Want to go Primal? Drop the wife or husband (Rule #11)
This is not a joke and I'm not trolling.
We're all here because we feel we need to live our lives according to our primal / natural needs.
There is a lot of research saying that we're non monogamous, that we're not designed to stay in long term relationships with just one partner.
In the small tribes that Gork used to live in, everyone were sharing everything - the food, the security and.... sexual partners.
That made sense because when everybody is sharing everything everyone is safer. No woman or child is dependent on ONE man. When everybody is sleeping with everybody - nobody knows who fathered who so the males protect all the children.
Monogamy was basically "invented" by the elite to organize society so private property could be accumulated and taxed, for social classes to be created, for wealth to be passed on from one generation to the next. Monogamy is what brought us here, to the where our civilization is today, but it is no longer necessary.
There is tons of research in this area and the most popular book written on the subject is this one:
Sex at Dawn: How We Mate, Why We Stray, and What It Means for Modern Relationships: Christopher Ryan, Cacilda Jetha: 9780061707810: Amazon.com: Books
I copy here part of a review from Amazon:
"The suggestion that humans did not evolve as a monogamous species is not as radical an idea as it may sound. In The Descent of Man Charles Darwin wrote, "Those who have most closely studied the subject [particularly the anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan] believe that communal marriage was the original and universal form throughout the world." Yet ever since the nineteenth century anthropologists have struggled over how to identify the mating system of human beings. In 1967 George P. Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas reported that only 14.5% of modern preindustrial societies could be classified as monogamous. Yet, in the West, researchers commonly refer to humans as "serially monogamous," based on the pattern of repeated monogamous marriages throughout men and women's lifetimes. But with over half of divorces occurring because of infidelity and one in 25 dads unknowingly raising children that they didn't father, this is not a picture that fits comfortably with monogamy of any sort, serial or otherwise.
However, by looking at modern indigenous societies and comparing the findings of anthropologists with the latest results in behavioral psychology and biology, Ryan and Jethá piece together a remarkably coherent pattern from an otherwise fractured understanding of human sexuality. From societies that believe that multiple men are necessary for a successful pregnancy (what researchers refer to as "partible paternity") to those where not having an extra-marital tryst will cause a man to be labeled "stingy of one's genitals" by his female suitors, the authors conclude that marriage may be an established social arrangement among many hunter-gatherers but it's one in which sexuality is decidedly fluid. A range of physiological evidence from Western populations is further offered to support this position, from the year-round libido in both sexes, to the unusually large size of men's genitalia compared to other apes, to the shifting sexual strategy during various stages in women's reproductive cycle (and lest we forget multiple female orgasms?). All suggest that our species is adapted for several concurrent sexual partners."
(the reference to multiple orgasms in females - in Gork's tribe women used to have sex with a few males, one after the other, to increase the chance of insemination and so it will be impossible to know who fathered the offspring, as mentioned above)
So I wanted to start a discussion here about this subject and see what you guys think. Was this ever discussed in the community?
As for myself, even before going into primal eating habits, I realized that long term monogamous relationships are "not for me". Only later I discovered that they are actually not for anyone and that it's just another example of how our culture has engineered us in a specific way, mainly to the benefit of the elite.
Last edited by Davidil; 06-19-2013 at 01:11 AM.
I'll continue to stay married, thanks. I enjoy this monogamy thing. It works for me.
And FWIW, certainly "feel" like I am this way, and that it's not simply acculturation. Nor do I think that it's for "everyone." Ie, I don't believe one way or the other is "universal."
Last edited by zoebird; 06-19-2013 at 01:13 AM.
Why not? If we're all meant to eat a certain way, why we're not meant to mate in a certain way?
Originally Posted by zoebird
I agree that it might be "right" for some. 1% of people are asexual (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality) , and 10% or so are born gay. I think maybe 10% are born monogamous but most people are not, which explains the high divorce rates (70% in some countries)
I think this is a worthwhile discussion.
