Do we expect too much of ourselves (and each other) in terms of monogamy?

[Frrrrightattendant]

Is it even 'natural'?

I've been wondering this for ages - and not particularly in the context of any of my relationships, but it does come up and I'm interested to know if it's a minority view or there's something in it.

I was wondering whether we are, in terms of nature, really built to stay with the same person for ever. Or even for several years...or as long as our children are small(ish)?

What's the human condition got over other animals that makes us aspire to a lifelong mate? Do animals have other partners...I am ignorant on the science aspect.

It's just that I have seen so many people divorce and split up and thinking about it there does seem to be a big dissonance between social expectation (ie find ONE person, marry them, have kids, stay together) and what often happens.

I suppose I'm wondering if it might be a good thing to lower our expectations a bit - instead of getting hopeful and then being horrendously disappointed when one partner fancies someone else, or goes and has an affair or whatever.

I'm trying to word this sensitively so I hope it doesn't upset anyone. But I'm just not sure we are all cut out for long marriages.

What do people think?

[cory]

Some animals do, some don't. There are certainly monogamous fish species- including some where a fish will die if losing its mate, possibly also some birds. Others are all over the place.

Personally, I think I probably am one of those people that are cut out for monogamy. When ds split up with me 26 years ago, my instinct was not to get a replacement, but to get on with other parts of my life without too much whining. I wanted him, not just anyone. Eventually we got together again, and have been together for the last 25 years. I have never felt the need for change in this time. No evidence that he has either.

But certainly wouldn't want to prescribe for others- as long as they are honest.

[Frrrrightattendant]

I didn't know that about the fish, Cory

and I understand what you mean about not wanting anyone else. I felt like that about dp when he left me, about 6 years ago - and I still don't want anyone else. Nobody seems to match up.

25 years is great I'm glad you're happy.

[EvilAllenPoe]

i think that, historically, monogamy has worked for some people but by no means most -although 'marriage for life' may have been the gold standrd, people did trade partners, discreetly pop up in other towns with new partners, or due to the short life expectancies of the time, have to find new partners nyway.

my great grandfather for instnce, had three wives - all three died in childbirth. If the marriage wasn;t working, it didn't have to end in divorce therefore.

also, in terms of how people lived - people may have been less dependent on their partners than perhaps we re - they would be forced by circumstance to either live with extended family in the same house, with live-in staff (or if you were staff, you lived as part of your employers household rather than simply as a married couple) and be supported by a wider community. That danger of 'running out of conversation' would be less of an issue. Also - people were quite bltantly unfaithful - 1 in 10 houses in London were brothels in 1900 (oh the hypocrisy of the Victorian age!) and the profits of prositituion paid for some of Londons nicest houisng to be built...

These days, if you marry aged 30, you are likely to have nother 50 years to go with that person - you are expected to be faithful, you are expected (and likely to) spend time with them, and not share your house with many others.

with things as they are today - that needs a really strong bond to make two people stay together. People talk about 'work' to keep their relationship together, not 'taking eachother for granted' - having a good relationship over a long period is not seen as something that happens without conscious effort..this doesn't make it seem like something everyone will be able to do.

Some groups of humans do things very differently -polyandry, polygamy, or tribal arrangements that do not recognise individual couples exist....marriage is definitely a construct of social evolution,but not a universal occurrence by any means.

[EvilAllenPoe]

notes children have set up plans for world domination whilst i have been typing away oblivious

[overmydeadbody]

Quite a ,ot of animals choose one partner for life, or at least one partner for the duration that their young are still young and in need of them for survival.

I'm sure apes mourn their parters if they die.


the tihng about monogamy is that is requires effort and commitment by both partners. It is not the easy option, but as long as both partners are committed to putting in the effort (while understanding that they may fancy other people be drawn to other people, that is not abnormal) not to act on their impulses towards others.


