Monogamy

From New World Encyclopedia
Previous (Monocotyledon)
Next (Monolatrism)


Definition

Monogamy is the custom or condition of having only one mate during a period of time. The word monogamy comes from the Greek word monos, which means one or alone, and the Greek word gamos, which means marriage or union.

Marriage is the institution through which a man and a woman typically expect to share their lives intimately in a monogamous relationship, usually refered to in the vows stated at their wedding. Raising children in a family, holding property, sexual behavior, relationship to society, inheritance, emotional intimacy, health care, and love are a few examples of the rights and obligations often shared by a married couple. The term monogamy, however, may be appplied to a couple who are not formally married, but maintain an exclusive sexual relationship.

Varieties of Monogamy

Biologists have described three types of monogamy: social monogamy, sexual monogamy, and genetic monogamy. Social monogamy refers to two people who live together, have sex with one another, and cooperate in acquiring basic resources such as food, clothes, and money. Sexual monogamy refers to two people who remain sexually exclusive with one another and have no outside sex partners. Genetic monogamy refers to the fact that two partners only have offspring with one another, so that all the offspring raised by the pair are genetically related to each partner. Beyond these distinctions, certain combinations of factors may occur:

Social monogamy refers to a male and female's social living arrangement (e.g., shared use of a territory, behaviour indicative of a social pair, and/or proximity between a male and female) without inferring any sexual interactions or reproductive patterns. In humans, social monogamy equals monogamous marriage. Sexual monogamy is defined as an exclusive sexual relationship between a female and a male based on observations of sexual interactions. Finally, the term genetic monogamy is used when DNA analyses can confirm that a female-male pair reproduce exclusively with each other. A combination of terms indicates examples where levels of relationships coincide, e.g., sociosexual and sociogenetic monogamy describe corresponding social and sexual, and social and genetic monogamous relationships, respectively.[1]

Serial monogamy is a form of monogamy in which participants have only one sexual partner at any one time, but have more than one sexual partner in their lifetime. The term "serial monogamy" is more often more descriptive than prescriptive, in that those involved did not plan to have subsequent relationships while involved in each monogamous partnership.

Incidence of Monogamy

Mating Systems in Animals

Monogamy is one of several mating systems observed in animals. The percentage of monogamous species is greater in some taxa than in others. Biologists estimate up to 90 percent of avian species are socially monogamous. [2][3] In contrast, biologists estimate only 3 percent of mammalian species are socially monogamous, although up to 15 percent of primate species are monogamoys.[4]

In Human Beings

The United Nations World Fertility Report of 2003 noted that 89 percent of all women and men in the world get married by age forty-nine. [5]

Not all marriages are socially monogamous. Anthropological studies have reported that 80-85% of societies allow polygamous marriage.[6] [7] [8] Yet, most of the men in societies that allow polygamy do not obtain sufficient wealth or status to have multiple wives, so the majority of marriages in these societies involve one husband and one wife. Murdock estimated that 80 percent of marriages in societies that allow polygamy involve only one husband and one wife, [8] a figure confirmed by White's analysis of marriages in polygamous societies.[9]

An impartial observer employing the criterion of numerical preponderance, consequently, would be compelled to characterize nearly every known human society as monogamous, despite the preference for and frequency of polygyny in the overwhelming majority.” (Murdock, 1949, pages 27-28) [10]

Since this estimate of 80 percent applies to societies where polygamous marriage is a legal or culturally accepted option, the percent of socially monogamous marriages is significantly higher in the world as a whole when societies that do not permit polygamy are included.

Studies[11] [12] [13] found that approximately 85-90 percent of married women and around 75-80 percent of married men in the United States are sexually monogamous throughout their marriages. Results from a variety of other countries also showed that the majority of married people are sexually monogamous during their marriages. Yet, the incidence of sexual monogamy varies across cultures, and women appear to be more sexually monogamous than men. Thus, the data show that a large majority of people enter socially monogamous relationships at some point in their lives.

Causes of Monogamy

Socially monogamous species are scattered throughout the animal kingdom. A few insects are socially monogamous; a few fish are socially monogamous; many birds are socially monogamous; and a few mammals are socially monogamous. These species did not inherit social monogamy from a common ancestor. Instead, social monogamy has evolved independently in different species.

