Why Monogamy Is Ridiculous

[KilljoyKlown]

Polygamy requires more resources than does monogamy. For example, the various aspects of the social welfare system, which supports mother's raising children without fathers, is due to polygamy. The males in the inner city use this approach and have children scattered overwhere. The only way to run an experiment to see which is better (monogamy versus polygamy) in an objective way, is to remove all the extra funding handicap so the two orientations can be compared in a controlled way. I trying to address which is objectively better and not subjectively better; rational vs irrational.

Don't get me wrong, if one is young and enjoys playing the field, this is normal and natural, especially for the males. But this behavior also has pitfalls that will need other social mops to help clean up the mess, so we can create the subjective illusion this is better. For example, part of the above objectivity test would be to take away all medications and treatments for STD's, so we can have a controlled experiment for an objective comparison. Another subjective data stacker has to do with abortion. We need to remove this option, temprarily, for the objectivity test, so the results aren't slanted subjectively using the handicap of extra social cost.

Liberal social illusions always have extra costs. Once these costs are hidden by making them appear to be a routine part of culture, the magic trick is ready. The young people are not well educated by liberal public schools and can't see the game that they are programmed to ignore. We need to take magic out of education in bring in science.

Don't get me wrong, there is an added excitement in polygamy that one will not get as easily within monogamy, except near the beginning when both are about the same in terms of novelty. There is also an excitement one will get with drugs and alcohol one won't get with a burger and coke. That excitement is objective, but is only part of the equation, more geared toward the thrill of the individual. But the total objective needs to add all the other social costs to the excitement.

Maybe a full comparision would be to making all drugs legal, and then asking the liberal magicians to make an illuson that says doing this is the new social standard for excitement and fun. It is all natural since rats and apes in tests like alchohol and crack.

This magic might work for the individual, at least in the short term. But there will be an extended cost that will spill over into culture. If we could get liberal big government to foot that bill so this secondary social cost is disguised as just part of normal business, the new drug standard may look like a good idea. But we will need to use the liberal science magic to alter the objective equation. Then the young people we call it natural human.

Let's see if I understand what you are saying. All things lose there excitement over time. I always wondered what the attraction of having a large concubine was? Keep it new and exciting every night.

Can you imagine never having a woman that knows what you like? (Bet that gets old too!)

 

[KilljoyKlown]

A lot of men seem to find it stressy...poor guys

These days it's rare to find a woman willing to offer sympathy when it's needed. Thanks.

 

[scheherazade]

That cracked me up. :bravo:

What about nonmonogamy affairs? Which is more damaging?

Read on (emotional affairs) in Wikipedia.

You raise a very good point with the topic of emotional affairs. Apparently the internet and exactly such involvement is being cited more frequently in divorce statistics, as people are disengaging in the three dimensional world and engaging with the virtual medium.

My interest in this medium is several, both for professional and personal reasons. I work both graveyard shift and an office job, and my awake/sleep cycles are always moving, making the participation at most social events a physical impossibility.

I research many topics related to health, nutrition, night shift stress disorder and psychology and one element of virtual relationships I find quite surprising.....

People engage with other people at an emotional level, even though they have never met and the persona each is portraying may in fact be fictional, as is frequently 'discovered' at some point.

This fascinates me, as it is something that I can test and experience for myself.

Staring at the screen and wondering why the words of someone half a world away have the power to injure or boost one's mood is a very interesting aspect of the processes of the brain/body to me.

I want to better understand this, that I can avoid being manipulated, and not send the wrong type of signals to others who may be reading my words, without the benefits of intonation and body language to verify my meaning.

 

[Anti-Flag]

For some women getting pregnant by one man then marring the provider makes a lot of sense. You do make a good point about the trust issue. Coming clean after the fact doesn't make a great deal of sense, does it.

