I can't believe I voted twice, though I am riding the fence on this one. For humans in general I believe it is unnatural for humans to be monogamous. I am not going to elaborate since I don't know the facts, and I think it's been covered pretty extensively by those who have come before me.
Do you believe that monogamy is natural or unnatural for humans?
10/24/2010
Quote:
Well stated - I don't object to polyamory (sic) - It's just not for me.
Originally posted by
Persephone Nightmare
Sorry for resurrecting a somewhat dead thread, but I came across it and wanted to answer
I don't think that monogamy is unnatural, but I also don't think that poly relationships are unnatural either. I think it's either just a ... more
I don't think that monogamy is unnatural, but I also don't think that poly relationships are unnatural either. I think it's either just a ... more
Sorry for resurrecting a somewhat dead thread, but I came across it and wanted to answer
I don't think that monogamy is unnatural, but I also don't think that poly relationships are unnatural either. I think it's either just a preference or just how people are born (I'm not sure which, or if it's both that play a factor, lol). I don't remember who said it on this thread, but I believe that both mono and poly relationships are just as natural as hetero and homosexual ones (and all the other -sexual relationships out there like pansexuality, asexuality, and etc, lol).
Personally, for me, I thrive on complete and total heterosexual monogamy with Synthetik and couldn't/wouldn't have it any other way. However, I feel that is just how I was made/my preference, and I do not condemn anyone who is otherwise. What works for Synthetik and I, may not work for others, and the reverse is also true, I'm sure less
I don't think that monogamy is unnatural, but I also don't think that poly relationships are unnatural either. I think it's either just a preference or just how people are born (I'm not sure which, or if it's both that play a factor, lol). I don't remember who said it on this thread, but I believe that both mono and poly relationships are just as natural as hetero and homosexual ones (and all the other -sexual relationships out there like pansexuality, asexuality, and etc, lol).
Personally, for me, I thrive on complete and total heterosexual monogamy with Synthetik and couldn't/wouldn't have it any other way. However, I feel that is just how I was made/my preference, and I do not condemn anyone who is otherwise. What works for Synthetik and I, may not work for others, and the reverse is also true, I'm sure less
10/24/2010
i've always thought monogamy wasn't really a natural concept for humans. there has been plurality in marriage pretty much since the beginning of humanity.
many forget that monogamy is a very modern concept and actually doesn't make very much sense for the gene pool or for societal constructs.
many forget that monogamy is a very modern concept and actually doesn't make very much sense for the gene pool or for societal constructs.
10/24/2010
Quote:
I vote other, because I'm not sure what I agree with. I personally don't ever want to be married, I want a polyhome, and it's just what feels natural to me. I'm not sure I believe that we as a whole are one way or another though. I sit on the fence.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
10/25/2010
I think there are people who are hardwired one way and others who are just hardwired differently. I think it's as different and natural as people who love obese partners versus people who desire thin partners. Our differences are just that, differences.
10/25/2010
I think that while humans are animals we're evolved to the point that we don't do most things based on instincts, so I think that monogomy is the same. Monogomy and Polyamory I think are both based on individuals preferences, desires and ability to maintain those lifestyles in a healthy way.
I think that when people find that they cannot stand being faithful to one person as in cheating on the person, or not getting into relationships because they feel the need to sleep around (not in polyamorous relationships where the sex with other people has been agreed upon) that it's more a matter of something else with their mental and emotional makeup, and that it's not based on instincts.
I think that when people find that they cannot stand being faithful to one person as in cheating on the person, or not getting into relationships because they feel the need to sleep around (not in polyamorous relationships where the sex with other people has been agreed upon) that it's more a matter of something else with their mental and emotional makeup, and that it's not based on instincts.
11/06/2010
Quote:
monogamy is a lovely thought, but I believ it was forced and is unnatural. Sex is sex and we are all sexual beings.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
11/13/2010
Quote:
to me it seems to be the natural state for humans to be poly. we are always looking to see what is on the other side of the fence as biological animals.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
but that's just my voice in this, and it's very much not for everyone.
11/28/2010
Humans actually aren't monogamous creatures.. thanks instincts! lol
11/29/2010
Quote:
if we are or we arnt it doesnt really matter wheather we chose to be creachurs of instinct or reson is our own choice....and yes im an opjectivist
Originally posted by
LavenderSkies
Humans actually aren't monogamous creatures.. thanks instincts! lol
12/06/2010
I say it depends on the person!