Some factors that have been suggested as contributing to the evolution of social monogamy include:

  • resources available in the surrounding environment [14]
  • geographic distribution of mates [15]
  • incidence of parasites and sexually transmitted diseases [16]
  • amount of parental care given to offspring [2]
  • mate guarding behaviors[17]
  • infanticide [18]
  • length of breeding season [19]
  • chemical mechanisms of bonding in the brain [20]

Other factors may also contribute to the evolution of social monogamy. Moreover, different sets of factors may explain the evolution of social monogamy in different species. There is no "one-size-fits-all" explanation of why different species evolved monogamous mating systems.

Human Monogamy

Culture influences the incidence of social monogamy in human beings. Many cultures have passed laws making social monogamy the only legal form of marriage. The passage of such laws in many cases reflects the religious beliefs. In the late twentieth century, international organizations such as the United Nations and the African Union started to promote social monogamy as a way to give women and men equal rights in marriage.

Barash and Lipton have eloquently summarized the complexity of human monogamy: "Monogamy among animals is a matter of biology. So is monogamy among human beings. But in the human case, monogamy is more. It is also a matter of psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, law, ethics, theology, literature, history, philosophy, and most of the remaining humanities and social sciences as well." (Barash & Lipton 2001, pp. 191-192)[21]

Thus, even in the realm of animals, where instinct and genetics dominate sexual behavior, science cannot predict whether or not a species will be monogomous. How much more complex is the issue in human beings, where the mind is able to choose beyond the tendencies and instincts of the physical body, and where the purpose of life is complex and multi-dimensional.

However, when the monogomous path is not chosen, consequences occur on all levels, and are enduring:

That sick, used feeling of having given a precious part of myself ... to so many and for nothing, still aches. I never imagined I'd pay so dearly and for so long.[22]

Such an experience is all too common, and all too pervasive: health issues affect the physical body, psychological issues affect our individual state of mind, and social issues affect our relationships with others. Finally, spiritual issues affect our eternal soul and our relationship with God.

Health Issues

Sexually transmitted diseases are both a medical and a social problem. Since the chances of contracting a sexually transmitted disease increase with the number of partners one has, monogamy is a safer option. Sexually transmitted diseases can effect more than one generation. Children can also be affected since many diseases can be transferred at birth.

One argument for casual sex is that it provides relief and satisfaction. However, the nature of this act can also lead to greater stress and more serious problems. Instead of relief, the constant worry about disease can lead to greater tension. In addition, there is always a risk of unwanted pregnancy.

Psychological Issues

Beyond the physical dangers of uncommitted, multiple sexual relationships are the effects on one's psychological health.[23] These effects include:

  • Stunting of spiritual and moral growth
  • Character corruption
  • Guilt, regret and diminished sense of worth
  • Heartbreak and destructive behavior
  • Spirititual disorientation
  • Degradation of love, life, and lineage

These consequences can be more profound and long-lasting than the physical consequences. For those who do not recognize the commitment necessary in entering into a sexual relationship, particularly adolescents, [[friendship]s can be ruined by the introduction of sexual activity in the relationship. From a caring, mutually beneficial relationship involving communication and activities shared in a larger social group, the sexually active couple become self-centered and possessive, quickly becoming suspicious and jealous of any attention their partner pays to another. When one is not committed to a monogamous relationship, one does not expect one's partner to be so committed.

The desire for romantic love is natural and healthy in adolescents, and part of normal psychological development. The inclusiong of sexual activity prematurely has been noted to greatly reduce the creativity and emotional excitement of young people, leaving them "flat-souled" and impoverished in ideals, hopes and imagination.[24]

Brad Hayton provides insight into the attitudes of many homosexuals towards commitment and marriage:

Homosexuals...are taught by example and belief that marital relationships are transitory and mostly sexual in nature. Sexual relationships are primarily for pleasure rather than procreation. And they are taught that monogamy in a marriage is not the norm [and] should be discouraged if one wants a good "marital" relationship. [25]

Psychological studies of monogamous relationships have revealed three significant issues: First, satisfaction is often raised to initial high levels, but equally often declines during the first years of marriage. Second, attachment, the need for physical and emotional closeness, plays an important role in many aspects of monogamous relationships. Finally, although some people question the duration of marriage as a worthwhile goal, most people expect their marriages to last a long time. If it fails, the psychological consequences of ending a sexual relationship have been found to be emotionally traumatic.

