Why monogamy is a myth
Mel
2012/07/04 21:35:19
1. Why is long-term sexual monogamy so difficult for many couples?
Several factors conspire to make long-term sexual monogamy difficult for people. As a species, we’ve evolved to be sexually responsive to novelty. From a genetic point of view, the lure of new partners (known to scientists as the Coolidge effect) combined with less responsiveness to the familiar (the Westermarck effect) motivated our ancestors to risk leaving their small hunter/gatherer societies to join other groups, thus avoiding incest and bringing crucial genetic vigor to future generations.
Another problem is that most people in the West marry because they’re “in love,” which is a temporary, blissfully delusional state we should enjoy, but not expect to last forever. As the German poet, Goethe put it, “Love is an ideal thing, marriage a real thing. A confusion of the real with the ideal never goes unpunished.”
2. Why do you specify “sexual monogamy?” Isn’t all monogamy sexual?
Biologists distinguish sexual monogamy from social monogamy. As DNA testing has grown cheaper in recent years, we’ve learned that most species formerly classified as “monogamous” (primarily birds) are socially monogamous, but not sexually so. In other words, they form pairs that cooperatively care for that season’s brood of young, but the male may well not be the biological father. Applied to humans, we argue that a more flexible approach to sexual fidelity can increase marital stability and thus lead to greater social and family stability.
3. How can you say that humans are the most sexual species? This makes us sound like animals.
Actually, most animals would consider us the sex maniacs. Almost all animals have sex only for reproduction—just when the female is ovulating. But humans (and our closely related cousins, the bonobos) have sex for an endless list of reasons. We do it for fun, for pleasure, for money, to cement a friendship, for ego gratification, to relax, to seal a business deal or political alliance (think of arranged royal marriages), and yes, sometimes even to make babies. If you consider the ratio of copulations per birth, humans and bonobos are off the charts. Then, if you add all the hours spent fantasizing, remembering, planning, masturbating, porn and soap-opera watching, romance novel reading . . . .
4. Even if you’re right that humans aren’t “naturally” monogamous, we’re conscious beings with free will to decide how we live, so what’s wrong with simply choosing to be monogamous?
Nothing, as long as we fully understand and accept the costs involved in choosing behavior that conflicts with how we evolved. For example, you might happily choose to work the night shift, but the resulting disruption of your circadian clock will increase your risk of cancer, cardio-vascular disease, gastric disorders, and so on no matter how committed you are to your decision. Similarly, we can choose to wear tight corsets, or ill-fitting shoes, or to live on chili-dogs and ice cream, but because all these behaviors run counter to our evolved nature they will cost us over time. Like celibacy, lifelong sexual monogamy is something we can certainly choose, but it should be an informed decision.
5. Maybe monogamy isn’t natural for humans, but what about love?
The capacity for love may be the most “human” thing about us. In fact, anthropologists commonly report long term, stable partnerships between men and women, even in many of the most sexually promiscuous societies we discuss in Sex at Dawn. But our book is about the evolution of human sexuality, not our emotional development. The tendency to confuse love with sex (and vice-versa) leads to immense suffering.
6. So you’re recommending the everyone should have an open marriage or not get married at all?
Definitely not. We’re not recommending anything other than knowledge, introspection, and honesty. In fact, as we say in the book, we’re not really sure what to do with this information ourselves. We hope Sex at Dawn advances the conversation about human sexuality so people can focus more on the realities of what human beings are and a bit less on the religious and cultural mythologies concerning what we should be and should feel. What individuals or couples do with this information (if anything) is up to them.
7. You guys are married, right? How do you handle this issue?
That’s definitely a fair question, but one we’ve decided not to answer publicly. Certainly, our relationship is informed by our research, but the details of our own sex life are nobody’s business but ours.
8. What about the neurochemistry of love? Doesn’t research showing increased levels of neurotransmitters (particularly dopamine) and brain activity in certain regions when people look at photos of someone they love demonstrate that pair bonding is natural for our species?
