long time (until death) as being one particularly long monogamy in a series, and would be aided by social assumptions (monogamy is reinforced by society's judgment) and by that particular person's "style". There are differences everywhere though, so I would consider it quite variable but still falling in line mostly with one style.
As far as cheating goes, I'd be inclined to say that it would be due to trying to replace our natural urges with ones held up by society. Those aspirations would most likely fail in practice, but would still be beneficial to keep up in appearance. However... on a more biological note...
I would attribute major causes of females cheating to wanting to have their cake and eat it too. By that I mean being socially monogamous with the provider type (rich, but kinda lame) for security, while wanting to mate on the side with the 'alpha' guy for genetic inclinations (subconsciously).
For males... I remember reading about how when a couple has a child, then man's testosterone levels drop - that may be a reason that men are less likely to cheat on their spouse once kids are involved if that is, in fact, a true statistic. 'Alpha' type guys would appear to have more testosterone than others, and are more inclined to use force and take what they want - which would include additional partners if they so desired... and many would. However, the drop in testosterone may be linked with a contentment with a single partner and less of a desire to stray from the marriage.
My thoughts on the subject, anyway.
On a side note, I'm particularly interested to see what happens with my dear sister concerning that above point on testosterone reduction. She married a guy who I consider a complete douchebag and just had a kid with him. I'm curious to see if he softens and becomes more of a "nice guy" as the new reality settles in.
People, for the most part, date in highschool and form relationships, then break up, then form new ones, then break up. This continues until marriage, where a lot of people still cheat on their spouse and where a large portion end in divorce. From that, I would gather that we would naturally fall in line under serial monogamy. I would count pairings lasting for a long time (until death) as being one particularly long monogamy in a series, and would be aided by social assumptions (monogamy is reinforced by society's judgment) and by that particular person's "style". There are differences everywhere though, so I would consider it quite variable but still falling in line mostly with one style.
As far as cheating goes, I'd be inclined to say that it would be due to trying to replace our natural urges with ones held up by society. Those aspirations would most likely fail in practice, but would still be beneficial to keep up in appearance. However... on a more biological note...
I would attribute major causes of females cheating to wanting to have their cake and eat it too. By that I mean being socially monogamous with the provider type (rich, but kinda lame) for security, while wanting to mate on the side with the 'alpha' guy for genetic inclinations (subconsciously).
For males... I remember reading about how when a couple has a child, then man's testosterone levels drop - that may be a reason that men are less likely to cheat on their spouse once kids are involved if that is, in fact, a true statistic. 'Alpha' type guys would appear to have more testosterone than others, and are more inclined to use force and take what they want - which would include additional partners if they so desired... and many would. However, the drop in testosterone may be linked with a contentment with a single partner and less of a desire to stray from the marriage.
My thoughts on the subject, anyway.
On a side note, I'm particularly interested to see what happens with my dear sister concerning that above point on testosterone reduction. She married a guy who I consider a complete douchebag and just had a kid with him. I'm curious to see if he softens and becomes more of a "nice guy" as the new reality settles in.
SpilledMilk
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- ENTP
- Enneagram
- 667
Evolutionary biology, if you accept its methods as an explanation for what is "natural", suggests that humans are generally monogamous, but also have frequent desires for extra-relationship affairs which maximize sexually reproductive fitness. This is based on a branch of the Red Queen Hypothesis.
In a nutshell, men desire to impregnate as many women as possible (having been equipped to do so). However, the flip side is that men, having increased intelligence and socialization, also subscribe to the view of rearing a child by investing quality time into that child. Men also enjoy a steady supply of sex from a monogamous partner. Monogamy also allows men to monitor their mates for cuckoldry.
Women ideally desire men who are both sexually fit as well as good parents. These traits tend to be dichotomous; a good seducer (implying a child will tend to be more fit to pass on many copies of their own genes -- and their mothers' genes by extension) isn't a good provider, and vice-versa (a good worker is obedient but probably not a ladies' man). So when women cheat, they tend to cheat on their provider (but boring) husbands with seducers, and allow their provider husbands to raise a child that is not really their own. Women's focus is much more on quality and less so on quantity as opposed to males (sperm vs. egg quantity/opportunity costs).
These are obviously very simplified explanations, but are one step in enhancing this discussion with scientific discovery. I'm coming from a biological perspective, and though culture and socialization are originally born of biology, they have taken a shape of their own which also influence the value of monogamy and competes with basic biological drives.
In a nutshell, men desire to impregnate as many women as possible (having been equipped to do so). However, the flip side is that men, having increased intelligence and socialization, also subscribe to the view of rearing a child by investing quality time into that child. Men also enjoy a steady supply of sex from a monogamous partner. Monogamy also allows men to monitor their mates for cuckoldry.
Women ideally desire men who are both sexually fit as well as good parents. These traits tend to be dichotomous; a good seducer (implying a child will tend to be more fit to pass on many copies of their own genes -- and their mothers' genes by extension) isn't a good provider, and vice-versa (a good worker is obedient but probably not a ladies' man). So when women cheat, they tend to cheat on their provider (but boring) husbands with seducers, and allow their provider husbands to raise a child that is not really their own. Women's focus is much more on quality and less so on quantity as opposed to males (sperm vs. egg quantity/opportunity costs).
These are obviously very simplified explanations, but are one step in enhancing this discussion with scientific discovery. I'm coming from a biological perspective, and though culture and socialization are originally born of biology, they have taken a shape of their own which also influence the value of monogamy and competes with basic biological drives.
