| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:16:22 AM |
It's actually a well-established scientific statement. Just because it rubs some the wrong way doesn't mean it's not true.
It most absolutely is not. Its hypothesis.
And its simply become vogue to be stated as fact (usually by people who refuse to just acknowledge they like to f*ck around).
This goes for men AND women.
Ive mentioned this before...Sharia Law. Thats all you need to know.
People dont f*ck around when they know they're going to have limbs amputed, eyes gouged or be stoned to death.
You dont do something when the penalties are exceptionally harsh and you know begging, arguing, feigning innocence or citing some non-existent theory wont save your dumbass.
Modern society is just a flash in the pan in evolutionary terms so both men and women still have their Stone Age brains.
Speak for yourself.
People who choose to liken themselves to Ardipithecus ramidus or even Homo erectus for that matter...
Honestly...if you believe your brain is functioning at the same level as 4 million plus years ago...then it clearly is.  | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:33:47 AM | Maybe it's not a matter of men have less control over their instincts but maybe it's that some men have superior control, lol.
Seriously though, the more attractive a person is, the more control they have to have. The very best looking ones are the ones who are getting all the attention. I would imagine that they have to have super strength to never eventually wear down.
And on the other end, there are those people who are forced into monogamy, if they can even find a mate at all. Those poor **stards would feel lucky to hold on to any one person for any length of time. They have to be disciplined or else they'd be running all over and acting out, hiring hookers, looking at porno, or worse raping and pillaging. Oh wait, I guess some are doing that... | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:50:17 AM | in nature animals are controlled by the instinct to propogate with no emotional attachment.it's quite simple.the female of the species comes in season,and the male seeeks her out.in socially oriented packs, herds etc.,the alpha male does the breeding and moves on to the next female in season.
in many species that male's dominance is challenged and the winner takes over the breeding rights.
bears travel and live alone except during mating season,once mated both female and male go their separate ways and carry on with their lives..no emotional attachment.
if it were true that a man was not monogamous,why do they become emotionally attached? for that matter why do women?why don't we just use them for propogation and toss them aside?
as far as my understanding goes,back in "cave man era" theorectically,there were family units even then set in a communal environment.men were territorial and hunted. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:55:18 AM | I think the idea is a crass boiled-down adoption of some ideas adopted by evolutionary psychology. The theory of evolution postulates that organisms evolve new populations of organisms which adapt to new environments due to natural selection and genetic mutation. Sexual reproduction and the numbers of offspring produced lie at the heart of evolutionary success, but it is a misunderstanding to think evolution is 'designed' to benefit the individual. Observations by biologists in the field of various species of animals, from insects to birds and many mammal species, show that few species are monagamous. Forms of behaviour occur which would be repugant to our ethical norms but which are explicable if the organisms involved are trying to maximise their chances of reproductive success.
In humans, the evidence from science is that we have also evolved from precursor hominid species. Evolutionary psychology and sociobiology are relatively new attempts by science to explain certain human behaviours which seem puzzling or unethical, as well as normal, in terms of evolutionary origins. In so far as cheating goes, the evidence is that both and women cheat, sometimes for the same underlying reasons, and other times for different reasons, but the ultimate reason is to maximise reproductive success. Reproductive success includes having offspring, but also having offspring which survive and reproduce themselves. There always seems to be a certain percentage of children in a population that were fathered by someone other than the usual partner of the mother, and also a certain proportion of men and women engage in sexual activity with someone other than their committed partner.
A lot of cheating by men and women in relationships then probably arises at least in part due to deep-rooted biological instincts and drives we have little concious control over. However because we are concious animals, we have some capacity to control and choose our actions, and also we have some capacity for rationality. Sometimes cheating may well be due to a biological instinct someone refuses to control, but other times it may be due to a rational decision. Evolutionary psychology and sociobiology seem to propose our sexual activities are driven in peculiar ways by both instincts and rational decision making, with outcomes not so much aimed at individual happiness but at evolutionary success.
These theories need to be examined with some attention and care, particularly by philosophers and ethicists. There may also be some repercussions for our theological beliefs, particularly those based on divine command and natural law theory. | |
|
| |
| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:25:44 AM | | I think men and women are going to have multiple sex partners, especially since we're living longer. However, I don't buy into the philosophy "he's a man, so it's ok that he can screw more than one woman at a time". There are the cheats (of either sex), and then there are those who are devoted and faithful. It's about choices, not about how we're "wired". | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:26:03 AM |
It's a nice attempt at telling you they don't just want to fuk you, and you alone.