Possibly, but not likely. These effects are seen when people look at their children, close friends, and siblings as well as their husband/wife, so it’s not clear how this research demonstrates much about one kind of love versus another. Perhaps more important, as we demonstrate in Sex at Dawn, it’s a mistake to assume that sexual exclusivity is a standard part of all pair bonds. In many societies that can legitimately be said to practice marriage, neither male nor female fidelity is expected as part of the deal. The notion that the exchange of female fidelity for male provisioning extends to our origins as a species appears to be little more than a projection of contemporary morality into the distant past—what we call Flintstonization.
9. The second chapter of your book is called “What Darwin Didn’t Know About Sex.” Are you arguing against Darwinian evolution?
No, we are not Darwin bashers, by any means. Darwin passionately believed that good theory comes from good data, which is why he spent most of his life collecting and organizing specimens, observations, and precise measurements. Obviously, contemporary theorists have much more data to work with than what was available a hundred and fifty years ago, so it’s no critique of Darwin’s brilliance to question a few of his assumptions in light of all this new information. He’d demand nothing less.
10. Why do middle-aged men risk so much for flings with younger women?
With the caveat that every situation is different, one factor we think deserves more attention is the role of testosterone (T) in middle-aged men’s eroticism. In their twenties, men’s T levels begin a long decline, often experienced as diminished passion and appetite for life. Suppressed T levels are associated with depression, heart attacks, dementia, and overall mortality rates from 88 to 250 percent higher. One of the few things that can reliably and immediately revive a man’s sagging testosterone is exposure to a new woman. One researcher found that even a brief chat with an attractive woman raised men’s testosterone levels by fourteen percent within minutes. In Sex at Dawn, we suggest that many men may be confusing the hormonal changes triggered by an affair with actual “love,” thus leading them to make ill-advised decisions catastrophic to their families, their marriages, and eventually themselves.
11. Does this explain why many men are afraid of commitment?
A lot of men certainly know from experience that variety is an important element in their sexual response and that a lifetime of monogamy—even with the woman of their dreams—is an intimidating prospect. Whether this represents “fear” or self-knowledge is an open question. This short essay sums it up pretty well.
12. What does the human body tell us about our sexual evolution?
The human body is full of information about our ancestors’ sex lives. In Sex at Dawn, we explain how women’s breasts, orgasms and reproductive anatomy echo the same story told by men’s testicles, penises, and seminal chemistry. It’s an X-rated tale of the orgiastic origins of our species.
13. If monogamy isn’t natural, why have I read that marriage is universal among all human societies?
Many anthropologists who have argued that “marriage” is universal haven’t agreed on a clear definition of what they mean by the word. In Sex at Dawn, we discuss societies where so-called “married couples” don’t expect sexual exclusivity, exchanges of property, cohabitation, any difficulty in ending the union, a relationship between extended families, or even a hint of paternal responsibility. Yet anthropologists still insist on calling these relationships “marriage.”
14. If your thesis is correct, then why do almost all industrialized societies prohibit—at least officially—infidelity?
It’s almost impossible for most of us to appreciate how radically different the social world of our ancestors was from what we experience today. Anthropologists agree that pre-agricultural societies almost universally share a passionate commitment to so-called “fierce egalitarianism.” Because they are nomadic, such people accumulate as little personal property as possible, thus resulting in cultures organized around sharing. Food, shelter, child-care, protection from predators . . . all are scrupulously shared.
With the advent of agriculture just 10,000 years ago (less than 1/20th of our existence as anatomically modern Homo sapiens), personal property became all-important. Families accumulated land, buildings, status, and wealth that they wanted to keep in the family. The only way a man could ensure his paternity was through strictly controlling his wife’s (or wives’) sexual behavior. Thus, female infidelity has been ruthlessly punished for millennia. Most evolutionary psychologists assert that male obsession with controlling female sexual behavior is intrinsic to human nature, but the evidence we present in Sex at Dawn shows it to be a response to economic conditions that arose with farming.