If you don't want to live monogamously with one partner, than don't, but suggesting it's not for anyone is way off base. None of the research proves conclusively that humanoid civilizations never lived in monogamous relationships. All you have there are a bunch of assumptions and theories with no tangible way to prove them. With our highly developed brains and all that, we are all capable of making a choice regarding our lifestyles. You may want to consider the high rate of sexually transmitted diseases and infections in those who do not live in committed or otherwise monogamous relationships. Safe sex wasn't exactly an option back then. In every community group there was certainly the possibility that some chose monogamy while others chose to share partners.
It might have made sense in an environment where you wanted to maximize the chances of reproduction (mortality among young males must have been higher than today due to more perilous lifestyle for example). But today ? I think monogamy is not a bad thing at all, considering that we don't need to maximize the chances for successful reproduction ... on the contrary, it looks like we have been too successful ...
But again, monogamy as a contraception tool is probably not the most efficient thing ever
First, I obviously answered, so at a certain level, I'm happy to disagree with you.
Beyond that, it's not as if your idea is "new" to the forum. You are knew to the forum, but a quick forum search will show you many other (usually men) who come in here and talk about how they should be able to have lots of partners because it's how we evolved and stuff. It's basically *yawn* and do whatever you want (so long as you have consent from those with whom you do it).
Second, I also don't believe that we are all supposed to eat a certain way, or exercise/move a certain way, etc. Human beings living on different parts of the planet had different food availability, and being highly adaptive creatures, tended to do well on a variety of different diets. Compare Inuits to Kitivans to Maasai etc. Thai women to Swedish women (modern study switching their diets in controlled groups, and when women ate food form their culture/heritage, their health was better than eating form another heritage. this does not say, btw, that a swedish woman *should not* eat thai food, but rather that people might do better on the diet of their heritage than just a "healthy diet" such as an okinawan or mediterranean diet.).
I truly believe that human beings are highly adaptable, socially complex creatures with a variety of healthy opportunities at their disposal to use as they see fit.
Beyond this, there are lots of ways to have a sex life, with plenty of consent and happiness. Married couples (or unmarried couples) join swingers clubs, for example, in order to experience multiple partners. Some people have polyamorous relationships. Some people are monogamous. Some people are serial monogamists. It's really just a matter of what a person wants.
You couldn't pay me enough to go back to a polyandrous society. I lived in a part of Africa where polyandry (more than one wife) was commonly practiced. No one in their right mind should want to live the way those women did. Do you have any idea how hard it is for a women to raise 5+ kids (which is what you get with no birth control) when the man decides he wants to move on to a new wife? Malnutrition is extremely common in those children. Also, when the men do come back to the women, which they usually do at some point, the women have no way of knowing who they slept with or what they could have contracted which is why HIV/AIDS is so high there.
Sure monogomy isn't for everyone and sure, you could argue that it would be different in a developed nation, but I've seen it play out and it probably isn't what you think it's like.
Isn't more than one wife polygamy? Anyways, desiring multiple partners is just a reproductive strategy. You can have more than one strategy.
Also, concealed ovulation works in some apes, but I'm just as equally protective of people I know there isn't a chance in hell I sired as I am those I might have. Maybe I'm weird. This thread's gonna blow, I think.
I'd bet my last bison liver on it.
Originally Posted by MEversbergII
"Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine
To be honest, you have the right to go out and not have a husband or wife. I know a ton of guys who do that. And some women too. What happens with the guys is that all their friends envy them because because they always have some cute girl on their arm and brag about how much sex they have. And it's awesome. All sorts of awesome. Then they get sick OR the money runs out. Then they are alone. They can't attract the women anymore without the income (or abs). And they've usually disgusted the (fat and old) wives of their guy friends so much that the guy friends can't hang out with them anymore. Then they are just old pathetic losers that get taken advantage of by ugly girls on meth.
The weird thing, you have the women that go that route. And they always have the handsome pool boy. And then they get old and have all these cool friends and are really interesting people. Kind of pans out better for them then for the men.
I think for men, perhaps the benefits of a monogamous committed relationship are not seen until you get ill or lose your money and the cute cave girls decide you aren't very interesting anymore.
Tags for this Thread