Monogamy isn't the only option though, if both partners can agree on other relationship arrangements that is not wrong either.


The hurt comes when someone pretends to be monogamous, takes vows to be manogamous, and then cheats and betrays their vows and basically isn't prepared to put in the hard work required to stay monogamous.

[quizling]

Like Evil, I do think the fact of monogamy has changed throughout history, as people didn't live so long and more women died in childbirth and men in war. Also, the upper classes (in general, obviously some were) have never been monogamous before now - it was considered very inferior and middle-class to not have a mistress - George III was criticised for being faithful to his wife! People thought there was something wrong with him

[MalificenceBloodandSand]

Surely people know instinctively if they are monogamous or not?

There is of course a spectrum, with the totally non-monogamous at one end and people like me (what I would call an absolute monogamist) at the other.
It's people the people in the middle, lying (to themselves as much as to others) about whether they are capable of monogamy that cause so much heartache.
I know absolutely that I will only love one man for the whole of my life, even if he died tomorrow, I am not capable of loving or even having a relationship, with anyone else - it's how I am made, it's not a belief, it's a fact.
I don't expect my husband to share the same view, if I died he may well have other relationships - as long as he never marries or has other children, that's fine.

[Lougle]

No, actually I don't think that we expect too much when we ask for a long-term partnership to be monogamous.

What I do think is that society has become fickle with most of its standards, and it is a 'typical' line of thought to think that if a proportion do not meet those standards, the standards should be relaxed, rather than the people taking responsibility.

Look at so many issues of society. Children have no respect for their elders, well allow them to be 'autonomous' and come to their own sensibilities.

Prisons spilling over, so stop custodial sentences for repeat offenders because prison doesn't work. Basically rewarding repeat offenders.

[3thumbedwitch]

lots of birds are monogamous as well - swans and penguins, for starters. And I think dolphins are too..

I think it is a social construct more than natural that humans are monogamous - and I think that our fairy stories rely too heavily upon the concept - but I plan to stay faithful to DH and hope that he will stay faithful to me as well.

[Frrrrightattendant]

But Lougle you are assuming quite a lot. I like the quote from Chesterton:

'The Christian Ideal was not tried and found wanting. It was found difficult and not tried'.

I think it's called evolution and I don't believe society is worse than it used to be - just bad and good in different ways.

[Frrrrightattendant]

I like your post, Evil - it makes no sense to me, the 50 years of living just with one person no matter what. There may be people who wish to put in whatever it takes to remain strictly monogamous over that time period, and others to whom it comes naturally.

But I would guess they are in the minority - I don't know. It's whether it's worth the massive effort required in some circumstances, just for the ideal of monogamy for life.

Is it a concept worth putting all that into? Or is it better just to follow - obviously within reason and with as little pain as possible - ones changing feelings?

I know I adore dp but I don't think either of us wants the conventional set up - it's just really hard for him to admit it, because he's worried about looking like a failure I think. Just one example. I didn't want to admit it for ages either but now I have I am liberated.

[Lougle]

I am sorry, but what is difficult about sticking to your word? You say 'I want to marry you, and as part of that I will be faithful to you'. If you don't think you can be monogamous, don't marry. If you don't want to be monogamous, find someone who wants an 'open relationship' .

[Frrrrightattendant]

No, I'm not disagreeing that ones word should be stuck to!

I just think sometimes it's better not to marry - I think we are saying the same thing there.

[Lougle]

Maybe, but some things in life should be hard, IMO. Committment to another individual is hard - living with someone who has different ways of doing things, ways of thinking. Surely that is why the whole marriage process is such a big deal - you have an engagement period, which is a preparation time. You have the wedding, a public display of your intentions. You have the marriage, where the rubber hits the road.

I just think that today's society is so....flakey. If you don't like it, give it up. If it gets hard, walk away. What is wrong with saying 'yeah, it's hard, isn't it?' Why does hard=broken?

