Monogamy. Learned or Natural for Humans

[Dargos]

I would like to ask this forum their opinions on the subject of Monogamy. Is this "life style" a learned activity or do we have a natural desire to live and love only one partner.

Thru personal experiance I feel that monogamy is a learned style of living indoctrinated on us from the time of our first coherent thought form... mommy and daddy. The majority(at least in western culture) have the "Nuclear Family" as the basis for family interaction(Father, Mother and childeren).
However it is not a "natural" thing. Both men and women, who are in an exclusive relationship, have natural desires for others. Monogamy is a choice we make after being bombarded by societys definition of morality.
(note. I do not feel that monogamy is a bad thing...only that it is not "natural")

[weemadando]

Monogamy is definately learnt.

[Shinova]

Totally learned behavior. From a biological and evolutionary point of view, a male is contributing the most to his species when he's a player, not as a married man.

For women it's different since they can field only one baby at a time.

[NecronLord]

ditto

[haas mark]

learned because of what Shinova said.

Biologically, males of any given species try to spread their genes as far as they possibly can as many times as they can. Which is proilly why guys have threesome/foursome/orgy fetishes/fantasies.

[data_link]

Learned. I'd explain why, but Shinova beat me to it.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Learned behavior.

But Humans are no longer driven by instinct, so reproduction is no longer the sole purpose of our existance.

I prefer Monogamy.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Yup, but with women it's shop around for the best genetic material, replace drone if he's not up to stuff anymore.

[haas mark]

Learned behavior.

But Humans are no longer driven by instinct, so reproduction is no longer the sole purpose of our existance.

I prefer Monogamy.

For the most part, Spanky. I too prefer monogamy, but there are those that wish for threesoems and whatnot.....IMO, this is instinctual. It's never been scientifically proven, but I think that the male instinct to reproduce in as many places as possible is what causes guys to want multiple partners at once (and why guya are so scumballish about checking out women).

[weemadando]

Learned behavior.

But Humans are no longer driven by instinct, so reproduction is no longer the sole purpose of our existance.

I prefer Monogamy.

For the most part, Spanky. I too prefer monogamy, but there are those that wish for threesoems and whatnot.....IMO, this is instinctual. It's never been scientifically proven, but I think that the male instinct to reproduce in as many places as possible is what causes guys to want multiple partners at once (and why guya are so scumballish about checking out women).

Actually according to a recent study, women with multiple sexual partners have a much higher fertility rate, as the "excitement" leads to more hormones etc. As such even monogamy for women being natural may be debated.

I'll add a link when I find it.

[haas mark]

Hey, I never said anything about women...that was Shinova.

[Lagmonster]

I've noticed you're all pulling for it as a learned social behaviour. To a certain extent, this is true.

But remember that biologically, human babies require *years* of support before they can get along on their own. The inclusion of two parents and the protection granted by the much stronger male would be beneficial for the species. Point one.

Point two, humans are pack animals. It is in our interest to form family clans, like other mammals do. This doesn't necessarily mean we're completely with only one mate, but it does mean that we're likely to limit our number of partners to a small family unit of, say, one alpha male, three sub-males, and four or five females shared throughout the clan, with the alpha getting first dibs.

Now, these do qualify as social impetus, true, but at that point you have to ask whether it's a trained or untrained social impetus. In other words, whether humans behave that way by nature or if they are required to be taught monogamy (or, at least, the clan-group-monogomy practiced by pack animals) in their social structure.

[Darth Wong]

Partly learned, partly instinctive. The social influences are undeniable. However, monogamy is not unheard-of in the animal kingdom, and there are logical benefits.

Girls tend to select boyfriends based on beauty. Women tend to prefer more rugged, reliable men. Why? The leading theory is that as women mature, they instinctively seek a partner more for his ability to not only sire children but protect and support the family. That ability is diluted if he has many wives, and nonexistent if he's a "player". Indeed, being a "player" is totally unnatural; the instinct to protect one's own offspring is strong, and so I'd say the choice of natural inclinations is between monogamy and polygamy, with unattached "spreading of genetic material" not on the menu. As lagmonster pointed out, we humans are high-maintenance offspring.

Besides, jealousy seems to be instinctive too.