15. When I hear my (heterosexual) neighbors having sex, why is it almost always the woman who is loudest?
Believe it or not, there are scientists who follow primates through the jungle with microphones, collecting data on what’s called “female copulatory vocalization.” What they’ve found is that the females of the more promiscuous species tend to have the loudest, most complex vocalizations. Don’t tell the neighbors!
16. Does human nature lead to war or peace, selfishness or generosity?
Asked this way, this question will never be answered. The nature of human nature is changeability. Is the natural state of H2O solid, liquid, or gas? Context is crucial.
17. Aren’t we much healthier than our ancestors were? After all, they only lived into their thirties.
The widely-accepted idea that a thirty five year-old stone age person was “old” is simply untrue. In Sex at Dawn we show that our prehistoric ancestors typically lived into their fifties, sixties, and even seventies.
Several factors conspire to make long-term sexual monogamy difficult for people. As a species, we’ve evolved to be sexually responsive to novelty. From a genetic point of view, the lure of new partners (known to scientists as the Coolidge effect) combined with less responsiveness to the familiar (the Westermarck effect) motivated our ancestors to risk leaving their small hunter/gatherer societies to join other groups, thus avoiding incest and bringing crucial genetic vigor to future generations.
Another problem is that most people in the West marry because they’re “in love,” which is a temporary, blissfully delusional state we should enjoy, but not expect to last forever. As the German poet, Goethe put it, “Love is an ideal thing, marriage a real thing. A confusion of the real with the ideal never goes unpunished.”
2. Why do you specify “sexual monogamy?” Isn’t all monogamy sexual?
Biologists distinguish sexual monogamy from social monogamy. As DNA testing has grown cheaper in recent years, we’ve learned that most species formerly classified as “monogamous” (primarily birds) are socially monogamous, but not sexually so. In other words, they form pairs that cooperatively care for that season’s brood of young, but the male may well not be the biological father. Applied to humans, we argue that a more flexible approach to sexual fidelity can increase marital stability and thus lead to greater social and family stability.
3. How can you say that humans are the most sexual species? This makes us sound like animals.
Actually, most animals would consider us the sex maniacs. Almost all animals have sex only for reproduction—just when the female is ovulating. But humans (and our closely related cousins, the bonobos) have sex for an endless list of reasons. We do it for fun, for pleasure, for money, to cement a friendship, for ego gratification, to relax, to seal a business deal or political alliance (think of arranged royal marriages), and yes, sometimes even to make babies. If you consider the ratio of copulations per birth, humans and bonobos are off the charts. Then, if you add all the hours spent fantasizing, remembering, planning, masturbating, porn and soap-opera watching, romance novel reading . . . .
4. Even if you’re right that humans aren’t “naturally” monogamous, we’re conscious beings with free will to decide how we live, so what’s wrong with simply choosing to be monogamous?
Nothing, as long as we fully understand and accept the costs involved in choosing behavior that conflicts with how we evolved. For example, you might happily choose to work the night shift, but the resulting disruption of your circadian clock will increase your risk of cancer, cardio-vascular disease, gastric disorders, and so on no matter how committed you are to your decision. Similarly, we can choose to wear tight corsets, or ill-fitting shoes, or to live on chili-dogs and ice cream, but because all these behaviors run counter to our evolved nature they will cost us over time. Like celibacy, lifelong sexual monogamy is something we can certainly choose, but it should be an informed decision.
5. Maybe monogamy isn’t natural for humans, but what about love?
The capacity for love may be the most “human” thing about us. In fact, anthropologists commonly report long term, stable partnerships between men and women, even in many of the most sexually promiscuous societies we discuss in Sex at Dawn. But our book is about the evolution of human sexuality, not our emotional development. The tendency to confuse love with sex (and vice-versa) leads to immense suffering.