12/09/2010
Quote:
This. Lol
Originally posted by
LicentiouslyYours
Setting aside the concept of biology as a defense for cheating, I think we are animals and while we certainly have many higher level abilities that make us clearly more than just animals, we do share appetites—lust, thirst, hunger—with animals and
...
more
Setting aside the concept of biology as a defense for cheating, I think we are animals and while we certainly have many higher level abilities that make us clearly more than just animals, we do share appetites—lust, thirst, hunger—with animals and they exist for a reason.
We are designed to want to have sex, eat and drink to ensure survival, but these appetites are both psychological and physical and we really have very little actual control over "wanting."
That said, we certainly do have control over our own behavior and legitimate reasons for choosing not to eat, drink or fuck in a particular situation. That's not to say it isn't difficult to resist doing so and obviously anybody with an extra pound or two is wearing proof that they did not resist temptation on an occasion or two.
What I find really interesting is that giving into the temptation to eat or drink things we want, rather than need isn't viewed nearly as seriously as giving into the temptation to have sex where we shouldn't—while really, at a basic level, it's not all that different.
And now I've gone of to a place where I am just wandering around in my brain and typing it out as I think it..so I'll stop. less
We are designed to want to have sex, eat and drink to ensure survival, but these appetites are both psychological and physical and we really have very little actual control over "wanting."
That said, we certainly do have control over our own behavior and legitimate reasons for choosing not to eat, drink or fuck in a particular situation. That's not to say it isn't difficult to resist doing so and obviously anybody with an extra pound or two is wearing proof that they did not resist temptation on an occasion or two.
What I find really interesting is that giving into the temptation to eat or drink things we want, rather than need isn't viewed nearly as seriously as giving into the temptation to have sex where we shouldn't—while really, at a basic level, it's not all that different.
And now I've gone of to a place where I am just wandering around in my brain and typing it out as I think it..so I'll stop. less
I pretty much agree with the whole we have a choice and are still a type of animals, we are.
01/16/2011
Monogamy is a man-made creation for social, moral, or other reasons. Biologically, we aren't wired for it. I totally believe in emotional monogamy but will never believe we are intended for sexual monogamy. Speaking as someone with a wife and a boyfriend, I do love them both but, in different ways that are very hard to explain. For bisexuals, I believe it is easier to be 'polyamorous' with a male and a female but I think it would be very difficult to have more than one female or more than one male partner where there is an emotional connection.
01/16/2011
Quote:
I've had both male and female partners and the issues aren't any easier than having two same sex partners. The dynamic and problem set is still the same the only difference between now, when I have two male patners and when I had a male and female partner, is my husband and my life partner speak the same language!
Originally posted by
Tidwtrguy
Monogamy is a man-made creation for social, moral, or other reasons. Biologically, we aren't wired for it. I totally believe in emotional monogamy but will never believe we are intended for sexual monogamy. Speaking as someone with a wife and
...
more
Monogamy is a man-made creation for social, moral, or other reasons. Biologically, we aren't wired for it. I totally believe in emotional monogamy but will never believe we are intended for sexual monogamy. Speaking as someone with a wife and a boyfriend, I do love them both but, in different ways that are very hard to explain. For bisexuals, I believe it is easier to be 'polyamorous' with a male and a female but I think it would be very difficult to have more than one female or more than one male partner where there is an emotional connection.
less
Besides if you have both sex partners then one of your partners has a same sex co-partner or (you hope) close friend or acquaintance who shares the same feelings for you!
01/26/2011
I think some people are capable of absolute monogamy and some aren't. It's how the entirety of the situation itself is handled that counts. Not being able to be honest about what you want in a relationship and what you feel is best for you in life is quite damaging and can lead to feelings of suffocation and disinterest and straying. I think it's a very tricky situation and humans shouldn't be compared to animals of the wild kingdom because we do have the ability to rationalize and justify our actions where as procreation and non-monogamy are 100% required for other species to continue to exist. Genetic stagnation is dire to a species. And this probably applied to humans when the first civilizations were appearing but I don't think it applies now because we have the means to control unwanted pregnancies and with 6.2 billion people on the planet, the genetic combinations are endless.
