Monogamy- Social Construct ( Archived) (152)

I think our reasoning drives us to monogamy, which is, in my opinion a purely social constraint for human beings. It's a good and productive constraint which explains why we've reasoned ourselves into it.

I think monogamy may be a much more natural state for females than males because of the genetic programming that has made us successful. However we look at it, natural state or social constraint, social contracts between men and women are a critical part of our culture and law and it is one of the bedrocks of our society.

That so many people have had so many partners belies claims that monogamy is a natural state for humans. The fact that so many marriages ends in divorce tells us that there is some conflict between our genetic construct and social construct.

There is real value in the stability and trust that requires monogamy for support. Being true to your partner is being responsible and being true to your word and these things are of enormous value because without them, we wouldn't be able to properly function in family untis and probably not particularly well in any other social unit, either.

We can't be modeled after other animals, although the closest we can probably get is bonobo chimps. Ninety percent of bird species are monogamous but mongamy in that sense does not require lifetime obligations, but merely monogamy for at least one breeding season. Only a very small percentage of birds or other animals form mated pairs for life and I'm afraid we can't be counted among that small number because too many of us fail to maintain these lifelong bonds.

Monogamy may not be everyone's choice, but it's my choice and it needs to be the choice for my partner, as well. Inability or unwillingness to do that is a deal-breaker.

sorry that comment was meat to be ignored, i was half having a conversation with a mate who was yakking on about celibacy while i was typing and i got the two topics confused.. sorry.

I disagree that we're more like birds than the other mammals for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that birds aren't other mammals (probably goofing your your syntax more than your knowledge in this case).

I do, however, have to question your statement that birds not only look after their children but their grandchildren. I have a fairly well developed knowledge of birds and can't think off the top of my head of ANY bird species that have such a social structure where the grandparents of the offspring perform rearing and nurturing behaviors that would be specific to that offspring that aren't given equally to any other offspring in a breeding colony, rookery, covey or other social organization. And these types of organizations are, in themselves, rather unusual for birds.

you've got puffins and penquins and quail and monk parakeets all as examples of brood/rookery/covey style social structures and I don't know of any behaviors that would give evidence of grandparents engaging in "care" for grandchildren over and above any other care provided to any other member of their particular social organization.