|
|
|
|
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 1:13:04 PM | | Damn right that's a cop out. I am monogamous man. You see it is not about "men." It's about how any one "man or woman" thinks. When someone says to you, "Hey, that's how all men think." Tell yourself, "No, that's how YOU think!" So if that is true, and it is, the source for positive feedback is corrupted. Hence, your frustration. As they say in Hollywood, "I believe that's a wrap." 00-Daddy | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 2:27:50 PM | It's not even about whether it's a cop out or not. It's quite apparent that being monogamous is not part of our nature. Let us not ignore the elephant in the room. Sure there are those who can use the truth as a cop out, but it doesn't change the truth.
Because we are beings which are self aware and capable of critical thinking, we are also beings that have created "civilizations". And one of the things that makes up a civilization is civil living, that is having morals, rules, and conditions to live by which help us all get along with each other.
One of the conditions that promotes civility is the act of taking responsibility for our actions. And part of those actions is taking responsibility towards how we treat one another. Higher civilization clearly states that we not be deceptive towards one another and that at times we must consciously deny some of our instinctive urges for the betterment of society as a whole. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 2:35:50 PM | Wow, just wow, at the amount of mis-information in this thread. First, the fact that men use it as an excuse and their partners don't appreciate that does not disqualify the evidence of how men are hardwired. Men don't shoot 10 million sperm with only 10% being fertile for no reason, there is a very legit, reason. Read the book 'The Red Queen' if you really want to educate yourself on the subject and sex and the evolution of human nature. Men like blond bombshells (and women want to look like them)
Long before TV—in 15th- and 16th- century Italy, and possibly two millennia ago—women were dying their hair blond. A recent study shows that in Iran, where exposure to Western media and culture is limited, women are actually more concerned with their body image, and want to lose more weight, than their American counterparts. It is difficult to ascribe the preferences and desires of women in 15th-century Italy and 21st-century Iran to socialization by media.
Women's desire to look like Barbie—young with small waist, large breasts, long blond hair, and blue eyes—is a direct, realistic, and sensible response to the desire of men to mate with women who look like her. There is evolutionary logic behind each of these features.
Men prefer young women in part because they tend to be healthier than older women. One accurate indicator of health is physical attractiveness; another is hair. Healthy women have lustrous, shiny hair, whereas the hair of sickly people loses its luster. Because hair grows slowly, shoulder-length hair reveals several years of a woman's health status.
Men also have a universal preference for women with a low waist-to-hip ratio. They are healthier and more fertile than other women; they have an easier time conceiving a child and do so at earlier ages because they have larger amounts of essential reproductive hormones. Thus men are unconsciously seeking healthier and more fertile women when they seek women with small waists.
Until very recently, it was a mystery to evolutionary psychology why men prefer women with large breasts, since the size of a woman's breasts has no relationship to her ability to lactate. But Harvard anthropologist Frank Marlowe contends that larger, and hence heavier, breasts sag more conspicuously with age than do smaller breasts. Thus they make it easier for men to judge a woman's age (and her reproductive value) by sight—suggesting why men find women with large breasts more attractive.
Alternatively, men may prefer women with large breasts for the same reason they prefer women with small waists. A new study of Polish women shows that women with large breasts and tight waists have the greatest fecundity, indicated by their levels of two reproductive hormones (estradiol and progesterone).
Blond hair is unique in that it changes dramatically with age. Typically, young girls with light blond hair become women with brown hair. Thus, men who prefer to mate with blond women are unconsciously attempting to mate with younger (and hence, on average, healthier and more fecund) women. It is no coincidence that blond hair evolved in Scandinavia and northern Europe, probably as an alternative means for women to advertise their youth, as their bodies were concealed under heavy clothing.
Women with blue eyes should not be any different from those with green or brown eyes. Yet preference for blue eyes seems both universal and undeniable—in males as well as females. One explanation is that the human pupil dilates when an individual is exposed to something that she likes. For instance, the pupils of women and infants (but not men) spontaneously dilate when they see babies. Pupil dilation is an honest indicator of interest and attraction. And the size of the pupil is easiest to determine in blue eyes. Blue-eyed people are considered attractive as potential mates because it is easiest to determine whether they are interested in us or not.
The irony is that none of the above is true any longer. Through face-lifts, wigs, liposuction, surgical breast augmentation, hair dye, and color contact lenses, any woman, regardless of age, can have many of the key features that define ideal female beauty. And men fall for them. Men can cognitively understand that many blond women with firm, large breasts are not actually 15 years old, but they still find them attractive because their evolved psychological mechanisms are fooled by modern inventions that did not exist in the ancestral environment.
# Most women benefit from polygyny, while most men benefit from monogamy
When there is resource inequality among men—the case in every human society—most women benefit from polygyny: women can share a wealthy man. Under monogamy, they are stuck with marrying a poorer man.
