FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Are humans meant to be monogamous?
Are humans meant to be monogamous?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
As a species we surpass what "should be". Our self awareness of almost everything we do combined with free will makes it impossible to know what we "should be".
Are we none monogamous because we are aware of what it is, so we rebel against the idea of it? Or is the reverse true, we are aware but like the idea of being so?
Plenty of people are, just as plenty of people are not.
Some species of animals are and some are not.
By our very evolution and journey of a deep self awareness we can't be sure. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Taken off the internet...
Male Criteria
The human male has a drive to impregnate as many females as possible, to create as many offspring with his genes as possible. (Ehrlichman & Eichenstein, 1992) Thus, he applies criteria typical for a male animal. He looks for women who are impregnable: those who are old enough to be past puberty, but young enough to care for children for at least several years. He looks for healthy (i.e., clear, smooth skin, "bright" eyes, good conformation of body and limbs, etc.) women, so they can carry the fetus to term, deliver it, and care for it after birth. Beyond that, he doesn't really care. She doesn't have to be intelligent, talented, socially aware, or in any other way have a brain. In fact, the dumber she is the easier it would be for him to meet her criteria for desirability since they are less likely to be extensive.
Thus, men have minimal criteria for sexual desire; basically, they are concerned with a woman's anatomy -- as long as a woman looks young enough and healthy, she is desirable. They also consider her beautiful, since to a male beautiful and desirable are virtually synonymous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?  "
Some animals are. Swans. Gibbons. Orang-u-tans. Etc. Monogamy isn't the same as mating for life. Orangs, for example, form short term but monogamous relationships. The females don't mate with multiple males in the same breeding season. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice? "
Only 5% of species are
Sea horse
Male prairie voles - hell, this little fucker will potentially kill other females that come near him that are not his mate.
Bald eagles (with a few exceptions)
There are more but there are some examples |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mily36CWoman
over a year ago
Beds (or anywhere beginning with B..!?) |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Only 5% of species are
Sea horse
Male prairie voles - hell, this little fucker will potentially kill other females that come near him that are not his mate.
"
Heck, think most assume it's the female that bites the males head off in most cases   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mily36CWoman
over a year ago
Beds (or anywhere beginning with B..!?) |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Swans are, as are some other types of birds!"
Afraid not, if there is nesting failure pairs are known to split up ...and recent DNA studies on signets from 'known paired swans' showed additional DNA from another male swan |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Swans are, as are some other types of birds!
Afraid not, if there is nesting failure pairs are known to split up ...and recent DNA studies on signets from 'known paired swans' showed additional DNA from another male swan "
Omg swans are sluts...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ack688Man
over a year ago
abruzzo Italy (and UK) |
If we look at ourselves as part of the primates group as a whole and define ‘meant’ as relating to traits prevalent in that group as a whole, then primates generally show higher rates of social manogamy than other mammals, although not lifelong, so, sequential social manogamy, however the rates of sexual manogamy are much lower. So what are we ‘meant’ to do? It seems we are ‘meant’ to have a small number of consecutive partners in terms of living arrangements but then still have sex with others within that framework, which does seem to be what a lot of people do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
...and you really don't want to know about the sexual habits of ducks "
They've never been thought of as monogamous though!
We shouldn't conflate monogamy with the duration of the relationship.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *reya73Woman
over a year ago
Whitley Bay |
Humans are blessed with choice. I don't think we're 'meant' to be one way or another.
For me, when I have been monogomous it has been very right with that person. When I'm ethically non monogomous it's totally natural and a conscious way of being.
At the moment I couldn't imagine monogomy.. I have loving, committed, fulfilling NM relationships. It works.
It's not for everyone though. It takes a certain something to make it work healthily for all involved.
I do feel that people with certain personalities/circumstances are more naturally drawn to it than others.
X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Depends on the person. Some are some aren't. Just because we are one species does not mean we are hardwired and conditioned to linear thoughts. Our prior experiences and backgrounds factor in our thought processes. We haven't all had the same experiences in life so no, we are not conditioned to monogamy, it's a lot more complex |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we look at ourselves as part of the primates group as a whole and define ‘meant’ as relating to traits prevalent in that group as a whole, then primates generally show higher rates of social manogamy than other mammals, although not lifelong, so, sequential social manogamy, however the rates of sexual manogamy are much lower. So what are we ‘meant’ to do? It seems we are ‘meant’ to have a small number of consecutive partners in terms of living arrangements but then still have sex with others within that framework, which does seem to be what a lot of people do."