6. So you’re recommending the everyone should have an open marriage or not get married at all?
Definitely not. We’re not recommending anything other than knowledge, introspection, and honesty. In fact, as we say in the book, we’re not really sure what to do with this information ourselves. We hope Sex at Dawn advances the conversation about human sexuality so people can focus more on the realities of what human beings are and a bit less on the religious and cultural mythologies concerning what we should be and should feel. What individuals or couples do with this information (if anything) is up to them.
7. You guys are married, right? How do you handle this issue?
That’s definitely a fair question, but one we’ve decided not to answer publicly. Certainly, our relationship is informed by our research, but the details of our own sex life are nobody’s business but ours.
8. What about the neurochemistry of love? Doesn’t research showing increased levels of neurotransmitters (particularly dopamine) and brain activity in certain regions when people look at photos of someone they love demonstrate that pair bonding is natural for our species?
Possibly, but not likely. These effects are seen when people look at their children, close friends, and siblings as well as their husband/wife, so it’s not clear how this research demonstrates much about one kind of love versus another. Perhaps more important, as we demonstrate in Sex at Dawn, it’s a mistake to assume that sexual exclusivity is a standard part of all pair bonds. In many societies that can legitimately be said to practice marriage, neither male nor female fidelity is expected as part of the deal. The notion that the exchange of female fidelity for male provisioning extends to our origins as a species appears to be little more than a projection of contemporary morality into the distant past—what we call Flintstonization.
9. The second chapter of your book is called “What Darwin Didn’t Know About Sex.” Are you arguing against Darwinian evolution?
No, we are not Darwin bashers, by any means. Darwin passionately believed that good theory comes from good data, which is why he spent most of his life collecting and organizing specimens, observations, and precise measurements. Obviously, contemporary theorists have much more data to work with than what was available a hundred and fifty years ago, so it’s no critique of Darwin’s brilliance to question a few of his assumptions in light of all this new information. He’d demand nothing less.
10. Why do middle-aged men risk so much for flings with younger women?
With the caveat that every situation is different, one factor we think deserves more attention is the role of testosterone (T) in middle-aged men’s eroticism. In their twenties, men’s T levels begin a long decline, often experienced as diminished passion and appetite for life. Suppressed T levels are associated with depression, heart attacks, dementia, and overall mortality rates from 88 to 250 percent higher. One of the few things that can reliably and immediately revive a man’s sagging testosterone is exposure to a new woman. One researcher found that even a brief chat with an attractive woman raised men’s testosterone levels by fourteen percent within minutes. In Sex at Dawn, we suggest that many men may be confusing the hormonal changes triggered by an affair with actual “love,” thus leading them to make ill-advised decisions catastrophic to their families, their marriages, and eventually themselves.
11. Does this explain why many men are afraid of commitment?
A lot of men certainly know from experience that variety is an important element in their sexual response and that a lifetime of monogamy—even with the woman of their dreams—is an intimidating prospect. Whether this represents “fear” or self-knowledge is an open question. This short essay sums it up pretty well.
12. What does the human body tell us about our sexual evolution?
The human body is full of information about our ancestors’ sex lives. In Sex at Dawn, we explain how women’s breasts, orgasms and reproductive anatomy echo the same story told by men’s testicles, penises, and seminal chemistry. It’s an X-rated tale of the orgiastic origins of our species.
13. If monogamy isn’t natural, why have I read that marriage is universal among all human societies?
Many anthropologists who have argued that “marriage” is universal haven’t agreed on a clear definition of what they mean by the word. In Sex at Dawn, we discuss societies where so-called “married couples” don’t expect sexual exclusivity, exchanges of property, cohabitation, any difficulty in ending the union, a relationship between extended families, or even a hint of paternal responsibility. Yet anthropologists still insist on calling these relationships “marriage.”