The only exceptions are extremely desirable women. Under monogamy, they can monopolize the wealthiest men; under polygyny, they must share the men with other, less desirable women. However, the situation is exactly opposite for men. Monogamy guarantees that every man can find a wife. True, less desirable men can marry only less desirable women, but that's much better than not marrying anyone at all.
Men in monogamous societies imagine they would be better off under polygyny. What they don't realize is that, for most men who are not extremely desirable, polygyny means no wife at all, or, if they are lucky, a wife who is much less desirable than one they could get under monogamy. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 2:36:47 PM | Actually I am a surreal monogamist. My favorite is Honey Bunches of Wild Oats. I'd like to share but it would be against my better judgment, or was it nature? I get so confused.
Sharia Law? You got to be kidding, the Inquisition was much more effective. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
As far as alpha males spreading genes around it has been shown that the effort to monopolize a breeding pool is usually counterproductive, especially when long term care of young is involved. That is why births are balanced essentially 1:1 and why altruistic behavior exists since it is the fittest group, not individual, that survives to pass along genes. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:14:22 PM | 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 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.
Actually men have not been able to control it. In evolutionary terms, the winning men are the smart good looking Alpha males that women choose to have sneaky sex with. That is almost all women because, if they have the opportunity, they win by selecting the best genes for their children .
The big losers are the average men. There are not enough top males so women are forced to select average men that are dependable and good providers as mates. And with that comes the privilege of sex. Even there women have evolved with the strategy of having sex with superior males when they are ovulating and climaxing, thereby retaining most of his sperm and faking climaxing with her mate and expelling most of his sperm. All an average man can hope for is that some of her children will be sired by him. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:17:36 PM |
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.
That doesn't speak to whether men are 'meant to be monogamous' at all.
I don't see what environmental constraints have to do with anything. That's like putting a greyhound in a tiny cage and saying they don't like to run. | |
|
| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:24:56 PM | From the Opost:
"Men, do you really feel, deep down inside, that you were not meant to be with one woman for the rest of your life due to your 'wiring'?"
1. To answer the question: Yes we do, but I do not think it is a matter of wiring and I do not think it is gender specific, ie this applies to both men and women.
2. The NOT meant to be with one woman for the rest of one's life thing does not mean non-monogamy. Ie one can be monogamous in any given rel and still not believe in that "rest of your life" stuff! | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:31:53 PM | A lot of people confuse polyamory with cheating.
They're not the same thing.
I agree. They're not the same thing. The difference seems simple to me - it's consent or awareness of a relationship's boundaries. If a partner in an established monogamous relationship goes outside of the relationship, it's cheating. But, if there is no intent for a monogamous relationship, then having sex with another isn't cheating. So, being monogamous is about being true to your word. | |
|
| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:36:35 PM | I would like to think men have evolved somewhat in the last few million years, but then I look around at work and all I see are guys scratching their nuts, armpits, ass and picking their noses and chewing on their fingernails, yes in that order, and to top it all off watch them eat. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:46:36 PM |
Average men seldom cheat because they have few opportunities unless they buy it.
Fewer than alphas, sure. But a below average woman paired with a below average man, and looking to cheat, might be quite happy to cheat with an average one.
As an above average male, there's nothing a woman who is, say a '3' out of 10, can do to entice me into having sex with her. She could show up with tacos, purring, with her boobs pressed against my front door, and I wouldn't let her in.
Now, I know of course some above average guys would sex her up, but it would be done quite stealthily, to avoid the social costs. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:49:38 PM |
I would like to think men have evolved somewhat in the last few million years, but then I look around at work and all I see are guys scratching their nuts, armpits, ass and picking their noses and chewing on their fingernails, yes in that order, and to top it all off watch them eat. Some men have in fact evolved from the Neanderthal, spread-my-seed-far-and-wide, uncouth, moron of a caveman male species. While those particular body parts continue to itch, those men have learned to scratch in private, eat with their mouth closed, and keep their d!ck in their pants when in a relationship. If it was true that men are 'hardwired' to NOT be monogamous, every man.. including your father, would have been unfaithful. While it does in fact occur, not all men are that way and it will never be an acceptable 'excuse' for cheating. There is none, period. It's taking the easy way out and absolving yourself of any and all personal responsibility for your own stupidity and actions. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:57:32 PM | Monogamy is a choice, self respect, respect for your partner and respect for a relationship is a choice.
We have conscious will and ability to control any and all impulses to "act" on what we may momentarily feel or get an urge to do. This not only applies to sex, but to many other areas, those who act with very little impulse control usually find themselves often in trouble or jail and have very little if any success in any type of relationship.