I've had wine Jack so can I have a toddler explanation for sequential social monogamy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well monogamy kinda makes people believe that ur other half should be the one who ticks all the boxes for that one person, sexually, physically emotionally etc, I think in this day and age it's just not possible |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well monogamy kinda makes people believe that ur other half should be the one who ticks all the boxes for that one person, sexually, physically emotionally etc, I think in this day and age it's just not possible"
I'm more inclined to think that modern life doesn't really allow for the time to commit to more than one intimate relationship at a time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Well monogamy kinda makes people believe that ur other half should be the one who ticks all the boxes for that one person, sexually, physically emotionally etc, I think in this day and age it's just not possible
I'm more inclined to think that modern life doesn't really allow for the time to commit to more than one intimate relationship at a time "
Exactly society has changed dramatically since the 1950s but we still use it as a stick to beat ourselves(and others) with |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Years ago I would have sed yes
I was in a old fashioned mentally by how I was brung up
But now that I am a “ insert 4 letter word ”
I would say no i love hooking up with random people to much
That’s not to say if the right person came along and wanted a closed relationship that I wouldn’t take that change
But my ideal relationship would be open for both and open both as in open for me with guys and woman and open for her for guys and woman if they wanted |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Well monogamy kinda makes people believe that ur other half should be the one who ticks all the boxes for that one person, sexually, physically emotionally etc, I think in this day and age it's just not possible"
Monogamy doesn't do that, people's unrealistic expectations of relationships do that along with the huge lack of communication that many relationships are dogged by. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
"Well monogamy kinda makes people believe that ur other half should be the one who ticks all the boxes for that one person, sexually, physically emotionally etc, I think in this day and age it's just not possible"
And yet as others have said some animal species are naturally monogamous.
Its not something that we as humans just came up with randomly. We are aware of what it is, we have a name for it but we certainly did not create it. Some humans have put an emphasis on it to be THE way things should be, and for some it works out.
As I said above, self awareness mixed with free will and add in a bit of evolution from primates (as somebody else pointed out) and we find ourselves at this point. Wondering but never really knowing what humans "should be". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mily36CWoman
over a year ago
Beds (or anywhere beginning with B..!?) |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Penguins are "
True, in a breeding session ...but as the female chooses the male if he doesn't show up the next time she selects another ... (more like Fab swingers than they know!? Lol)  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Penguins are
True, in a breeding session ...but as the female chooses the male if he doesn't show up the next time she selects another ... (more like Fab swingers than they know!? Lol) "
Lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Penguins are
True, in a breeding session ...but as the female chooses the male if he doesn't show up the next time she selects another ... (more like Fab swingers than they know!? Lol) "
Monogamy isn't the same as life partners though! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eliWoman
over a year ago
. |
"Taken off the internet...
Male Criteria
The human male has a drive to impregnate as many females as possible, to create as many offspring with his genes as possible. (Ehrlichman & Eichenstein, 1992)...She doesn't have to be intelligent, talented, socially aware, or in any other way have a brain....
Thus, men have minimal criteria for sexual desire; basically, they are concerned with a woman's anatomy -- as long as a woman looks young enough and healthy, she is desirable. They also consider her beautiful, since to a male beautiful and desirable are virtually synonymous."
Holy fuck, praise men a bit more there E&E. We all know if it's from the interwebs it must be true.
I think some people are meant to be monogamous, others less so. Some are trapped in monogamy through socio-cultural pressures, lack of knowledge etc. Some are monogamous depending on their partner. I don't think there's one right way for people to be - ENM can be fantastic but it's not for everyone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we look at ourselves as part of the primates group as a whole and define ‘meant’ as relating to traits prevalent in that group as a whole, then primates generally show higher rates of social manogamy than other mammals, although not lifelong, so, sequential social manogamy, however the rates of sexual manogamy are much lower. So what are we ‘meant’ to do? It seems we are ‘meant’ to have a small number of consecutive partners in terms of living arrangements but then still have sex with others within that framework, which does seem to be what a lot of people do.