14. If your thesis is correct, then why do almost all industrialized societies prohibit—at least officially—infidelity?
It’s almost impossible for most of us to appreciate how radically different the social world of our ancestors was from what we experience today. Anthropologists agree that pre-agricultural societies almost universally share a passionate commitment to so-called “fierce egalitarianism.” Because they are nomadic, such people accumulate as little personal property as possible, thus resulting in cultures organized around sharing. Food, shelter, child-care, protection from predators . . . all are scrupulously shared.
With the advent of agriculture just 10,000 years ago (less than 1/20th of our existence as anatomically modern Homo sapiens), personal property became all-important. Families accumulated land, buildings, status, and wealth that they wanted to keep in the family. The only way a man could ensure his paternity was through strictly controlling his wife’s (or wives’) sexual behavior. Thus, female infidelity has been ruthlessly punished for millennia. Most evolutionary psychologists assert that male obsession with controlling female sexual behavior is intrinsic to human nature, but the evidence we present in Sex at Dawn shows it to be a response to economic conditions that arose with farming.
15. When I hear my (heterosexual) neighbors having sex, why is it almost always the woman who is loudest?
Believe it or not, there are scientists who follow primates through the jungle with microphones, collecting data on what’s called “female copulatory vocalization.” What they’ve found is that the females of the more promiscuous species tend to have the loudest, most complex vocalizations. Don’t tell the neighbors!
16. Does human nature lead to war or peace, selfishness or generosity?
Asked this way, this question will never be answered. The nature of human nature is changeability. Is the natural state of H2O solid, liquid, or gas? Context is crucial.
17. Aren’t we much healthier than our ancestors were? After all, they only lived into their thirties.
The widely-accepted idea that a thirty five year-old stone age person was “old” is simply untrue. In Sex at Dawn we show that our prehistoric ancestors typically lived into their fifties, sixties, and even seventies.
- Sex at Dawn »
- The Authors/FAQ »
- FAQ »
Read More: http://www.sexatdawn.com
- Socrates
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
- Eleanor Roosevelt
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Only the wisest and the stupidest of men never change.
- Confucius
When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends.
- Japanese Proverb
In comparison to "swagger".
Oh... I'd dispute that animals only have sex to reproduce; they have sex because it feels good. They don't link having sex with giving birth which happens weeks or months later!
His studies on the reasons people cheat show that the vast majority of people are unfaithful. Whatever we might like to think, monogamous relationships just don’t work, he says.
More articles on
infidelity
More on
relationship problems
Monogamy is a myth, Anderson argues in his new book, The Monogamy Gap: men, love and the reality of cheating .
People in open sexual relationships stick together longer, he says. And swinging couples rate their marriages as happier.
Fantasy
Anderson's findings are based on interviews with 120 men at three US universities and one in the UK. So young guys prefer to sleep around rather than stick with one girl? No surprises there, you might think. Nevertheless, the interviews led Anderson to the conclusion that monogamy doesn’t work because it fails to fulfil a lifetime of sexual desires.
“We’ve been sold a myth that monogamy is the only right, proper and natural way to experience a relationship. The common belief is that if you’re cheating on your partner then you’re clearly not in love and if you just found the right person you would never have these desires. But that’s absolute fantasy for most people, except perhaps fo...
His studies on the reasons people cheat show that the vast majority of people are unfaithful. Whatever we might like to think, monogamous relationships just don’t work, he says.
More articles on
infidelity
More on
relationship problems
Monogamy is a myth, Anderson argues in his new book, The Monogamy Gap: men, love and the reality of cheating .
People in open sexual relationships stick together longer, he says. And swinging couples rate their marriages as happier.
Fantasy
Anderson's findings are based on interviews with 120 men at three US universities and one in the UK. So young guys prefer to sleep around rather than stick with one girl? No surprises there, you might think. Nevertheless, the interviews led Anderson to the conclusion that monogamy doesn’t work because it fails to fulfil a lifetime of sexual desires.