Hence the DNA test requirement at least. But personally I think it does make sense to come clean, because that person is obviously not capable of monogamy, and they obviously do not love the person the way they are being loved. It is exceptionally unfair and selfish for them to remain, and they clearly aren't entirely happy with it!
Of course really they should be ending the relationship before that stage. People need to learn to be honest, with themselves as well as others. Perhaps then there will be less bitter people and slagging off of the opposite sex. :shrug:

 

[KilljoyKlown]

Hence the DNA test requirement at least. But personally I think it does make sense to come clean, because that person is obviously not capable of monogamy, and they obviously do not love the person the way they are being loved. It is exceptionally unfair and selfish for them to remain, and they clearly aren't entirely happy with it!
Of course really they should be ending the relationship before that stage. People need to learn to be honest, with themselves as well as others. Perhaps then there will be less bitter people and slagging off of the opposite sex. :shrug:

From a woman's point of view, they find a man they want to have a child with, but know he will never be a provider. So they find another man that they know will be a good provider and marry him at about the same time as they get pregnant by man number one. They now dump man number one and live happily ever after with man number two.

I'm not sure what you would call a woman like that, but they do exist and your stat of 15% would indicate maybe more than I thought before.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

You raise a very good point with the topic of emotional affairs. Apparently the internet and exactly such involvement is being cited more frequently in divorce statistics, as people are disengaging in the three dimensional world and engaging with the virtual medium.

My interest in this medium is several, both for professional and personal reasons. I work both graveyard shift and an office job, and my awake/sleep cycles are always moving, making the participation at most social events a physical impossibility.

I research many topics related to health, nutrition, night shift stress disorder and psychology and one element of virtual relationships I find quite surprising.....

People engage with other people at an emotional level, even though they have never met and the persona each is portraying may in fact be fictional, as is frequently 'discovered' at some point.

This fascinates me, as it is something that I can test and experience for myself.

Staring at the screen and wondering why the words of someone half a world away have the power to injure or boost one's mood is a very interesting aspect of the processes of the brain/body to me.

I want to better understand this, that I can avoid being manipulated, and not send the wrong type of signals to others who may be reading my words, without the benefits of intonation and body language to verify my meaning.

I think if I was in a healthy relationship and knew my significant other was playing on the Internet with total strangers who had fictitious names and no way of knowing where in the world they are for sure. Would I care? Probably not. But suppose this activity started when in a healthy relationship and then that relationship hit a rough patch?? Now I might start to care, as I might perceive it to be a threat, when actually nothing has changed as far as the Internet goes.

You might think I was being a bit insecure, but after you've been burned a couple of times or more it's hard not to get a little paranoid during those rough patches. That's called baggage and everyone has it, but even honest people are sometimes reluctant to declare all the baggage they carry with them.

Now if you have an Internet relationship that goes bad. What's the worst that can happen (assuming false names and not knowing where they live)?

 

[iceaura]

For example, part of the above objectivity test would be to take away all medications and treatments for STD's, so we can have a controlled experiment for an objective comparison. Another subjective data stacker has to do with abortion. We need to remove this option, temprarily, for the objectivity test, so the results aren't slanted subjectively using the handicap of extra social cost.

In the first place, that's been tried - that was normal life, for hundreds of years. Some of the consequences were a high rate of death and injury during abortion, and syphilis spreading as a plague and major cause of death.

In the second: Why are we removing (in theory - never accomplished in practice, btw) all the social support or recovery means for one strategy's possible effects, and not the other's?

Are you planning to keep the account books - for the costs - in similarly biased fashion? We know, for example, that social pressures and punishments for the non-monogamous increase the frequency of abortions and STDs. Are you planning to maintain your monogamy group without the social pressures and punishments?

 

[scheherazade]

I think if I was in a healthy relationship and knew my significant other was playing on the Internet with total strangers who had fictitious names and no way of knowing where in the world they are for sure. Would I care? Probably not. But suppose this activity started when in a healthy relationship and then that relationship hit a rough patch?? Now I might start to care, as I might perceive it to be a threat, when actually nothing has changed as far as the Internet goes.

You might think I was being a bit insecure, but after you've been burned a couple of times or more it's hard not to get a little paranoid during those rough patches. That's called baggage and everyone has it, but even honest people are sometimes reluctant to declare all the baggage they carry with them.