Satisfaction

The events of falling in love and getting married raise people's feelings of happiness and satisfaction to unusually high levels. It is natural for these feelings of happiness and satisfaction to return to more normal levels over time.

When two people fall in love and develop an intimate relationship, they begin to include their partners in their concepts of themselves. People feel like they acquire new capabilities because they have the support of close partners. "I might not be able to handle parenthood by myself, but with the help of my partner's good parenting skills, I'll be a good parent." This overlap of the concepts of self and partner has been called "self-expansion."[26]

People generally experience a high level of self-expansion at the beginning of relationships when they constantly learn new things about themselves and their partners. Rapid self-expansion pushes satisfaction to very high levels. However, as the relationship matures, the rate of self-expansion slows, and people experience a relative decline in satisfaction.

Once couples are married, they have to deal with the inevitability of arguments and conflict. Couples who deal poorly with arguments and conflict build up a history of negative emotional interactions that erodes marital satisfaction.

How well couples handle conflict and stress depends on their vulnerabilities, the kinds of stresses they face, and their processes of adaptation.[27] Couples who handle conflict and stress poorly become less and less satisfied with their relationships over time. Those who succeed in dealing with conflict, through mutual support and good communication, on the other hand, develop deep trust and closeness in their relationship. Such relationships result in greater satisfaction and long-lasting happiness that is qualitatively different from the excitement of the early stages of a relationship.

Attachment

Attachment is the tendency to seek closeness to another person, to feel secure when that person is present, and to feel anxious when that person is absent.

Attachment theory was originally developed by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth to describe children's desires for closeness with their parents. Hazen and Shaver[28] noticed that interactions between adult romantic partners shared similarities to interactions between children and caregivers. Romantic partners desire to be close to one another. They feel comforted when their partners are present and anxious or lonely when their partners are absent. Romantic relationships serve as a secure base that help partners face the surprises, opportunities, and challenges life presents. People who have secure attachment styles usually express greater satisfaction with their relationships than people who have other attachment styles. [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] Secure attachment styles may lead to more constructive communication and more intimate self-disclosures, which in turn increase relationship satisfaction. [30] [34]


People with secure attachment styles often have longer-lasting relationships. [35] [36] This may be partly due to commitment, since people with secure attachment styles tend to express more commitment to their relationships.

Duration

Studies of couples in laboratories and studies of people in long-lasting marriages have identified several factors that contribute to the duration of monogamous relationships.

One pattern that predicts relationship duration is the balance of positive and negative interactions. [37] Positive interactions can repair damage done by negative interactions. However, negative interactions have a stronger impact than positive interactions, so couples need to engage in far more positive interactions than negative interactions to remain stable. Stable and happy couples consistently engage in at least 5 positive interactions for every 1 negative interaction. Couples who maintain a 5:1 ratio of positive interactions to negative interactions are less likely to break up.

People who use humor and gentleness to soothe the feelings of their partners, and who respond calmly to the negative emotional expressions of their partners, are less likely to break up with their partners.

Not everyone agrees the duration of a relationship indicates the success of a relationship. Some people reject the idea of "till death do us part" in favor of "as long as love shall last." [38] Constantine and Constantine have clearly summarized this perspective:

"For our part, to stay together for the longest possible time is a poor goal for marriage. Other ends—growth, fulfillment, happiness, among others—are more important and may demand shorter relationships if they are given priority. People change and the marriage that was valid at one time may lose its validity." (Constantine & Constantine, 1973, page 203) [39]

Husbands and wives in long-lasting marriages have been found to agree on the following as the top seven reasons for their success:

  • Spouse as best friend
  • Liking spouse as a person
  • Marriage as a long term commitment
  • Agreement on aims and goals
  • Spouses becoming more interesting to each other
  • Wanting the relationship to succeed

These reasons indicate that marriage is most likely to be successful when both partners are committed to a monogamous relationship.

Social Issues

Virginity is usually held sacred within a society. The custom of the virgin bride stemmed from patriarchal ideas of ownership and entitlement, even though it was also the only form of birth control. Virginity is recognized as a precious gift, to be shared with a special person, and not wasted on a casual fling.

When society regards monogamy as the norm, the family unit is stable, sexual activity is maintained exclusively between the monogomous partners, and various social norms regarding sexual behavior are kept. When a society does not give high regard to monogamy, various social consequences ensue, which have negative impact on families, communities, and the nation as a whole.

