Are human beings meant to be monogamous?

The answer is probably yes.

More women are just too much work. Look at the Mormons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-Pm5092a0c

No conservative has ever stepped out of the bounds of monogamy. It is all fake news lies.

https://www.ranker.com/list/republican-sex-scandals/web-infoguy?page=5

doctorj wrote:

One relationship can be enough of a headache. Why have more? It’s a good question though.

Who said anything about a relationship? We're talking about one vs multiple sex partners - nothing at all about relationships.

No Attention Span wrote:

Did you stop reading after the Fifth Commandment?

Did you stop reading after The Book of Revelation?

Nottatomato wrote:

Relationships breed misery.

No, absentee fathers breed misery. Sex concerns more than the two people committing the act. It impacts health insurance rates, tax rates, school performance, crime rates, infectious disease rates, etc. It is hazardous to act upon your evolutionary impulses in modern life.

Monogamy is great for the stability of a society, but a horrible genetic strategy.

The most genetically successful human male would have multiple partners, starting at a young age and continuing to an old age. Lots of kids. While his genetic survival might suffer by not parenting his own children, this is probably outweighed by the fact that fatherless children tend to survive to sexual maturity just as frequently as fathered children. Additionally, some might argue that fatherless children are themselves more likely to engage in youthful, unprotected sex and thus spread the father's genes even more quickly.

Banana Bread wrote:

Yes we are meant to just be with one person, our soulmate. That is what God wants from us. You can't go around tainting yourself and any partner you are with. Nobody should have to touch someone if they have already been touched by someone else. It is immoral and disrespectful. It just causes an anarchist society full of debauchery, but I guess that is what the liberals want because they don't really care about what happens to society despite their claims.

Prick.

Religion, like monogamy is a social; not biological; construct.

If you have a woman who loves intimacy, monogamy wins! You’ve hit the jackpot!

Genes still get diluted pretty fast with this strategy from 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16... so the many children strategy for spreading your genes is still pretty terrible strategy from a fathers genetic strategy. Best strategy if your goal is to pass on your full genetic material would be to father children with a twin sister.

Good genetic traits will spread exponentially because anyone who has them will likely have more than one kid. Where bad ones will weed themselves out regardless of how many copies you make in generation 1.

Mother nature believes in monogamy. Why risk getting STDs screwing around. Not worth it. Find a nice mate and be happy.

"Meant to be" monogamous is probably not the way to put it, as there is great variety in the sexual attitudes of different individuals and among different cultures; monogamy is widely practiced among human beings but is not universal.

But there is something to be said in that monogamy is apparently an ethical ideal in most world religions, which seems to be underscored by a common thread of thinking: Sexuality is a powerful impulse that can control you if you allow it to, so better to approach it with discipline. Libido- sexual energy- has powerful potential to move your life in any direction you choose to channel it, but will also consume you if you allow it to control your existence. In this line of thinking, its better to channel that desire for sex into one committed partner to allow it a healthy point of release so that it doesn't take over otherwise.

I ultimately think that this is a bad question.

I understand the underlying curiosity, but ultimately the language of this question is what cripples it.

"Has the evolutionary life history of humans selected for monogamy over time? If so, by which mechanisms?"

"Do children born and raised by monogamous parents exhibit lower rates of clinical anxiety, depression, and/or other significant markers of mental health?

"Using a multivariate analysis to control for some obvious variables, do countries more conducive to monogamous relationships have higher or lower economic output?"

^I think these could potentially lead us to some more impactful conclusions. Whether one attributes meaning to the exclusivity of a relationship is likely a function of the subjective interpretation of one's own world view, which is formulated through a mix of genetic and environmental factors. You will never get a conclusive answer to this question because one does not exist.

Yo Brad; yeah, blah blah ...but what if you just wanna blow loads into a little group of woman that love your personality..?!

Genetics Math wrote:

Genes still get diluted pretty fast with this strategy from 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16... so the many children strategy for spreading your genes is still pretty terrible strategy from a fathers genetic strategy. Best strategy if your goal is to pass on your full genetic material would be to father children with a twin sister.

Good genetic traits will spread exponentially because anyone who has them will likely have more than one kid. Where bad ones will weed themselves out regardless of how many copies you make in generation 1.

You realize that makes absolutely no sense, right?

I knew a few women wrote:

Yo Brad; yeah, blah blah ...but what if you just wanna blow loads into a little group of woman that love your personality..?!

If you really knew women, you'd understand they aren't so willing to share. It's their instinct to view a man as property.

Stats tell the story pretty well. 2/3 of people married in urban areas get divorced, and a marriage has about a 50-55% chance or reaching 25yrs. 82% are initiated by women.

80% say they would cheat if they wouldn't get caught. Let that sink in. 80%. Estimated cheating rates are 25%-75%.

Does that sound like a system that is "working"? Presumably not. Monogamy worked pretty well 50+ yrs ago when we had a very patricarchical society. In present society? Not so much.

I think those stats make it clear that monogamy is not a natural state for humans. While essential for the rise of civilation, it's definitely against our biology, which was thought to be serially monogamous (woman is with a man for 3-5yrs to get a child to where it's more self dependent and less need for a man, then move on to next guy-> good because more sexual variation than lifelong single partner).

Also explains why women are biologically set up to get sexually bored of a guy after 3-7 years. There is a reason the "post nuptial shutoff" thread exists, and it's not all from crappy husbands and stress.

Monogamy does work in some cases. Will of course depend on the mindset of the two people and their level of commitment and understanding of what will happen. Usually good if both partners have busy/robust careers and/or a low sex drive.

That in mind, knowing the stats I can't recommend monogamy. I can't recommend polygamy (multiple relationships) either, very few humans can love multiple people and keep that under control. What does that leave? Open relationship/marriage. One long term pair bonded relationship with emotional investment. Then one other girl (could be more, but one is plenty) who is a pure FB. Sex with her at least once a month. More frequent outside sex or more than one FB would depend on your sexual desire and being a high sex drive guy.

Obviously, woman is free to have FB type relationship with other guys. Some women will on and off, others never will. Horrible, biased system if a guy tries to say "I can have sex with whoever but you have to be exclusive to me".

It's a solid system, kids are possible, still get pair bonded deep relationship.

Have you seen "polyamorous" people? Ugliest people ever.

Your kids have half of your genes and half of their moms genes. Your grand kids have a 1/4 of your genes and great grand kids have 1/8, great great grand kids 1/16 of your genes and so on.

It doesn't matter how many kids you have your individual genes are diluted pretty fast.

You want to increase the number of genetics your kids have similar to you incest would do a better job of accomplishing that but that doesn't seem to work out very well. Look at dog breading that sort of one dad to a 1000 puppies seems to have caused lots of problems in purebred dogs.

Genetics like variety and monogamy to a few partners accomplishes this best. Having one guy pass on tons of his genes is great for the short term but bad for the long term survival of a species.

Are human beings meant to be generous?

Are human beings meant to be honest?

Are human beings meant to be courageous?

Are human beings meant to be just?

There are things called "virtues". If you get married, and you take traditional vows, then you should honor them.