Monogamy IMO is just as much about impulse control as wanting to smack someone that makes you angry, maybe more so.
We're all ultimately responsible and accountable for our actions and the impact and how they affect others in our lives. Mature people think before they act and consider the repercussions in advance. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 3:58:51 PM |
Fewer than alphas, sure. But a below average woman paired with a below average man, and looking to cheat, might be quite happy to cheat with an average one.
As an above average male, there's nothing a woman who is, say a '3' out of 10, can do to entice me into having sex with her.
All that is true. Obviously most of the top males, having so many choices are only going to choose to have sex with the prettiest women. And, since most males will date down for sex but not marry down, some average men win buy siring the children to women that are the mates of even lower ranking males. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 4:16:41 PM | People who are unhappy in their relationships do the strangest things. Putting it about is another way of ensuring that the relationship will end once all is revealed.
Been there done that - don't throw stones at those who also fall by the way side.
Who knows why some relationships last for life and others don't. Do some people settle for very little in of their long term relationships?
If one partner is cheating then there is a serious shortcoming in the relationship - not necessarily a sexual issue.
In my case the sex was reasonable but the intellectual frustration was awful.
If we have not walked in the shoes of another, in terms of what goes on behind closed doors, perhaps its best not to sit in judgement.
What a boring place the world would if everyone who married stayed faithful and married for life.
There would be no need of sites like this. 
Good night, all off up the wooden hill to Bedfordshire | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 4:23:20 PM | Is yet more pseudo-psychology bollocks to excuse bad human behaviour
Yes men can be monogamous if they choose to.
People, men and women, like to abdicate personal reponsibility - whether it be parenting skills, behaviour in a relationship etc etc but will blame some biological, congenital impulse or syndrome. The weak people do that. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 4:32:14 PM | | I think men CAN be monogamous. It all depends on the man. Some men just don't want to be, same as some women don't want to be. Some people like "getting around", in which case I don't think they should get in a relationship with anyone in the 1st place. If you know you can't commit to 1 person, why waste anothers time and drag their heart through the mud? Just go for 1 night stands. I personally am a 1 man woman.... I never cheated. Has the thought ever crossed my mind? When I was unhappy in my marriage, yeah it did, BUT I knew better.... I would of never gone behind his back or hurt him in that way. I think ending it first is the way to go. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 4:33:38 PM | Any man or woman who uses this argument just doesn't have the integrity to admit that they are lacking in character, morals and self-control. No one is forced to be unfaithful. It is a conscience decision to remain monogamous or to cheat on your partner.
Being non-monogamous and cheating are separate issues. Non-monogamy CAN be the choice of an honest person with character, morals and self-control. Using the "non-monogamy is natural" theory as an reason for cheating is no different than using any other excuse for cheating. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:03:07 PM |
*carpe_diem* wrote: If it was true that men are 'hardwired'
to NOT be monogamous, every man.. including your father,
would have been unfaithful.
Please explain your reasoning. If I postulate, for example, that
people are hardwired to avoid getting killed, the fact that some
willingly go into battle or commit suicide isn't enough by itself
to prove that we don't inherit a survival instinct.
Also, we have two distinct topic questions in this thread:
1. Are humans naturally monogamous?
2. Can our natural drives be used to excuse or justify immoral behavior?
It will be less confusing to debate them separately. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:15:44 PM |
That doesn't speak to whether men are 'meant to be monogamous' at all.
I don't see what environmental constraints have to do with anything. That's like putting a greyhound in a tiny cage and saying they don't like to run.
Firstly a greyhound is an animal...albeit as an animal species...we are humans.
Huge difference.
What it does infact tell you ...that it is a choice...aha! and which is the difference between animals vs humans.
Considering it IS a choice...there is no hardwiring about it.
You either decide to do it...or you dont. | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 6:33:34 PM | | I am quite capable of being monogamous if and when I meet my lady. For me the problem has been the opposite. I have been technically single since 1984 and I have dumped half a dozen women in that time for not being able to keep their pants on behind my back. | |
|
| |
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 10:40:36 PM |
Please explain your reasoning. If I postulate, for example, that
people are hardwired to avoid getting killed, the fact that some
willingly go into battle or commit suicide isn't enough by itself
to prove that we don't inherit a survival instinct.
True ... I suspect the motivating factor is the promise of 72 virgins.
Heh ... so much for monogamy in heaven I guess.
 | |
|
| What's this Men are not monogamous by nature' line all about?
Posted: 3/3/2008 11:50:31 PM | "Whatever technique you use to screen women doesn't
appear to be working too well."
I defy any man to see thru a convincing cheater. It happens to a great number of men who never know until they catch them at it. There are millions of men out there who's wives see more cream than a dairy and they never ever catch them at it. I have done a lot of accurate observing in my lifetime. | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