[Dargos]

...snip

Point two, humans are pack animals. It is in our interest to form family clans, like other mammals do. This doesn't necessarily mean we're completely with only one mate, but it does mean that we're likely to limit our number of partners to a small family unit of, say, one alpha male, three sub-males, and four or five females shared throughout the clan, with the alpha getting first dibs.

interesting...I would ad that there would be an Alpha female as well. As evidence I would point out that groups of women living in close proximity over time start to have their menstral cycle around the same time and by default become fertile around the same time as well. This involentary bodily function is adjusted to corispond with the most dominate female in the group.....I will look up link to research information and will post it.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

It's more biological than learnt behavior.

Human infants are helpless at birth.
Human take a long time to reach maturity.
Humans tend to only have one child at a time.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

I would like to ask this forum their opinions on the subject of Monogamy. Is this "life style" a learned activity or do we have a natural desire to live and love only one partner.

Thru personal experiance I feel that monogamy is a learned style of living indoctrinated on us from the time of our first coherent thought form... mommy and daddy. The majority(at least in western culture) have the "Nuclear Family" as the basis for family interaction(Father, Mother and childeren).
However it is not a "natural" thing. Both men and women, who are in an exclusive relationship, have natural desires for others. Monogamy is a choice we make after being bombarded by societys definition of morality.
(note. I do not feel that monogamy is a bad thing...only that it is not "natural")

Of course we're not monogamous by nature. I mean, that preposterous idea would only be supported if the nuclear family has been around since the beginning of recorded human history and that all human cultures exhibit this phenomenon. Oh wait -- it is, and they do.

[Shinova]

I would like to ask this forum their opinions on the subject of Monogamy. Is this "life style" a learned activity or do we have a natural desire to live and love only one partner.

Thru personal experiance I feel that monogamy is a learned style of living indoctrinated on us from the time of our first coherent thought form... mommy and daddy. The majority(at least in western culture) have the "Nuclear Family" as the basis for family interaction(Father, Mother and childeren).
However it is not a "natural" thing. Both men and women, who are in an exclusive relationship, have natural desires for others. Monogamy is a choice we make after being bombarded by societys definition of morality.
(note. I do not feel that monogamy is a bad thing...only that it is not "natural")

Of course we're not monogamous by nature. I mean, that preposterous idea would only be supported if the nuclear family has been around since the beginning of recorded human history and that all human cultures exhibit this phenomenon. Oh wait -- it is, and they do.

PRE-history is where all the non-monogamy lies.

[Darth Wong]

Many societies throughout history have been polygamous. But some form of commitment (though not necessarily single-partner exclusive) is necessary, instinctive, and natural. Without it, we would not have survived.

[neoolong]

I would say that some sort of family structure has its origins in nature. However, to go from that to strict monogamy is probably due mostly to social forces.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Or even purely practical considerations -- I know that, being the "hunter/gatherer" for my own kids and having both an ex-wife and a girlfriend, I don't think I could afford polygamy. Now going back to prehistoric times, imagine busting your ass all day long hunting, fishing, whatever just for one family -- now imagine how hard it would be to do that for more than one family...

[Shinova]

Or even purely practical considerations -- I know that, being the "hunter/gatherer" for my own kids and having both an ex-wife and a girlfriend, I don't think I could afford polygamy. Now going back to prehistoric times, imagine busting your ass all day long hunting, fishing, whatever just for one family -- now imagine how hard it would be to do that for more than one family...

Actually, I think back in prehistoric days, humans lived in communities of groups of families, not just one family.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Or even purely practical considerations -- I know that, being the "hunter/gatherer" for my own kids and having both an ex-wife and a girlfriend, I don't think I could afford polygamy. Now going back to prehistoric times, imagine busting your ass all day long hunting, fishing, whatever just for one family -- now imagine how hard it would be to do that for more than one family...

Actually, I think back in prehistoric days, humans lived in communities of groups of families, not just one family.

Still, the harder you worked, the more you took home, he?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Humans are pair-bonding creatures through some biological predisposition, and some through cultural indoctrination. Most scientists seem to agree that humans are naturally "serial monogamists," that by and large we pair off and split off in natural settings.

They identified hormones that are associated with pair-bonding in 100% monogamous moles and found that a related chemical was saturating the cortexes of volunteers who claimed they'd fallen in love. It seems to part of both.

[Exonerate]

If I recall correctly, a male's instinct is torn between spreading his genetic material as much as possible and being a stable mate (so that females like him)

[data_link]

If I recall correctly, a male's instinct is torn between spreading his genetic material as much as possible and being a stable mate (so that females like him)

BTW, is this also true for Angels?