Now if you have an Internet relationship that goes bad. What's the worst that can happen (assuming false names and not knowing where they live)?

You raise some very valid concerns, KJ, and in no manner would I consider them to be an expression of insecurity, especially if one has experienced a relationship with a significant other who had been anything less than faithful to commitments made and shared.

My significant other has his own web page and is also on Facebook to keep in touch with family and to track down long lost high school friends.

My preference is the Science forums and the chess forum. I share comments with him about the personalities I am posting to and he is my executive assistant in that he finds many interesting links that I can post to the threads and topics that I am discussing with others, possibly making me appear more knowledgeable than I actually am,.........or not, lol.... I most often give credit to those who find links that I subsequently post.

I have been rather startled to learn that a considerable number of people are using the medium of the internet to scope out persons that they may be considering a future relationship with as an economically viable and safe way of 'meeting' people. I suppose it's as good a starting point as any, just that it had not occurred to me that persons were shopping for relationships WHILE they were presently in one. :bugeye:

My teaching was that there is usually a 'mourning period' after a relationship gone asunder, a time to reflect and contemplate on what new direction one should embark upon.

Apparently I am not in touch with today's 'fast paced' physical and emotional lifestyle.

And that's just the way I intend to keep it. I have never been 'mainstream' and unlikely to change anytime soon......

 

[river]

isn't being faithfull to just one partner about being best friends with each other

I think so

 

[scheherazade]

isn't being faithfull to just one partner about being best friends with each other

I think so

You have touched on a very important aspect of long-term relationships, river.
Friendship is perhaps the most important aspect of an intimate relationship, although too many people fail to realize and develop their relationship to it's full potential. As one friend of mine remarked, you can only spend so much of your time between the sheets, lol.....it's the rest of the hours that define the relationship and determine whether it evolves or stagnates.

 

[river]

Originally Posted by river
isn't being faithfull to just one partner about being best friends with each other

I think so

You have touched on a very important aspect of long-term relationships, river.
Friendship is perhaps the most important aspect of an intimate relationship, although too many people fail to realize and develop their relationship to it's full potential. As one friend of mine remarked, you can only spend so much of your time between the sheets, lol.....it's the rest of the hours that define the relationship and determine whether it evolves or stagnates.

isn't that a refreshing response

many yrs ago I had sex with a women I did not know , there was just no intimacy at all , none

couldn't talk to her about much of anything because there was no bond of trust and understanding and really , acceptance , either

NO friendship at all

we never hanged around with each other , got to know each other

I could never marry a women who I thought could not or would not be my best friend in the end

 

[Pandaemoni]

I have seen the "monogamy is impossible" line used as cover for explaining why many male friends have stepped out on their wives...and I find it troubling as a result. Monogamy is not impossible if you exercise self-control...it's only impossible if you choose not to do so. By viewing failures as inevitable it is easy to erode the sense of being morally responsible for giving in to temptation.

I would say, instead, that monogamy is difficult, but that one should remember that each time you do step out on a significant other who expects you to be faithful, you are acting immorally. That you have it in you to step away from the situation, and if you do not, that is a failure on your part and demonstrates your lack of strength.

(Hypothetically, imagine you are about to "do the deed" with another woman and are right on the edge of consummating, at which point she changes her mind and says "no." If you truly have no self control, then you will inevitably rape her. You'd have no ability to do otherwise presumably. Most men who are not evil would admit that if the woman did decide to stop that, unpleasant as it may be, they too would stop. But if one can stop at that late stage, then one could have stopped far earlier, recognized the signs of temptation and removed oneself from the situation before it led to anything.)

It is true that feelings of desire and thoughts of infidelity are inevitable, and I do think that our overidealization of romance and love leads us into the trap of imagining that we will never develop feelings for another person. We'd be better off if we realized that having feelings for multiple people is common (for men and women) and were mature enough for husbands and wives to openly discuss the feelings they have for other men and women, recognizing that having feelings and acting on them are two very different things.

Again also, if you do develop feelings for another woman, and your wife takes issue with that, or you have any apprehension about being "unable" to prevent yourself from acting on those feelings, then you should withdraw from contact with that other woman to the extent possible.

