Is being monogamous in a relationship going against human nature?

Evolutionary speaking, very few animals that I know of are monogamous with their mates.

To me being monogamous in a relationship is going against billions of years of evolution.

Of course, there is one very good reason to remain in a monogamous relationship and that is because of sexually transmitted diseases. But aside from that, with the divorce rate at 50% or more and the infidelity rate in marriage and relationships, most likely quite a bit higher, is being monogamous an unnatural human construct enforced on people by religion or rituals?

Most of us were given a rational brain. Monogamy makes sense from a myriad of perspectives (ie: health, finance, psychological, stability, and if you're inclined....religously.)

It was one of those compromises we made many thousands of years ago, the fact that we are here proves that it worked.

The fact that the one thing we've experienced worked isn't proof that anything else wouldn't have, though. I'm just sayin'.

In his book The Naked Ape, Desmond Morris presents a pretty good theory on how we became monogamous as we became less a communal society. It's pretty good reading on any account.

and it has brought me a lot of joy. Human relationships are very complex. A happy relationship includes a rich variety of factors including sexual satisfaction, trust, companionship, shared humor, etc.

;-)

. . . a promise is a promise. If you can't overcome your "natural" tendencies, don't make the agreement.

.
.
.

not by design, or by a plan to "bed" many women, my "scorecard" is too high for my liking . .

but I honestly thought that each relationship was going "somewhere"

yup - I support monogamy, but polygamy would be interesting

guess I'll have to wait until that opportunity arrives before I can make an honest assessment . ..

...but there is no shortage of biological literature on this topic. Here's a link to one researcher's home page with further links to recent papers on sexual selection, monogamy, and so on.

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/h/hollandb/

Monogamy is EXTREMELY rare in nature-- many of the classic cases of apparent monogamy either turn out to be not monogamous on closer examination or the result of rather severe selection, e.g. extreme difficulty in rearing offspring without paternal assistance, but even those instances rarely result in lifetime monogamy.

So why not people?

Yeah, I dig some people who are married as well. Oh well. Applesauce happens. Gotta find somebody else.

And not just because of diseases, though that aspect is important. Emotional consideration for one's partner unless the relationship itself is detrimental to emotional consideration. (but then people need to break things off and bloody TALK, not quietly cheat behind their backs. x( )

for 12. Known him since I was just a child. I honestly think most people wish to find one person with whom to spend their lives with. :hi:

It was an anthropological thesis on the evolution of monogamy in humans and attempted to define the reasons why mankind is the most monogamous of the primates. The reasons basically boiled down to this: The human male/female ratio is roughly one to one, so when a male takes two females as mates, he is depriving other males of the chance. Because male humans are biologically driven to reproduce, this situation promotes competition and outright warfare between the haves and have-not's, and among the mateless. This constant fighting to gain, and then to keep, mates consumed resources and prevented humankind from advancing...we were too busy fighting to improve. Monogamy was a very early attempt at "wealth redistribution". Certain tribes of humans realized that the best way to cease the fighting was to impose a one mate limit. Using Darwinian logic, the cessation of fighting for mates among these tribes allowed them to use the time they'd previously spent fighting for other things, and likely furthered cooperation between males...improving hunting and the overall success of the tribe. This success would have translated into higher rates of population growth, and would have allowed monogamous societies to become dominant.

I don't know how much truth there really is to it, but it's certainly plausible from a scientific viewpoint.

to be a means by which the male has greater assurance that offspring are his and is therefor more willing to make sacrifices on their behalf. Where both parents are necessary for the survival of the offspring, monogamy makes evolutionary sense.

While it is not a monogamous relationship, a male lion or lions taking over a pride will kill any small young. He or they will then often fight to the death to protect future (his) offspring --- and of course his place in the pride.

Birds are not infrequently monogamous. However, studies have shown that in many species there is significant cheating by both "married" partners.

The evolutionary argument for this is diversity (several "fit" partners), while maintaining (more or less) the male dedication to offspring.

However, since we are generally talking about procreation in the case of other animals, and more frequently about just simple self gratification in the case of humans, it is harder to make any of these arguments. Self gratification is arguably a natural element of behavior in many animals, so the disposition to nonmonogamous behavior can be seen as natural based on this "drive". Of course one can argue that there are other "higher" natural laws that would mitigate self gratification --- like self preservation --- should your wife or girl friend catch you.

....also most all of our emotions are in conflict with our animal instincts as well...s'why I believe we're doomed to repeat history and destroy ourselves...as we're contiually and eternally conflicted in comparing ourselves to a *perfect* supernatural being instead of realiziing we're STILL mere animals instead.

is enough for me! I'm for quality, not quantity! It took a second marriage for me to find someone I could work with and not against. The idea of trying to do more than one relationship at a time exhausts me! Of course, I have three kids too.

I like to have friends too. Who has time for more lovers? You just need one high quality mate!;-)

We are perpetually recptive to sex. Other female mammals only are receptive to sex when they are fertile. Human females also enjoy sex. Regular sex keeps her mate interested and uncertain to the time that she can become pregnant. Male chimpanzees on the otherhand, have short term courtships with females in heat and move on when she is no longer in heat.

Monogamy is it for me.

If I can remain monogamous for over 13 years with my sex drive and the problems between us for the past 6 years, anyone can. Only once did I ever truly have an even the idea to not be monogamous, but ultimately that's not who I am. If I were in a better situation, I would have no problem with monogamy. I don't really have a problem with it now except wishing I were in a better situation. I never had polyamourous urges.