AAR
Click here for full forums index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Are Humans Meant to be Monogamous?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> General Chat Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:38 pm    Post subject: Are Humans Meant to be Monogamous? Reply with quote

This article was on the Internet today and sorta seems relevant to threads being discussed on the various boards. What do you think?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080319/sc_livescience/arehumansmeanttobemonogamous;_ylt=ArlI04gOBpppIxxGXYStzi1xieAA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skwright



Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can see where men would like this. Woman stay home w/ kids man goes behaves like a tom cat and then goes home. In this day and age, man would bring home STDs that would kill him and the woman. Then where would the kids be w/o either parent to support/raise them. I believe certain parts of Africa have this problem. With the spread of AIDS/HIV this would be way to kill off the human race not "spread the genes." Even if you take HIV out of the mix there are still enough STDs out there that, if left untreated, can kill or sterilize someone.
I think we have evolved as a species because males do not leave once the sperm has been deposited (although some men seem to think they can).
We are also more evolved in that we do not put all our emphasis on procreation but what can an individual can contribute to society.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Skwright wrote:
I can see where men would like this. Woman stay home w/ kids man goes behaves like a tom cat and then goes home. In this day and age, man would bring home STDs that would kill him and the woman. Then where would the kids be w/o either parent to support/raise them. I believe certain parts of Africa have this problem. With the spread of AIDS/HIV this would be way to kill off the human race not "spread the genes." Even if you take HIV out of the mix there are still enough STDs out there that, if left untreated, can kill or sterilize someone.
I think we have evolved as a species because males do not leave once the sperm has been deposited (although some men seem to think they can).
We are also more evolved in that we do not put all our emphasis on procreation but what can an individual can contribute to society.


I think it's also dependent on how one is wired. Either you're going to be a seed spreader or you're going to be a nurturer. The seed spreader is going to go forth and spew his seed to as many women as possible as quantity matters to him. The nurturer will invest in a one-woman relationship who will take care of the offspring that comes from that marriage. I do think this wiring affects how people view marriage and relationships. Either you're going to be looking for the one and only, forever and ever partner or you're going to be looking for the partner that works okay for now.

I've known a lot of men who were wonderfully faithfully married men who would never consider straying and I have known men that couldn't be faithful if their life depended on it. So I do think it's genetic that all of us are pre-disposed to being either a nurturer or a seed spreader.

It's almost like yin and yang. Balance and all that with two genetic strategies that both work in their own way. They both serve a purpose and that would be the continuation and improvement of the species.

The problem develops when the man and woman are not of the same type. A nurturer won't be happy when the seed spreading partner looks for other relationships. That's why I am always wary of romance stories where the "Duke of Slut" finds true love with the innocent heroine who stands for love and fidelity. Of course, it's all fantasy so suspension of disbelief is needed for many of them. I find that in my reading I'm more likely to believe in a HEA when I can accept the couple's love and commitment to each other is lasting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
willaful



Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 1557

PostPosted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree that it's an individual thing. Both men and women cheat on each other. Both men and women seek out honest polyamorous relationships.

In my personal experience, many men are completely faithful and devoted to their partners. My husband even felt bad when another girl kissed him when we were first dating. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I was in my 20s, three married men asked me to have affairs with them as well as a single guy. The single, divorced man ask me to have an affair with him while he was having an affair with a married woman who had left her husband and kids to be with him. Let me tell you I was pretty shocked by their advances. Three were married men after all! And the fourth was involved in a relationship of sorts. What were they doing hitting on me?

Obviously, I knew them from my social and working milieu so I knew them somewhat well. I knew two of the wives and the third wife I knew something about her.

These guys were players(seed spreaders) as far as I was concerned. I know I wasn't the first woman they had hit on nor would I be the last.