That said, whether as the result of socialization or inborn jealousy, most people are too childish to have open discussions about their extra-relationship crushes and attractions. That's too bad, but not something that is easily fixed.

 

[visceral_instinct]

Men have a primal urge to rape women.

Shut up.

 

[Big Chiller]

I think it is one think to have a look, and quite another to have a taste.

Or is there great similarity in having a long lustful gaze and have a material taste?

 

[Big Chiller]

You have touched on a very important aspect of long-term relationships, river.
Friendship is perhaps the most important aspect of an intimate relationship, although too many people fail to realize and develop their relationship to it's full potential. As one friend of mine remarked, you can only spend so much of your time between the sheets, lol.....it's the rest of the hours that define the relationship and determine whether it evolves or stagnates.

Yes, you would think one would see the connection between friendship and relationship. Hello.

 

[DRZion]

Cos' every woman wants coldsores on their cooter...

In the future of science I see designer STDs.. (that'll glow in the dark)

Men have a primal urge to rape women.

Consider the fact that from the dawn of life females have had the capacity to defend themselves against rape - this should mean there was evolutionary pressure for males to control their sexual cravings.

Instead, I think its more accurate to say 'every man could feel the impulse to procreate with any woman'.

(Hypothetically, imagine you are about to "do the deed" with another woman and are right on the edge of consummating, at which point she changes her mind and says "no." If you truly have no self control, then you will inevitably rape her. You'd have no ability to do otherwise presumably. Most men who are not evil would admit that if the woman did decide to stop that, unpleasant as it may be, they too would stop. But if one can stop at that late stage, then one could have stopped far earlier, recognized the signs of temptation and removed oneself from the situation before it led to anything.)

That is a great point!



I would like to add to the discussion the societal advantages of monogamy. There is an equal amount of women as there are men (they are both equally likely to be born). This means everyone can be happy. There would just be too many malcontents if 10% of people were practically denied all chances of having kids and others who had 50 or 60 children. Just like monogamy stabilizes personal life, it also stabilizes society. Because society is composed of individuals it directly benefits from this. The whole is the sum of its parts, in this case.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

Just a thought, but what about countries where the ratio of men to women is way out of whack like China. I think I heard that by 2050 there would be 9 men for every female. (Really sucks to be in China)

 

[chimpkin]

Pandaemoni said:
Monogamy is not impossible if you exercise self-control...it's only impossible if you choose not to do so.

Right.
I'm not going to stop lusting after other people.
I can only choose what I'm going to act on.

And, quite frankly, my wife takes her clothes off...and I lust after her just fine!
I am on a campaign to convince her she's as hot as I think she is.
But I'm sure you hetero guys know how well that usually works (rolls eyes).

River said:
isn't being faithfull to just one partner about being best friends with each other

I think so

This is why I really like being married.

 

[Stoniphi]

The desire for sex is normal. Rape is a crime of violence, not sexual passion. People who desire to rape have a "control issue", most of us do not suffer from that particular disorder. If you do, I would advise professional assistance before you get into deep doo - doo.

Marriage is a cost/benefit proposition - you give to get, and sex is a bonding activity. The longer you have sex with the same mate, the deeper the relationship...and the more enjoyable the sex.

We all lie, especially to ourselves. Breaking contractual agreements, however, we do not permit in civilized society because we need order. Marriage is one such contract, break the terms and lose the contract benefits as well as paying the costs for your dishonesty.

 

[Anti-Flag]

From a woman's point of view, they find a man they want to have a child with, but know he will never be a provider. So they find another man that they know will be a good provider and marry him at about the same time as they get pregnant by man number one. They now dump man number one and live happily ever after with man number two.

It makes as much sense as "men need to spread their seed so you can't blame them for cheating" - but that one really riles up the feminists so maybe it's about time men stood up for their rights too!

I'm not sure what you would call a woman like that, but they do exist and your stat of 15% would indicate maybe more than I thought before.

I'm sure we can come up with a few dozen words. But the behaviour of humans is disgusting anyway.