I have never been 'told' this by any of my mates. This is something that I hear in casual conversations with male friends or aquaintences. I read this alot in the forums or in other discussions.
Do I believe men/women can be monogamous? 100% yes! It is a choice. But when I hear it being discussed as a scientific fact, I view it as a total cop out. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:30:59 AM | it is a cop out, whether it's a man or woman using the line
sure, many animals are not monogamous by nature (and several are)... but our freedom to make a conscious decision on how we act is one of the things that sets us apart, imo... along with our personal understandings of such things as ethical and moral decisions, values, beliefs, responsibility, duty, loyalty, faithfulness, respect, etc... | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 8:22:21 AM | Observations by biologists in the field of various species of animals, from insects to birds and many mammal species, show that few species are monagamous. Forms of behaviour occur which would be repugant to our ethical norms but which are explicable if the organisms involved are trying to maximise their chances of reproductive success.
In humans, the evidence from science is that we have also evolved from precursor hominid species. Evolutionary psychology and sociobiology are relatively new attempts by science to explain certain human behaviours which seem puzzling or unethical, as well as normal, in terms of evolutionary origins. In so far as cheating goes, the evidence is that both and women cheat...
A lot of cheating by men and women in relationships then probably arises at least in part due to deep-rooted biological instincts and drives we have little conscious control over.
All that is true. Watch the birds, because human females are just like birds. Females birds go to great lengths to keep any transgressions secret, sneaking copulations when their mate is not around and even soliciting copulations from other males in their mate's presence only to make a grand show of rejecting them. The more a woman claims fidelity, the more likely it is that she cheats.
90 to 95 percent of decisions are made at the subconscious level. Terms like women's intuition, trust your instincts, and it just felt so right are subconscious decisions. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 8:50:40 AM | | Im with Kelley-88 on this one... Having served 6 years in the Army.... I have a long list of Married women I know first hand that have repeatedly cheated on their husbands.. Women do just as much if not more then men... Women are just better at HIDING it... | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 9:06:17 AM | And for some men, it can be quite frustrating;
when they make their intentions obvious, they are single and are willing to bed the female, she IS NOT INTERESTED.
'Some' women seem to need the intrique, the fantasy and the game, as part of foreplay.
'Some' women enjoy married and 'unavailable' men for these reasons.
 | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 9:15:54 AM |
It's a choice. Any human is capable of monogamy, it doesn't mean they are going to be happy about it though.
I agree with this statement, while still agreeing with the statements that human's are not genetically engineered to be monogamous.
At this point in our culture monogamy is common and preferred. Through a minimal amount of self-discipline people can be monogamous. This does not mean that they may not be TEMPTED to stray, it just means that their intellect can overcome their limbic brain.
Kinda reminds me of the whole gom jabbar test from the Dune novels. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 9:21:22 AM | Dunno. I'm very monogamous. I'm not wired for sex outside of a relationship. I get attached.
Now, I'll admit that I might switch to "bird watching" .... but that's as far as it goes.
Of course.... I've never had a situation where my needs weren't being met for 3 months or more at a time. So I can't really say what I would do in a situation where I felt neglected. I'd like to think that I would talk to my partner and either fix the problem or move on. | |
|
| I disagree with the whole premise of the original statement
Posted: 3/3/2008 9:21:36 AM | I have thought a bit about this topic due to observing some male and female friends go through the dissolution of their marraiges, as well as my feelings as I was going through my divorce. There is no doubt in my mind that men and women are wired differently when it comes to relationships.
Back in the time of prehistory men would go out hunting while the women would stay near the lair to care for the young. In those times men were instinctually predisposed to return with the food, while the womens instincts ran towards child care. If the man did not return from his gathering, a woman would simply find another mate, programed toward finding a provider for the kids as soon as she could. While the man was programed to return at all cost.
I have noticed women tend to handle breakups more readily and are quicker to fall into another relationship, while men who "roam" can track their behavior to someone in his past that made trust an issue for him, or, in alot of my friends cases, simply a self esteem issue.