I would definitely like to learn more about it on the scientific side of things so as to remove all emotional responses from my answers in the future.
I would definitely like to learn more about it on the scientific side of things so as to remove all emotional responses from my answers in the future.
01/26/2011
not really sure but it is natural to be attracted to more than one person at a time
01/26/2011
Does monogamy include so-called "serial monogamy"? At any rate, I vote natural, while assuming this means neither inevitable or invariable.
02/01/2011
Quote:
I think we all like different things at different times in our life.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
02/02/2011
Quote:
Just like the United States could never stand capitalism and from the very beginning we've been a mixed socialist economy that regulates trade, has nationalized industries and public works projects
Originally posted by
Gunsmoke
Naked communist - gotta love it - even the poor Russians couldn't stand it for more than 70 years - I say we give it a try - bread lines anyone?
02/02/2011
The heart wants what it wants. If you want to be faithful to one only person, then you will be. If you don't want to be faithful to only one person, then you won't. It's as simple as that.
02/02/2011
Quote:
With respect, I'm going to disagree and say that the difference is that we think we've got free will. I think we're biologically programmed to seek a partner who won't betray us while trying to reproduce with those who will produce the healthiest offspring. I don't even mean that we want to be with those who will produce the best offspring, there are a lot of studies that suggest that what women find attractive as a partner is not necessarily what they find attractive as a sexual partner, at least when they're most fertile.
Originally posted by
Gunsmoke
I'm a little bothered by the concept that we are just specialized animals.
Humans have free-will and a conscience, we choose to do what we do. Using nature as an excuse for betraying a spouse is a weak defense.
If you've made a ... more
Humans have free-will and a conscience, we choose to do what we do. Using nature as an excuse for betraying a spouse is a weak defense.
If you've made a ... more
I'm a little bothered by the concept that we are just specialized animals.
Humans have free-will and a conscience, we choose to do what we do. Using nature as an excuse for betraying a spouse is a weak defense.
If you've made a commitment keep it. If you've changed your mind - why don't you admit it up front instead of sneaking around behind someones back.
In fact, even open relationships are about honesty - so why wouldn't a monogamous relationship be at least as honest.
It's not about nature, it's about making and keeping commitments - INTEGRITY. less
Humans have free-will and a conscience, we choose to do what we do. Using nature as an excuse for betraying a spouse is a weak defense.
If you've made a commitment keep it. If you've changed your mind - why don't you admit it up front instead of sneaking around behind someones back.
In fact, even open relationships are about honesty - so why wouldn't a monogamous relationship be at least as honest.
It's not about nature, it's about making and keeping commitments - INTEGRITY. less
Men, on the other hand, well we all know the old story there. You're programmed to mate as much as possible with as many women as possible. If your parents and society successfully reprogram you, or if the threat of losing the woman you've got is too high, you won't sleep around.
I'm not suggesting that integrity doesn't play into it, I'm just suggesting that the limits of our willpower and integrity are not something we choose, but merely the product of our genes and our upbringing. I'm not using it as an excuse for bad behavior, in fact I think I've been reprogrammed myself. Still, I can't take credit for my own actions any more than I can put the blame on somebody else.
02/02/2011
Quote:
I appreciate your reasoned response. But suggesting that we're just too weak to control biological urges is an inadequate excuse for infidelity.
Originally posted by
That Guy
With respect, I'm going to disagree and say that the difference is that we think we've got free will. I think we're biologically programmed to seek a partner who won't betray us while trying to reproduce with those who will produce
...
more
With respect, I'm going to disagree and say that the difference is that we think we've got free will. I think we're biologically programmed to seek a partner who won't betray us while trying to reproduce with those who will produce the healthiest offspring. I don't even mean that we want to be with those who will produce the best offspring, there are a lot of studies that suggest that what women find attractive as a partner is not necessarily what they find attractive as a sexual partner, at least when they're most fertile.
Men, on the other hand, well we all know the old story there. You're programmed to mate as much as possible with as many women as possible. If your parents and society successfully reprogram you, or if the threat of losing the woman you've got is too high, you won't sleep around.