The single guy asked me in my office of all places. He waltzed into my office sat across the desk from me and propositioned me. Talk about inappropriate work place conversation. I had given my four weeks notice so he thought it might be his last chance. Frankly I was shocked by his brazenness. He and I actually had a candid conversation which was quite enlightening. The entire hospital knew he was having an affair with her(I knew about it) so I asked him about her. I told him she was expecting marriage and he said it wasn't going to happen. She wanted a doctor and she could look somewhere else. He didn't have any respect for her but sure wanted to sleep with her. For a doctor, he didn't have a lot of respect for women. He had one of the worse reputations at the hospital but there were women who were eager and willing to play.

I did not go out of my way to attract them. So, I do believe there is a portion of the male population that falls into the seed spreader category. I know, I encountered four of them!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2510

PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Might fidelity also have something to do with how seriously either partner considers the vows they take? I usually don't have much trouble accepting that a "rake" can become monogamous. I know from experience that it happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dick wrote:
Might fidelity also have something to do with how seriously either partner considers the vows they take? I usually don't have much trouble accepting that a "rake" can become monogamous. I know from experience that it happens.


Is it the vows or the commitment to their spouse that makes someone faithful? I don't think the vows are important--there just words that are said, but what is important is the love, respect and commitment one has for each other.


I know plenty of people who played the field who were involved in many relationships and were able to be monogamous following marriage and I don't think they fall into the seed spreader category. To me, these are people just having a good time until the right person comes along. That doesn't make them seed spreaders but amiable, friendly types who enjoy the company of the opposite sex.

I think the seed spreader category might qualify as a sexual addiction. These are people who are compelled to have sex with strangers and/or having sex with people just because there's a fleeting sexual attraction. These are people who won't ever be faithful as they are wired that way.

As to the rakes of romance land some of them have been written as sexual addicts as far as I have been concerned. Then there have been others written who didn't qualify as true rakes but just characters who had several relationships before settling down with the heroine.

The intent of romances is to show a HEA for all couples but there are those that I can't buy into. Then there are others that I can see that they have found their soul mates and would never think of cheating on that person or ever fall out of love. Why would they? They have everything they need.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kerstin



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1124
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KarenS wrote:
When I was in my 20s, three married men asked me to have affairs with them as well as a single guy. The single, divorced man ask me to have an affair with him while he was having an affair with a married woman who had left her husband and kids to be with him. Let me tell you I was pretty shocked by their advances. Three were married men after all! And the fourth was involved in a relationship of sorts. What were they doing hitting on me?

Obviously, I knew them from my social and working milieu so I knew them somewhat well. I knew two of the wives and the third wife I knew something about her.

These guys were players(seed spreaders) as far as I was concerned. I know I wasn't the first woman they had hit on nor would I be the last.

The single guy asked me in my office of all places. He waltzed into my office sat across the desk from me and propositioned me. Talk about inappropriate work place conversation. I had given my four weeks notice so he thought it might be his last chance. Frankly I was shocked by his brazenness. He and I actually had a candid conversation which was quite enlightening. The entire hospital knew he was having an affair with her(I knew about it) so I asked him about her. I told him she was expecting marriage and he said it wasn't going to happen. She wanted a doctor and she could look somewhere else. He didn't have any respect for her but sure wanted to sleep with her. For a doctor, he didn't have a lot of respect for women. He had one of the worse reputations at the hospital but there were women who were eager and willing to play.

I did not go out of my way to attract them. So, I do believe there is a portion of the male population that falls into the seed spreader category. I know, I encountered four of them!



I made somewhat similar experiences in my twenties. But though I refused to have sex with a man who only wanted to have an affair with me I know most of these guys were pretty successful in their endeavors (the handsome and charming ones at least). So there actually must be the female equivalent of the seed spreader.

Kerstin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kerstin wrote:
I made somewhat similar experiences in my twenties. But though I refused to have sex with a man who only wanted to have an affair with me I know most of these guys were pretty successful in their endeavors (the handsome and charming ones at least). So there actually must be the female equivalent of the seed spreader.