[Frrrrightattendant]

I don't know and I understand what you're saying. But equally, why does non-manogamy = broken?

What's so special about lifelong monogamy? I don't think I would be suitable for it - I change too much, I don't like living with someone else...that sort of thing.

[Frrrrightattendant]

I mean - why should we aspire to that rather than something else?

[Lougle]

But Fright, presumably that is a different issue, no? It is one thing to say that you don't want to live with your partner, and you don't want to necessarily have one partner for a long time. But are you saying that you don't want to be faithful to that partner during your relationship, however short?

To me, although I personally go in for marriage, I can understand people that don't. I can understand people who spend time intimately with another person, even though they don't think they are 'the one'.

I don't understand people who want to be sleeping with more than one person at a time. Personally. But that is because I see sex as an intimate, special thing, not just 'fun'.

[WhenwillIfeelnormal]

I read an interesting article recently about the possible links between the way people keep friendships and their ability to be monogamous in their romantic relationships.

The argument was that if you tended to maintain your long friendships and adapted to eachothers' growth and changes as friends, you would apply the same philosophy to your life partner. It got me thinking, because I've stayed close friends with my schoolfriends for over 30 years, a bunch of work friends for over 20 years, the women I befriended at the DCs' school, plus a few other "individual" long-term friends.

I love meeting people and making new friends too, but I don't tend to get so absorbed in a new friendship that I neglect existing relationships. And I've been married to the same man for 26 years now.

Frright, genuine question here. If your DP was of a different mindset and decided that he was heavily committed to a monogamous relationship with you, would you say "No way"?

[UnquietDad]

It's interesting - I've seen a lot of people totally and utterly convinced that they wanted to be monogamous and sure that they were never going to be anything else. And ten years down the line, no longer being so sure.

This is why "if you don't want to be monogamous, don't get married" seems a tad simplistic. People change.

On the other hand, how often is "I've found I really can't be monogamous" used as an excuse for "I want to have an affair and somehow intellectually justify it"? A bit like being a "sex addict" [snort]

[Lougle]

"It's interesting - I've seen a lot of people totally and utterly convinced that they wanted to be monogamous and sure that they were never going to be anything else. And ten years down the line, no longer being so sure."

Ah, but UnquietDad, to my mind, once you've made that committment, you make it work, regardless of whether you get a bit 'bored' 10 years down the line.

[motherinferior]

Frankly, in practice, far more people find monogamy unworkable than admit to it. I was very taken aback, in my more single/slapper days, by the sheer number of people in actually pretty contented relationships who also sometimes shagged other people.

I do only have one or two good friends who are openly non-monogamous - but of them, at least one couple has stayed together, very happily, for 15 years now.

[Lougle]

"It's interesting - I've seen a lot of people totally and utterly convinced that they wanted to be monogamous and sure that they were never going to be anything else. And ten years down the line, no longer being so sure."

Ah, but UnquietDad, to my mind, once you've made that committment, you make it work, regardless of whether you get a bit 'bored' 10 years down the line.

But then I am only 8¾ years down the line, so who knows, hey?

[UnquietDad]

It's not just about being "bored", though, is it? Don't get me wrong, I am sympathetic to monogamy myself. But I wonder what it's like to suddenly realise that you really have changed.

An old friend of mine was married to a man who realised after 7 years' marriage that he was bisexual, and started wanting to get into "swinging". She'd had no suspicion of this when they got married. And I think nor had he. There was really no way their ideals were compatible any longer.

[Lougle]

Do you really, honestly, think that he had no idea at all that he was bisexual?

I thought the whole 'gay rights' thing is based on the premise that gay people are born homosexual?

I am amazed that a bisexual man would not have any clue that he was bisexual.

[motherinferior]

I think in a society which expects us to be heterosexual, it's very easy to ignore/deny attraction to your own gender - especially if you fancy the other one as well.

But people do also change, I agree. Thank heavens.