I'm not suggesting that integrity doesn't play into it, I'm just suggesting that the limits of our willpower and integrity are not something we choose, but merely the product of our genes and our upbringing. I'm not using it as an excuse for bad behavior, in fact I think I've been reprogrammed myself. Still, I can't take credit for my own actions any more than I can put the blame on somebody else. less
Men, on the other hand, well we all know the old story there. You're programmed to mate as much as possible with as many women as possible. If your parents and society successfully reprogram you, or if the threat of losing the woman you've got is too high, you won't sleep around.
I'm not suggesting that integrity doesn't play into it, I'm just suggesting that the limits of our willpower and integrity are not something we choose, but merely the product of our genes and our upbringing. I'm not using it as an excuse for bad behavior, in fact I think I've been reprogrammed myself. Still, I can't take credit for my own actions any more than I can put the blame on somebody else. less
I have no problem with polyamory or even polygamy - it's about honesty. There's nothing in biology to explain away lying and deceit.
If you need sex with more than one partner, don't kid to yourself and lie to your partner - own up to it in advance - not after you've been caught.
02/02/2011
I's kind of a tough question. Thinking of what's natural brings up the question of instincts, relating to animals breeding habits, at least in my mind. Relating to that, we'd want to spread our genetics. I think that it's really a person-to-person thing. Some people are better off monogamous and some are better off in open or poly relationships. It really depends!
02/24/2011
Whatever floats your boat, whatever works for you.
02/24/2011
Quote:
Mamals as a general rule arent monagamous. We can choose to be but the desire not to be is always there.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
02/24/2011
I, personally, think that monogamy is unnatural. I don't think there is anything wrong with it, but I just don't think that it is the way we were built.
I only say this simply because we can go from relationship to relation ship and love a number of different people throughout our lives. The only thing that stops you from loving more than one person (or perhaps simply admitting that you love more than one person) is societies expectation that we only love one person and only commit ourselves to one person at a time. I know that may sound terribly lame blaming it on society, but I really think that's all it is.
I'm in a very happy monogamous relationship (my relationships have always been monogamous), but I do find myself attracted to other people and that's natural. I don't act on those feelings because my partner does not want me to, but if he didn't mind bringing other people into our relationship, there wouldn't be a single reason not to do it.
I only say this simply because we can go from relationship to relation ship and love a number of different people throughout our lives. The only thing that stops you from loving more than one person (or perhaps simply admitting that you love more than one person) is societies expectation that we only love one person and only commit ourselves to one person at a time. I know that may sound terribly lame blaming it on society, but I really think that's all it is.
I'm in a very happy monogamous relationship (my relationships have always been monogamous), but I do find myself attracted to other people and that's natural. I don't act on those feelings because my partner does not want me to, but if he didn't mind bringing other people into our relationship, there wouldn't be a single reason not to do it.
02/24/2011
WHITEMIKE
Quote:
It is unnatural, but it is beneficial. All societies advance quicker when they promote monogamy.
Originally posted by
Tori Rebel
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are
...
more
There have been studies done and there is a large population of people who do not believe that monogamy is a natural function for humans. One of the most popular reasons given is that you very rarely see monogamy in nature and since humans are animals, why should we be wired differently in that capacity.
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
One of the most popular arguments is that humans are not just your typical animals, roaming about in a field or a jungle - that we function at a higher level (this could also be compared to Freud's id/ego/superego structure).
So what do you think? Were humans made to try and procreate as much as possible or are we designed for monogamy? less
03/01/2011
I don't really think natural or unnatural is really relevant anymore, our society has evolved so much since "natural" had any real bearing. Everyone is comfortable with something different, that should be what's natural.
03/01/2011
I think this is a subject you indefinitely cannot generalize with. It depends on the psychology of the individual person. Neither is more or less natural than the other. Some people were made for monogamy/polygamy, while others weren't. In either case, it's not fair to force your partner into something they're uncomfortable with.
You could even look at the subject through a gender specific, evolution stand point. Men developed to want to spread their seed to multiple people for a higher likelihood of passing on their genes, while women have developed to find a partner to that will stand by and help in raising offspring.
You could even look at the subject through a gender specific, evolution stand point. Men developed to want to spread their seed to multiple people for a higher likelihood of passing on their genes, while women have developed to find a partner to that will stand by and help in raising offspring.
03/03/2011
I agree with Gunsmoke
03/04/2011