Divorce

A culture that does not support monogamous, committed marriages for life does not provide the environment that is needed to allow a husband and wife to sustain a marriage in difficult times. When husband and wife do not seriously commit to practice fidelity to each other until death, many difficulties become insurmountable and divorce becomes the common, and accepted, result.

Extramarital affairs strike at the very heart of the family—the marriage vow. Infidelity destroys the trust and bonds of love; all involved are deeply affected. A marriage may survive infidelity, but only with serious commitment and effort on the part of all involved.

When a society does not regard monogamous marriage as the ideal, divorce becomes widespread. The results of divorce affect not only the partners, but also the children, leading to a new generation of adults for whom enduring, monogamous relationships are viewed as unattainable.

Prostitution

The business of prostitution and the practice of sex outside of marriage feed upon each other. Prostitutes are victims of the system that reduces them to sexual objects, becoming trapped in the sex slave trade. Prostitution is responsible for the enslavement of large numbers of young girls, condemning them to a short life of violence, shame, and disease.

Pornography

Although people regard pornography as a harmless outlet for sexual energy, it is linked to crimes of rape and sexual abuse.[40] Long-term exposure to pornography has also been shown to create emotional withdrawal, greater acceptance of violence toward women, less sympathy toward victims of rape, and a general desensitization to violence.[41]

Illegitimate Children

Single parents, especially those who are still very young, face unprecedented challenges in rearing their children. A married couple, committed to each other and to their family, encounter stress and difficulties in learning how to adjust to the needs of their growing children. A single person, dealing with the emotional, financial, and other practical aspects of raising a child, is in great danger of failure. Unmarried teenagers who become pregnant face almost unsurmountable challenges to complete sufficient education to ensure a career that can support their children. Poverty is a common outcome, defrayed only by government welfare programs.

Domestic Violence

Studies have shown that domestic violence between unmarried couples is significantly higher than those committed to a married, monogamous relationship.[42]

Spiritual Issues

The world's religions have generally regarded the bond of marriage between a man and a woman as "divinely ordained," and adultery as the worst sin: "No other sin has such a baneful effect on the spiritual life."[43]

In Judaism and Christianity, it is written that "a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24), emphasizing the depth of the connection between husband and wife. The immutability of this relationship is further emphasized in Christianity by Jesus' commentary on that verse: "So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder" (Mark 10:8-9).

Religions also teach that a man should have only one wife, and a woman one husband:

  • But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his body, but the wife does. (Christianity - 1 Corinthians 7:2-4)
  • The possession of many wives undermines a man's moral nature. (Hinduism - Srimad Bhagavatam 11.3)
  • You will not be able to deal equally between your wives, however much you wish to do so. (Islam - Qur'an 4.129) Note that the Qur'an sanctions a man to support as many as four wives, but that this concession was specifically during times of war, when there were few men to support the women who would otherwise remain widows and their children orphaned. However, monogamy is considered the only equitable arrangement. [43]
  • It floats about, that boat of cypress wood, There by the side of the ho; With his two tufts of hair falling over his forehead, He was my only one; And I swear that till death I will not do the evil thing. (Confucianism - Book of Songs, Ode 45)
  • Whoever has many wives will have troubles in surfeit. He will be deceitful, he will lie, he will betray [some of them] to have them together. It is not certain that he can have peace to pray well. (African Religion - Yoruba Poem from Nigeria)

The uniqueness of the relationship between husband and wife is noted in the commandments "You shall not commit adultery" and "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife" (Exodus 20: 14-17). Adultery is regarded as a major sin throughout religious teachings, with serious consequences:

  • Approach not adultery; for it is a shameful deed and an evil, opening the road to other evils. (Islam - Qur'an 17:32)
  • Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for God will judge the immoral and the adulterous. (Christianity - Hebrews 13:4)
  • We find that to every sin God is long-suffering, except to the sin of unchastity. Rabbi Azariah said, "All things can God overlook save lewdness." (Judaism - Midrash, Leviticus Rabbah 23:9)
  • A wise man has nothing to do with lust. Lust is nothing but death, and lack of it is serenity. How can one who perceives this indulge in wanton behavior? (Jainism - Acarangasutra 2:61)
  • Four misfortunes befall a careless man who commits adultery:acquisition of demerit, disturbed sleep, third, blame; and fourth, a state of woe. There is acquisition of demerit as well as evil destiny. Brief is the joy of the frightened man and woman. The king imposes a heavy punishment. Hence no man should frequent another man's wife. (Buddhism - Dhammapada 309-310)
  • Do not approach thy neighbor's wife or maids. (Taoism - Tract of the Quiet Way)
  • The philanderer lusting after numerous women does not give up seeking on others' homes. What he does daily only brings regrets—in sorrow and greed he is shriveled up. (Sikhism - Adi Granth, Dhanasari, M.5, p. 672)
  • A man should not think incontinently of another's wife, much less address her to that end; for such a man will be reborn in a future life as a creeping insect. He who commits adultery is punished both here and hereafter; for his days in this world are cut short, and when dead he falls into hell. (Hinduism - Vishnu Purana 3.11)

This concern of religious teachings to warn people not to commit adultery but to practice fidelity to their spouse reflects the belief common to all faiths that the consequences of sexual activity that breaks the marital bond are extremely serious.

Value of Monogamy

People disagree strongly about the value of monogamy. For example, some people believe monogamous marriage oppresses women and burdens people with unrealistic expectations of lifelong sexual monogamy. Monogamy from this perspective promotes sexism and leads to needless suffering. Other people believe monogamy promotes women's equality and provides a context to deepen trust and intimacy. Monogamy from this perspective provides a foundation for social progress and offers people more secure relationships.

Criticism of Monogamy

Criticisms of monogamy vary in scope. Some criticisms reject all types of monogamy as inherently negative. Other criticisms accept social monogamy as a positive form of relationship, but reject sexual monogamy as an unnatural constraint on sexual behavior. Still other criticisms accept all types of monogamy as positive forms of relationship, but reject that idea that monogamy should be imposed on all people as the only legal option.

Engels' View

Friedrich Engels, a colleague of Karl Marx and pioneer in communist philosophy, wrote about monogamous marriage in his book, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. Engels describeds monogamous marriage as a social institution designed for two main functions. First, monogamous marriage ensured wealth was passed down to biologically related offspring. Second, monogamous marriage trapped women in a life of unpaid domestic and childrearing labor. Engels believed the communist revolution would undermine both of these functions. A communist society would no longer allow wealth to be passed down to biological offspring, and a communist society would socialize the work of raising children. Monogamous marriage would then no longer serve any purpose in communist society. Eventually monogamous marriage would fade away.

According to Engels, the rise of monogamous marriage coincided with oppression of women by men:

Thus when monogamous marriage first makes its appearance in history, it is not as the reconciliation of man and woman, still less as the highest form of such a reconciliation. Quite the contrary. Monogamous marriage comes on the scene as the subjugation of the one sex by the other; it announces a struggle between the sexes unknown throughout the whole previous prehistoric period. In an old unpublished manuscript, written by Marx and myself in 1846, I find the words: 'The first division of labor is that between man and woman for the propagation of children.' And today I can add: The first class opposition that appears in history coincides with the development of the antagonism between man and woman in monogamous marriage, and the first class oppression coincides with that of the female sex by the male.[44]

The way to undo this oppression, according to Engels, was to grant women and men equal rights in marriage and to socialize the care of children so women could work and earn their own livings. These changes would free women from financial dependency on men, and allow women to dissolve marriages with tyranical husbands. Monogamous marriage would become an agreement people entered purely for love and desire. Later generations, growing up without the oppressive history of monogamous marriage, might find alternative ways of arranging their private relationships.

Feminist View

Some feminists have criticized monogamous marriage for many of the same reasons as Engels. For example, Julia Penelope has claimed "Both monogamy and nonmonogamy name heteropatriarchal institutions within which the only important information is: how many women can a man legitimately own?" [45] However, feminism encompasses a broad range of writers and ideas with a diverse range of views on marriage, and it would be unfair to characterize all feminists as opposed to monogamous marriage.