I've had wine Jack so can I have a toddler explanation for sequential social monogamy? "
I believe the sequential part refers to it not necessarily being for life but one partner at a time. Social monogamy instead of sexual monogamy means having a mate who is your partner in all social situations but who in private you may cheat on?? This is how I read it.
Mr |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No. However lots of people lack honesty which enables them to have non monogamous relationships.
I really wish that I hadn’t been monogamous in relationships in the past because I think monogamy can bring doubts of trust. I would much rather have open relationships with full disclosure |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice?
Some animals are. Swans. Gibbons. Orang-u-tans. Etc. Monogamy isn't the same as mating for life. Orangs, for example, form short term but monogamous relationships. The females don't mate with multiple males in the same breeding season. "
That's a good point. When I read the op I immediately thought one partner for life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Your answer is found based on your religion and life teachings and standards. It comes down to moral standards and marriage and commitment guidelines. Those without any such guidelines can hump whoever they like but those with restrictions cannot |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Honesty and love is the key to relationships not monogamy. We both have kink for playing with others but that is all as the chemistry between us is so strong. At the end of the evening we know we will be back in each others arms. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I believe the science that says it's the primeval urge to sow ones seed that means the answer is no, But (ignore it as I do) understand the societal construct that has embedded the belief in us, that the answer is yes.
The actual answer is there is no answer, it is purely what YOU choose to believe. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice? "
Lots of birds are
Magpies
Swans
Barn owls
But so are gibbons and wolves |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Your answer is found based on your religion and life teachings and standards. It comes down to moral standards and marriage and commitment guidelines. Those without any such guidelines can hump whoever they like but those with restrictions cannot "
I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that anyone who is not monogamous has no moral standards or commitment? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we look at ourselves as part of the primates group as a whole and define ‘meant’ as relating to traits prevalent in that group as a whole, then primates generally show higher rates of social manogamy than other mammals, although not lifelong, so, sequential social manogamy, however the rates of sexual manogamy are much lower. So what are we ‘meant’ to do? It seems we are ‘meant’ to have a small number of consecutive partners in terms of living arrangements but then still have sex with others within that framework, which does seem to be what a lot of people do.
I've had wine Jack so can I have a toddler explanation for sequential social monogamy?
I believe the sequential part refers to it not necessarily being for life but one partner at a time. Social monogamy instead of sexual monogamy means having a mate who is your partner in all social situations but who in private you may cheat on?? This is how I read it.
Mr"
That's an interesting take. Still I think  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don’t think so
And my reason/opinion got this is I know very few couples who are happy in their relationship, real life and fab, and the majority of those who stay together are cheating or are cheating and only staying because of the kids
If two people are honest with each other then they could stay together in harmony but that’s still not monogamy really, is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts? "
Biologically it has been shown that we are not designed to be monogamous. I remember reading some scientific research back in the 90's about different types of sperms cells which are evolved to fight off competition. This indicates that there is a biological mechanism for ensuring that the best genes get to fertilise the egg... and for this to work, there needs to be a variety of males. There was a book called "Sperm Wars" published about it, it's very interesting.
Cal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts?
Biologically it has been shown that we are not designed to be monogamous. I remember reading some scientific research back in the 90's about different types of sperms cells which are evolved to fight off competition. This indicates that there is a biological mechanism for ensuring that the best genes get to fertilise the egg... and for this to work, there needs to be a variety of males. There was a book called "Sperm Wars" published about it, it's very interesting.
