Thursday, October 9, 2008

Psychology of Monogamy

I was having a conversation earlier that prompted me to think quite a bit about jealousy and sexual monogamy. As is typical, this drove me to start doing research, introspection, and analysis of many related issues, probably far more than I should. Our little journey starts with the question: why do some of us want monogamous relationships? From there, we quickly move to other questions, e.g. are our reasons valid; what are the reasons for our reasons; is there an appropriate answer for everyone or even in general; is it something we should fight for or rail against; what are the relationships between sex and self-worth; how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie-Roll Pop?

I'm not saying that I am against sexual monogamy; on the contrary, I have some sort of desire for it. I just want to be able to justify my desire in the issue, or at least be forced to admit to myself that I have an unfounded desire. Perhaps a truly healthy relationship doesn't need sexual monogamy, or perhaps a truly healthy relationship becomes sexually monogamous without any thought on the issue; maybe you fantasize about sex with others, but not really have a strong desire to carry through on it. But why? There has to be something to curb the desire, and is that something a thing to be sought and cherished, or just a factor for some people but not others?

Let's start with one point that is not really up for debate, at least not here: most humans are genetically and/or psychologically driven to have multiple sexual partners. If you disagree with this, can you just [bracket] the idea for now and pretend I'm right? It doesn't seem like this desire is biased towards men, either; apparently women want to have sex just as much as men. Go figure.Don't lie to yourself that your partner is never going to see someone they want to get funky with, or that you never will. It's natural to see a really sexy person and think about sex with them; it's part of the word, after all. We can't honestly be upset with someone for fantasizing a bit when Alessandra Ambrosia and/or Daniel Craig shows up on the screen. By corollary, we can't honestly be upset about fantasies involving equally sexy no-names on the street. Sure, we can be dishonestly upset about such fantasies, but be honest about your dishonesty and realize that it's unnatural to be upset about something so natural.

If we take the above paragraph as true, which you implicitly agreed to do by continuing reading, expecting a partner to not think about sex with anyone other than you is to expect them to be inhuman or dishonest. Assuming your partner is a human, which may not be true in some locations (Baaaaahhh), you are expecting the latter - your partner to lie to you and feel guilty about themselves. That's great if you thrive on a relationship of guilt, dishonesty, and delusion, like 90% of people and statistics. If, however, you want an honest relationship and still want to consider monogamy, you need to expand your inquiry.

Desire to have multiple sex partners, or at least fantasies about such are natural. "So, necessarily, we should embrace that point and follow through on it! To do otherwise would be unnatural! Right?" Wrong! Maybe we should embrace the point, but the inclusion of the word 'necessarily' throws a wrench into your monkey. Catching a cold is natural, but that doesn't mean we should, necessarily, embrace colds, seek them out and breath deeply the sneezes of others. "So that means we should, necessarily, fight the urge and be monogamous! Right?" What did I just tell you about the word 'necessarily'? Quit throwing things at monkeys (unless it's poo) and think rationally. Breathing is natural and I, for one, do not want to fight that urge, except maybe when sneezing is involved.

Being 'natural' doesn't tell us what we ought to do, though it might give us a starting point. If we have an urge, we ought to have a reason to resist that urge. If we have no reason, we might as well embrace it. What are the possible reasons for fighting the urge and embracing monogamy? I'm no expert on the topic, of course, but a few psychological rewards seem to be commonly cited. I'm going to cover one reason or theme of reasons, then quickly dismiss it/them because I can't relate at all, nor sustain any interest in the topic. Monogamy can cater to feelings of dominance or ownership. I do not respect such desires, so I'm not even going to entertain this as a valid justification for monogamy. It might be a reason, but it's definitely not a justification in my book. At least I'm honest!

Another reason cited is that monogamy gives us a sense of safety. I suppose this is based on the idea that if our partner isn't sleeping with anyone else, we don't have to worry about our partner leaving us. I really don't see a strong connection here, though; it feels more like the delusional attitude I discussed above. Remember that your partner is going to think about sex with someone else no matter what, so you better have more than just sex supporting your relationship, or you're either just fuck buddies or you're probably not going to last long anyway. If your partner is going to leave you because of sex, you were either in a rather narrowly supported relationship to begin with, or you had some other serious issues the two of you should have discussed; sex wasn't the reason, it was just the catalyst. If your partner is leaving you for more reasons than just sex, then we're talking about more than just sex, aren't we?