Many authors have criticized lifelong sexual monogamy as unnatural and unrealistic. They contend that humans have never been a sexually monogamous species, and that cultural expectations of sexual monogamy place enormous burdens on individuals to fulfill all the sexual needs of their partners. These expectations are quite unrealistic given how much variety exists in people's sexual desires and sex drives. In addition, sexual desires and sex drives can change over time due to circumstances (e.g., periods of high stress or poor health) and due to normal aging (e.g., changes in hormonal levels). Loving partners can find themselves mismatched in terms of their current sexual desires or sex drives. The failure to live up to unrealistic expectations of lifelong sexual monogamy causes people needless suffering.

Defense of Monogamy

The defense of monogamy is as varied and rich as its criticism. Generally, the viewpoint in defense of monogamy contends that monogamy actually promotes the equality of woman and secure relationships.

Although the founders of communism believed monogamy oppressed women and had no place in communist society, the communist revolution in China brought new ideas about monogamy. The newly formed communist government established monogamy as the only legal form of marriage.

The 1950 Marriage Law called for sweeping changes in many areas of family life. It forbade any 'arbitrary and compulsory' form of marriage that would be based on the superiority of men and would ignore women’s interests. The new democratic marriage system was based on the free choice of couples, monogamy, equal rights for both sexes, and the protection of the lawful interests of women. It abolished the begetting of male offspring as the principal purpose of marriage and weakened kinship ties which reduced the pressure on women to bear many children, especially sons. With arranged marriages prohibited, young women could choose their own marriage partners, share the financial cost of setting up a new household, and have equal status in household and family decision-making. The Government then initiated an extensive campaign of marriage-law education, working jointly with the Communist Party, women’s federations, trade unions, the armed forces, schools and other organizations.[46]

The communist revolutionaries in China viewed monogamy as a means of giving women and men equal rights in marriage. This view has since been echoed by women's rights movements in nations that allow polygamy. In nations that do allow polygamy, especially where it takes the form of polygyny (men taking several wives), women often feel the practice of polygamy makes them second-class citizens and lowers their quality of life. The women's rights movements in these nations want to make monogamy the only legal form of marriage. The United Nations joined these efforts in 1979 when the General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, an international bill of rights for women that over 180 nations have agreed to implement.

The United Nations began to promote social monogamy as the preferred form of marriage in 1979, when the General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, an international bill of rights for women that over 180 nations have agreed to implement. Article 16 of the Convention requires nations to give women and men equal rights in marriage. Polygamy is interpreted as inconsistent with Article 16, because it extends the right of multiple spouses to men but not to women. The United Nations has established the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women(CEDAW), to monitor the progress of nations implementing the Convention. The United Nations is thus working through the Convention and CEDAW to promote women's equality by making monogamy the only legal form of marriage worldwide.

Many authors claim sexual monogamy promotes security, intimacy, and stability in relationships. Their claim stems from observations of couples exploring "open marriage" where partners agree that each is free to engage in extramarital sexual relationships. Although some people have happy and stable open marriages, [47] [48] [49] sexual non-monogamy proves too difficult for most couples to manage and their relationships suffer as a consequence:

Any number of sexual innovators, over the past 60 or 70 years, have argued for a third alternative—a combination of permanence with permissiveness:that is, permanent adherence to the marriage, for the sake of child-rearing and social stability, combined with freedom for each partner to have additional emotional and physical relationships outside the marriage, But thus far, all variations upon this theme have proven disruptive to the marriages of most of those who have practiced them, and too threatening to the majority of those who have not to be seriously tried out. Relatively few people, even today, manage to make permissive marriage work at all, let alone work better than exclusive marriage. For although marriage no longer has the structural support of religion, community, law, or practical necessity, today there is something else that makes exclusivity, or the appearance of it, immensely important—namely, the lonliness and disconnectedness of modern life, which creates a deep need in modern man and woman to belong, and to have a binding emotional connection to someone else. And since for most people sex is so closely bound up with deep emotions, extramarital sexual acts are severely threatening to the emotional identity and security that marriage seems to offer.[50]

Sexual non-monogamy provokes jealousy and insecurity in most couples. Conversely, sexual monogamy reduces jealousy and builds the kind of trust and intimacy that makes relationships stable. This appears to be born out by research findings that people in sexually non-monogamous relationships experience jealousy more frequently than people in sexually monogamous relationships. [51] [52]