Generally I find the whole question of whether or not we are naturally monogamous fairly odd, as through all recorded history the majority of the race has paired up and stayed that way. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 9:50:19 AM | Having served 6 years in the Army.... I have a long list of Married women I know first hand that have repeatedly cheated on their husbands.. Women do just as much if not more then men... Women are just better at HIDING it...
That is true. Women have evolved to be much better at hiding it because the penalties for a woman being caught were severe. Her mate would punish her. He might leave her, or he might kill her and/or the child.
Basically, a few men, mostly Alpha males with lots of opportunities cheat a lot. Most women, given the opportunity with little chance of being caught will cheat when they are ovulating. Average men seldom cheat because they have few opportunities unless they buy it.
Women that did not choose good providers and dependable mates and, when they were ovulating, take advantage of opportunities to select the best genes for their children, (which would not be their mate), are not our ancestors. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 10:06:21 AM | > Women have evolved to be much better at hiding it because the penalties for a woman being caught were severe.
And this is precisely because the costs to the male for being cuckolded are so high. It's the equivalent for a female of being raped until pregnant and then being forced to carry the baby to term and care for it until maturity -- except that in the latter case half the genes of the child are still hers, whereas in the former case none of the genes of the man shouldering the costs are present in the child. It is only natural that men would have evolved to avoid being cuckolded at all costs. If women were capable of controlling themselves, the penalties wouldn't be necessary.
The costs to a woman of her man messing around on the side are much less, because it's typically the other woman who shoulders the burden of caring for any child which results -- unless the man decides he likes the other woman better and then deserts the first one.
P.S....
It's actually a well-established scientific statement. Just because it rubs some the wrong way doesn't mean it's not true. It most absolutely is not. Its hypothesis.
~Kyn~, since everything in science is a model of reality and not reality itself, a "well-established scientific statement" is a hypothesis. This doesn't mean it's not true within the framework of what is known (the model). I don't think there's any scientist who would not agree with the statement that humans are mildly polygamous, because that's what all the evidence points to.
| |
|
| |
| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 10:45:18 AM | I agree with that phrase to some extent. Sexually, yes, men/women/people in general are not made to be monogomus. But the fact is emotions plays a bigger part in our descition making that our labito. So, for the most part, we are capible of being monogomous if we are emotinally attached.
Me, I try not to tie my guys down. Sure I'd like the consistancy of a relationship, but I don't really care if my man is out boffing other chicks...as long as he's not bringing me home some nasty infection. Sex is sex, love is love. They don't have to be connected in any way.
I know, I'm strange like that! | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 11:43:04 AM | | I'd be interested to see what evolutionary psychology says about why humans suffer grief when they find out their mates cheat. You don't see a monkey weeping and trying to off himself because Mrs. Monkey did some monkey business with the next-branch neighbour. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 12:07:41 PM | YourCuteGuy1 wrote: And on the other end, there are
those people who are forced into monogamy, if they can
even find a mate at all. Those poor **stards would feel
lucky to hold on to any one person for any length of time.
You're bringing out a good point. The people I know who are
monogamous or supporting other people's children are usually
less sexually desirable on average and have less personal power,
autonomy and free will than those who enjoy multiple partners --
which appears consistent with the hypothesis that few people
instinctively perceive monogamy as the optimum reproductive
strategy. I can tell a lot about a man's level of desirablity by looking
at the women he's dating. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 12:24:04 PM | Cop out, selfish, immature, convenient.
I talked with my fiance about this when we were first starting to go more in depth in our "getting to know you" stuff, (really easy to do, as he'd been cheated on in 18 year marriage) and he, as well as most every guy I've had a long term relationship with, said that he couldn't handle more than 1 woman at a time, and wouldn't be able to share a woman with others. The kind of intimacy he wants just can't be provided in a relationship that isn't one on one.
This led me to question him about his fantasies, and whether a threesome interested him. (Not if he'd participate in one, but only if it had ever interested him.) OMGoodness, you should've seen his face! He actually seemed repulsed...said even if it was M/F/F, he couldn't handle it. He views it as cheap, dirty, selfish, and lacking in stuff I won't get into. He did mention that there's no way he could share, and was very loud and clear about it. He also said that he wasn't some big black hole of endless need that required lots of women to "fulfill" him. 
Ahh...I could just eat him alive! | |
|
| |
Home
login 