A similar reason, possibly another facet of the same reason, is that sexual monogamy helps you feel special somehow, that your partner favours you over all others. But, just like with the feeling of safety, this needs to be rooted in more than just sex. A healthy relationship likely includes everything other than sex and sex (in most cases), so I'm not saying the sex doesn't matter; I'm just saying that your partner abstaining from sex with others shouldn't be the source of a sense of safety in your relationship or the sole reason for feeling special or favoured by your partner. These should be rooted in a wide array of commonalities, attractions, and trust. Sex might be a part of this equation, but it seems like there needs to be more to reasonably justify sexual monogamy. If you have a sense of safety and a feeling that your partner considers you to be special without sexual monogamy, do you need the monogamy? It seems you would need something else at that point to justify the monogamy.

How do we make feelings of safety and specialness important enough to sex to have them justify sexual monogamy, or can they? Are there other justifications for sexual monogamy? How do we continue this chain of thought? I'm sure there are multiple answers that will suit different people, but I don't feel like I have reached an answer for myself. What do you think?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think that this entire issue is fluid for all people at all times. Sometimes we want monogamy and sometimes we don't. I think one has to go with what one feels at a given/particular time in a given/particular relationship.

That redheaded one said...

I have been both ways in a relationship and each way was the right one for that relationship. I think the idea of seeing someone as special and fufilling enough as themseves to not make you want to do anything but notice that someone is cute is a once in a life time chance.

Anonymous said...

Hey Britt, I didn't know you had a blog!

I don't know which argument works as a justification for me, as a I do have a strong preference, yet I have not felt (as of yet) the need to give a reason for that preference to myself. I'll try to put some other justifications here. At least ones comes to mind

The argument from romantic idealism: (romantic) Love and sex are two different things, that can be clearly experienced separately, but can also be experienced in combination. The idealist would feel that you cannot get both, the combined experience (sex with romantic love with one person) and the separete experience (sex with other people) at the same time, and thus chooses/needs to drop one of the two. Why exactly can you not experience the two? Is it just a cultural construct that love means sexual exclusivity?

I guess thats part of it, but I think its something that goes into the definition of the thing of it like "you cannot really call it a secret if x number people know about it" though I still have no idea how you can define something as love authoritatively.

Reflective Jealousy: You are a jealous person -and nature probably makes us jealous-, but are also kinda just, so you impose yourself the rules you want your partner to keep.

Anonymous said...

I am beginning to think the idea of monogamy is impossible. he problem I have is that it is more acceptable for a man to do it than a woman. If a man commits infidelity is is somewhat expected or accepted. If a woman commits infidelity she is labled all kinds of names and her partner may even murder her. If infidelity is an inevitable event in a man's life then it should be accepted as a woman's too. I have been idealistic and have never had an affair, but I have had my ex husband do this to me. The greatest hurt was betrayal of the lie. Maybe it really is impossible for humans to be monogamous, and if that is true, women should not receive so much condemnation when they succumb to the tempation.

Anonymous said...

It is useful to try everything in practise anyway and I like that here it's always possible to find something new. :)

Anonymous said...

substantiate in event this autonomous of evaluate of indictment [url=http://www.casinoapart.com]casino[/url] hand-out at the most beneficent [url=http://www.casinoapart.com]online casino[/url] archetype with 10's of into the open [url=http://www.casinoapart.com]online casinos[/url]. entrain on [url=http://www.casinoapart.com/articles/play-roulette.html]roulette[/url], [url=http://www.casinoapart.com/articles/play-slots.html]slots[/url] and [url=http://www.casinoapart.com/articles/play-baccarat.html]baccarat[/url] at this [url=http://www.casinoapart.com/articles/no-deposit-casinos.html]no staunch obstruct casino[/url] , www.casinoapart.com
the finest [url=http://de.casinoapart.com]casino[/url] to UK, german and all to the world. so in get ahead in the world the treatment of the exemplar [url=http://es.casinoapart.com]casino en linea[/url] corroborate us now.

Anonymous said...

[url=http://www.23planet.com]Online casinos[/url], also known as accepted casinos or Internet casinos, are online versions of respected ("buddy and mortar") casinos. Online casinos casualness gamblers to dissemble and wager on casino games with the relieve the Internet.
Online casinos habitually wagon odds and payback percentages that are comparable to land-based casinos. Some online casinos control higher payback percentages as a drug into cavity function games, and some emergence payout consequence profit audits on their websites. Assuming that the online casino is using an correctly programmed indefinitely consider up generator, catalogue games like blackjack preoccupy an established forebears edge. The payout be suffering with a pay out in commission of these games are established in the forefront the rules of the game.
Heterogeneous online casinos broadside on activity or snatch check in to grips with their software from companies like Microgaming, Realtime Gaming, Playtech, Intercontinental Skilfulness Technology and CryptoLogic Inc.

Anonymous said...

top [url=http://www.001casino.com/]casino[/url] hinder the latest [url=http://www.casinolasvegass.com/]free casino bonus[/url] unshackled no set aside hand-out at the best [url=http://www.baywatchcasino.com/]casino online
[/url].