Kerstin



Yes, there are definitely seed spreader females as well. We just think men are players when females can and do behave the same way. For every female who wouldn't cheat on their spouse or have an affair with a married guy, there is a proportionate number of women who would. I do feel it's a genetic strategy to improve the off-spring so these women are looking for the men who have the most to offer through intelligence, strength and attractiveness.

Oh, yeah, these guys usually are charming and handsome in order to attract women to them. They can get the women and usually have women falling over them. We read it all the time in romances where the rakish heroes have women falling at their feet begging to be taken to bed. An ugly, dull guy isn't going to get that reaction.

Which means a handsome, charming guy is not necessarily a player unless he's wired that way. And these strategies are for the perpetuation of the species so it's interesting how and why we behave the way we do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Natalie



Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Posts: 1693

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hardly doubt that these "rakes", modern or historical, really think about continuation of the species when they just want to have sex with any attractive female they see Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2510

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

All the theories put out about why some people are monogamous and others not don't accord with the equally prevalent idea that we humans are the only animal with some kind of control of biological urges. We can--and some do--starve ourselves to make a point; we can--and some do--commit suicide; we can--and some do--decide to be celibate. In my view, seed-spreaders simply have a weak well. Those who are "programmed" can change it if they choose.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Natalie wrote:
I hardly doubt that these "rakes", modern or historical, really think about continuation of the species when they just want to have sex with any attractive female they see Laughing


I agree. Can we say horny?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dick wrote:
All the theories put out about why some people are monogamous and others not don't accord with the equally prevalent idea that we humans are the only animal with some kind of control of biological urges. We can--and some do--starve ourselves to make a point; we can--and some do--commit suicide; we can--and some do--decide to be celibate. In my view, seed-spreaders simply have a weak well. Those who are "programmed" can change it if they choose.



Well I disagree. Cay you change if you are gblt (gay, bi, lesbian, transexual)? Our genetic make up affects us more than most people want to accept. I think it has a lot to do with the Judeo-Christian ethic and free will that says people can overcome any affliction if they just pray hard enough and try hard enough to change. Tell that to Pastor Ted Haggard of Colorado Springs. Our genes affect us more than we realize or want to admit. Humans are fairly predictable animals who behave in a certain fashion and it dates back to our genetic make up. People with addictive personalities will eventually develop an addiction--it's a matter of when not if. And the addiction might not be drugs or alcohol but sexual, gambling, shopping or even eating. How many heavy, obese people are really food addicts?

The purpose of our genes are to procreate. Their job is to perpetuate the species anyway it can. It has two strategies that's been working for the millions of years humans have been on Earth. So far it's working.

You ever wonder why some people are very nurturing caring parents when there are others who literally throw their children away? What makes them that way? Genetic make up. Many people will argue that religion somehow elevates people to higher standards but it really isn't religion doing it but the genetic code inside us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2510

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

to KarenS: I wasn't thinking in religious terms when I spoke of the will. I just don't think the mind's power to decide things for the entire human organism can be ruled out so easily. If the strongest of the biological imperatives is survival, why would people choose to go on hunger strikes in order to support a principle? Is such a choice also biologically determined? Why, in fact, would people have principles at all? What would be the point, if everything is determined by genetic predisposition? What, in fact, is the entire point of civilization if biology controls us so completely?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarenS



Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 870
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Civilization doesn't have a point, it just happened as a result of humans living together. Before civilization began, humans were hunter gatherers who lived in harmony with nature for a million years. There weren't enough of us to make a difference. Civilization began about 10,000 years ago with the advent of agriculture. Once hunter-gatherers stopped roaming and settled down in one area to tend to their crops, civilization as we know it began. We didn't change biologically, we changed culturally and developed rules for living in society. We're still the same biological creatures who are programmed a certain way.

This doesn't mean every seed spreader will be unfaithful but they have a predisposition and are more likely to be unfaithful. That's up to that person (either male or female) to follow through with those desires. Just as much as a seed spreader can be faithful, there is a likelihood of a nurturer to cheat. Just saying that these two genetic strategies make up our nature.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> General Chat Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group