rabbit_write_12 (mp3 download 1.6mb)
I talk fast. Here is the text.
With the book “Sex at Dawn” coming out there a light is suddenly shed on research that shows humans are not naturally monogamous. From evolutionary psychology, we know that men are naturally non-monogamous, their urge being to spread as much seed as possible. But it was long believed that women were inherently monogamous, however, not exactly right. We now know that women are actually hypergamous by nature. Which means they are with one partner at a time, but are always looking for a trade-up. A partner who will bring home a bigger boar, who has a bigger cave.
So. Humans are naturally non monogamous. Most of us in relationships are going against our biology. Does this mean that you should just stop what you are doing, open your relationship up?
An easy answer is “it’s just biology, and you can overcome your biology.” This is true. I mean, we’ve been overcoming it for years, right. But I’m not sure that I can argue it has worked out too well. I think that it is important to look at what we know about our natural behavior, especially when culture dictates against it.
I don’t think that monogamy by default is good. I think that when you enter a relationship this is something that needs to be explored, questioned so you can find where you each are.
But, I think in order for non-monogamy to work you have to be ready for it, emotionally and psychologically. Personally, I don’t know that I could psychologically handle my husband having a girlfriend. The thing is that choosing non monogamy might suite your biology but is going against culture, against the world that has been impressed on you, against your thought patterns. I don’t think non-monogamy is any easier an answer. It takes a ridiculous amount of strength in self, and strength in your relationship. And further, blindly choosing non-monogamy can be just as damaging, if not more, than monogamy by default.
But what grounds a good relationship is not monogamy or non monogamy. Relationships are built on some basic tenets and virtues of how you approach life and how you will approach each other. Honesty, communication, self knowledge. I think for the most part, this stays solid, but the rest needs to be fluid.
It is normal to be attracted to other people. In my relationship, because we value honesty, I tell my partner when i feel attracted to other people, and when this attraction worries me. It keeps us on top of where we are, and what we feel is okay.
My partner and I are monogamous. Now, when one says something like “my partner and I are monogamous” we have this thing, where we think it has to mean forever. But just because something works for you now doesn’t mean it always will.I think we need to be more fluid in our relationships, and allow for change as we naturally change. Keep an open mind, whether you are monogamous or non.
6 Comments
I had actually, VERY casually, dated married polyamorous men before I began even dating monogamous men.
Which, in retrospect, at 20-21, was kind of dumb.
But it made me really open-minded about non-monogamous relationships, and it also made me know myself “in that way” very early on.
I’m incredibly jealous. I don’t like the idea of another woman being “before me.” Maybe it’s my Cancerian nature, the fact I’m a type 4, whatever. But it showed me that I’m monogamous by nature, because the thought of my partner having another woman whose needs may be met before my own doesn’t make me happy.
That being said, I know that as I grow older…things may change. I doubt they will with this partner, and I plan on being with him a long time.
Ashe,
Ohh, thanks for sharing your experience. I thought about mentioning, as I was recording, that maybe non-monogamy is just hands down not for everyone. I’m not sure, since there is the biology argument, but this just might be true. That for certain people, given our psychology and the patterns imprinted upon us since childhood that non-monogamy would just not work out.
I do love that you are so lovely and fluid about that answer though!
It doesn’t surprise me that humans aren’t monogamous biologically… but I guess for me, who kind of felt (and still does sometimes) asexual until I met my current partner, I feel it’s easy for me to be monogamous, or more natural for me to be. The hypergamy aspect is really interesting… I wonder if that explains why I always want the best out of my relationship and wouldn’t settle for less (and if I found something better I would probably move on).
I’d say that most humans are non-monogamus (90%), some are naturally monogamous (8%) and very few are asexual (2%).
Just about everyone I know has an easy time falling for other people and acting on it, but they have a serious issue with their partner doing the same. This double standard is why so many people choose to be sneaky.
We need not be afraid of who we truly are, and who are partners truly are. Face the fear. Acknowledge it, and replace the fear in your heart with love. The process took me years to work through. It’s not easy, but it is so worth it.
Hello! Lurker here popping out of the wood works – I love every post of yours but I did want to point out a blog post I came across last week that you might be interested in about the author of Sex at Dawn: http://enagoski.wordpress.com/2010/08/16/before-you-read-sex-at-dawn/
Also, though I haven’t read the book, I have read some of the studies he sites about why humans are not naturally monogamous, and I have to say, for every study that supports his theory, there’s one that turns it on its head.
My belief (and I’m just a fourth year psychology student in college, so bear with me) is that humans are IN GENERAL in fact a monogamous species. Since women don’t demonstrate physically many outward signs of menstruation (and therefore, their fertility) there’s no cues for men to know when they are able to get a female pregnant. Therefore, it actually increases the chances of impregnation for men if they stick around with one female, having sex consistently and therefore insuring that eventually the woman will be fertile. There is actually a correlation between greater signs of fertility/being in heat in primates to polygamy. Gibbons are a monogamous primate species in which the female doesn’t show signs of fertility.
Of course, that doesn’t mean EVERY human is destined to be monogamous, and your post is certainly very thought provoking in regards to polyamory in general, regardless of biology. But I thought you struck me as the kind of person that might appreciate two sides to a theory, and I really just couldn’t help myself
I have a hard time understanding how scientific research takes this on. Saying that humans are naturally monogomous is like saying that we’re hard-wired for the publicly traded corporation. Monogomy is a system for organizing human relationships, often a great one, but not one that can be genetically predetermined any more than one’s political beliefs.
This is becuase, at a core level, monogomy isn’t about sex, it’s about time. Monogomy means that you only fuck one person AND that you prioritize that person in your life and in your schedule. Without that prioritization monogomy is meaningless as a concept, whereas you can take away the sex (as many asexual people do) and it still pretty much works.
Should you decide to spend time with your lover as opposed to your friends, another lover, your broader community or yourself? That’s the question at the heart of monogomy. And (though extremely fascinating) the cognitive functions that answer these sorts if questions about time are far more complicated than our simple genetic predisposition for salt. They are swathed in layers of personal preference, individual history and cultural context.
3 Trackbacks
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by rabbitwhite, Jeff Tobin. Jeff Tobin said: "So Humans Aren't Naturally Monogamous, Now What?" http://ow.ly/2rYFt by @rabbitwrite [...]
[...] my post about how monogamy isn’t natural, tackling where to go from there? The always stimulating [...]
[...] So, Humans Aren’t Naturally Monogamous. Now What? [Rabbit Write] [...]