“We’ve been sold a myth that monogamy is the only right, proper and natural way to experience a relationship. The common belief is that if you’re cheating on your partner then you’re clearly not in love and if you just found the right person you would never have these desires. But that’s absolute fantasy for most people, except perhaps for those who have very low sex drives.”
Cheating
Nearly four out of five of the men Anderson interviewed said they’d cheated on their current partner, even though they claimed to love their partner and had no plans to break up. “This was just a measurement of cheating with their current partner. Lifetime incidence of cheating would have been much higher.”
But the point of Anderson’s research was not to find out what percentage of men cheat. “We know that cheating ranges between 50 and 75 percent, depending on the survey you look at. I wanted to know why young men cheat. And why today’s generation cheats more often,” Anderson says.
Routine sex
To find out, Anderson used the interviews to create what he calls the ‘average relationship narrative’. Here’s the story:
“Boy meets girl. They begin having sex right off the bat. The sex is fast and furious.
“But within two months the sex starts to grow routine. They begin to let their darker sides slip out. They begin to see the other side of their partner that’s not so wonderful. Issues of power and control happen. And most relationships break up at about three months.
“For those that don’t, they enter a ‘norming’ phase, where things are on a more even keel. And in this stage, they’re still having sex but it’s highly routinised. They’re sexually habituated to their partners. They don’t desire sex with their partners as much as they want. And they just strongly begin to feel themselves desiring sex with somebody else.”
Marriage
People usually begin cheating within the first six months of the relationship, Anderson says. Men who have cheated a lot on one girlfriend are likely to cheat more on the next girlfriend, his research found.
“There’s a great example of one guy who told me, ‘I’d like to think that when I find that perfect woman. When I find that wife, I’m not going to cheat on her.’ And then I said to him: ‘Do you think this person you’re with now, could she be it? Could she be the person you marry?’ And he said: ‘Oh, absolutely.’ ‘Well have you cheated on her?’ ‘Well yeah. Yeah I have.’”
And it turns out marriage doesn’t lead to less cheating. Marriage can change your outlook but it does nothing to change your sexual desires, Anderson points out. And studies show that a higher percentage of married men cheat.
Sexual jail
“Large sample studies in the UK show that 72% of married men and 70% of married women had cheated on their spouses. Those with children are more likely to cheat than those without children. Christians have a higher rate of divorce than non-Christians in the United States. The last census shows that. And we know that divorce is almost exclusively preceded by cheating.”
Cheating is so common because monogamy is a socially enforced sexual jail, Anderson claims. People who want to have sex with someone other than their partner have to sneak around to do so because if they’re honest their partners will likely end the relationship. As a result, cheating becomes the only rational solution. The alternative is often resentment.
Jealousy
But surely if cheaters really loved their partners, they wouldn’t want to hurt them by being unfaithful? Anderson flips the question around. Surely if you really loved your partner, you wouldn’t want to keep him locked in the prison of monogamy, if he’s yearning to spread his wings, he says.
“One thing that these men showed me is that when they’re not getting that extra sex, they get angry. And that anger manifests in the relationship. To some degree, their partners are looked at as preventing them from having the sex that they want,” Anderson says.
His research into cheating has led Anderson to advocate open relationships as an alternative.
But aren’t such relationships liable to strand on the rocks of jealousy? Not according to Anderson. He says people with open relationships can learn to let go of jealousy and focus on their love for their partner.
Genitalia or heart?
“Swinging couples report higher rates of marital happiness than non-swinging couples. So this says that if we are looking to keep the family stable, if we’re looking to promote the institution of the family and even marriage, then we should consider the fact that the current system isn’t working. It’s failing miserably.
“The litmus test for a relationship ought not to be what one does with ones genitalia. The litmus test of a relationship ought to be what one does with one’s heart.”