Cal"
I've heard it suggested that one of the evolutionary reasons women tend to be so vocal during intercourse is because it's a signal to all men within earshot that there's a sexually available female *right there* and they should all be ready to take their turn. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Everything I have learnt to day through formal and self study indicate that no, we are not designed to be monogamous. However society is much easier to control if we are led to believe that we are. Being non monogamous has nothing to do with lack of morals or respect. More so the values that are placed upon individuals by societies expectations. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think you make a coupling to create and nurture offspring. Once that's done it's a free for all. "
The suggestion that I find most compelling, which if I remember correctly is the one from the book Sex at Dawn, is that in early human societies, everyone just had sex with everyone else, and any resulting children were raised by the tribe as a whole because there was no way of – and no interest in – knowing who fathered which child. It wasn't until agriculture and inheritance and the treatment of women and children as property came along that anyone cared who was which individual's offspring. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices. "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices. "
Amen!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No animal on earth is monogamous ... as humans though we just have a consciousness of choice? "
No not true
About 5% of all Mammal species are monogamous, including some species of anthropoid apes like Gibbons, as well as Orangutans and Gorillas. Its common in alot of bird species aswell |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices. "
Exactly this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I have to say this is quite an interesting read of different people's views.
I've always thought we're supposed to be but I think that's more society putting that in my head.
Like having another partner or more isn't something that's seen as acceptable.
I guess with my husband now though you could say we're ENM.
I think humans as a whole we're very social beings and whether we're supposed to be monogamous as a species I'm on the fence with.
Monogamy works for some and not others. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have to say this is quite an interesting read of different people's views.
I've always thought we're supposed to be but I think that's more society putting that in my head.
Like having another partner or more isn't something that's seen as acceptable.
I guess with my husband now though you could say we're ENM.
I think humans as a whole we're very social beings and whether we're supposed to be monogamous as a species I'm on the fence with.
Monogamy works for some and not others. "
Probably matching my thoughts exactly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whether biology or history demand that we should be monogamous, it doesn't work for many people. I am much happier since I embraced non-monogamy. But others are happier remaining monogamous. Both should be valid and accepted choices.
Exactly this "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share "
And here I am in 2021 with two boyfriends |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share "
I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources. "
Is JP saying that if society is not monogamous some men will miss out? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources. "
The guys at the top compromise because the guys at the bottom out number them and often they are the ones that do all work. If the guys at the bottom revolt it’s not good news for the guys at the top either.
They figure it out by comparing the chromosomes of men and women to see how different they from eachother. Women’s show much more diversity, meaning they mixed genes far more often |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources.
Is JP saying that if society is not monogamous some men will miss out? "
Depends what you mean by miss out? We aren’t talking about the present day, we are talking about 1000s of year’s ago
So they might miss out on spreading their genes, but by being part of a tribe, even if not at the top, they get to stay alive in a very hostile time in history. That’s not missing out entirely |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Love this thread; I am definitely not alone. Enjoyed reading ENM article on Google. I just like the security of having two men in my life; being able to let go fully with them both, together or on separate dates. X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources.
Is JP saying that if society is not monogamous some men will miss out?
Depends what you mean by miss out? We aren’t talking about the present day, we are talking about 1000s of year’s ago
So they might miss out on spreading their genes, but by being part of a tribe, even if not at the top, they get to stay alive in a very hostile time in history. That’s not missing out entirely "
Miss out = no sex. I've never come across this - it's quite fascinating. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve read that monogamy was invented to calm society down by creating a situation where every man gets a woman
Otherwise you have empires where the men at the top have endless women and the guys at the bottom have very few. This leads to violence between themselves and eventually, if it’s bad enough, a revolt against the guys at the top hoarding all the women
I think there’s scientific proof that while 80% of females passed on their genes, only 20% of men did. That’s proof that throughout a lot of history humans were not monogamous. Much like many mammals, the biggest, strongest and most powerful get the lions share I've seen that from JP. Haven't yet found the DNA source, and how they work that out.
I haven't yet worked out why the guys at the top compromised for societys benefit. Doesn't seem to me they benefited much. My guess is it's linked to "owning" resources.
Is JP saying that if society is not monogamous some men will miss out?
Depends what you mean by miss out? We aren’t talking about the present day, we are talking about 1000s of year’s ago
So they might miss out on spreading their genes, but by being part of a tribe, even if not at the top, they get to stay alive in a very hostile time in history. That’s not missing out entirely
Miss out = no sex. I've never come across this - it's quite fascinating. "
Look up some stuff on chimps, it’s the same there. Head chimp takes what he wants, the rest fight amongst themselves for what’s left. That’s true for food and mates. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