Some studies report at least 80 percent of people in open marriages experience jealousy over their extramarital relationships. [53] [54] A five year study of bisexuals observed a shift from sexual non-monogamy to sexual monogamy in many participants because they "...felt that nonmonogamy was too time consuming, took too much energy, or was too complicated. They also thought that it got in the way of developing love, trust, and more intimate relationships with a partner." (Weinberg, Williams, & Pryor, 1995, page 262)[55] Thus, many have concluded that the harmony of the conjugal relationship is best served by sexual exclusivity:

It is not that I feel any deep-rooted moral objection to a lack of sexual exclusiveness in long-term relationships. It is rather that I am increasingly aware of the difficulties that the vast majority of humans have in coping with it. The ideal of the open marriage seems to me to be a fine one. In addition to the central primary relationship, it recognises other less permanent, sexual or non-sexual relationships, which may in themselves be mutually rewarding and self-fulfilling. But few primary relationships can survive such apparent if unintended challenges. The essential security of the dyad is weakened, and further undermined by the ravages of jealousy. (Bancroft, 1989, page 10) [56]

Conclusion

One of the most common alternatives to monogamy is promiscuity:

Promiscuity is the practice of making relatively casual and indiscriminate choices. The term is most commonly applied to sexual behavior, where it refers to sexual intercourse that is not in the framework of a long term monogamous sexual relationship. [57]

"Polyamory" is another alternative, which involves multiple loving relationships. Although the word roots are poly (multiple) and amor (romantic love), the committment to honesty exists with all partners and ground rules are openly negotiated. Polygamy, polygyny, and polyandry are anthropological terms refering respectively to multiple marriages, marriages of multiple women to one man, and of multiple men to one woman.

Still another alternative to monogamy is sexual abstinence: "a choice not to participate in sexual intercourse." This can be for religious, moral, or other reasons. [58]

Sexual abstinence is the practice of voluntarily refraining from some or all aspects of sexual activity. Common reasons to deliberately abstain from the physical expression of sexual desire include religious or philosophical reasons (e.g. chastity), material reasons (to prevent conception or STD transmission), or to conform to legal injunctions. [59]

A perspective that is refreshingly clear, moving from the confusion of the twentieth century, comes from Crittenden: "What we rarely hear is how liberating marriage can actually be. The negative, that we are no longer able to live entirely for ourselves, is also the positive: We no longer have to live entirely for ourselves.[60]" Monogamy is the opportunity to grow beyond the borders of the self and live for the sake of someone else. Through the willingness to live in an exclusive special relationship, for the sake of that other, it may be that one's own dreams and desires are finally fulfilled.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  1. ↑ Reichard, U.H. (2003). Monogamy: Past and present. In U.H. Reichard and C. Boesch (Eds.), Monogamy: Mating strategies and parnternships in birds, humans, and other mammals (pp.3-25).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Lack, D. (1968). Ecological Adaptations for Breeding in Birds. London: Methuen. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Lack,1968" defined multiple times with different content
  3. ↑ Moller, A.P. (1986). Mating systems among European passerines: a review. Ibis, 7, 234-250.
  4. ↑ Reichard, U.H. (2002). Monogamy—A variable relationship. Max Planck Research, 3, 62-67.
  5. ↑ United Nations (2004). World Fertility Report: 2003. Retrieved April 26, 2006 from http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldfertility/World_Fertility_Report.htm .
  6. ↑ Murdock, G.P. (1967). Ethnographic Atlas. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
  7. ↑ White, D.R. & Veit, C. (1999). White-Veit EthnoAtlas. Retrieved April 28, 2006 from http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/ethnoatlas/nindex.html.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Murdock, G. P. (1981). Atlas of World Cultures. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. ISBN 0822934329 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Murdock,1981" defined multiple times with different content
  9. ↑ White, D.R. (1988). "Rethinking polygyny: Co-wives, codes, and cultural systems." Current Anthropology, 29, 572.
  10. ↑ Murdock, G.P. (1965). Social Structure. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0029222907
  11. ↑ Clements, M. (1994, August 7). Sex in America today: A new national survey reveals how our attitudes are changing. Parade Magazine, 4-6.
  12. ↑ Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T, & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  13. ↑ Wiederman, M. W. (1997). Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 34, 167-174.
  14. ↑ Harding, J.A., Almany, G.R., Houck, L.D., & Hixon, M.A. (2003). Experimental analysis of monogamy in the Caribbean cleaner goby, Gobiosoma evelynae. Animal Behaviour, 65, 865–874.
  15. ↑ Komers, P.E. & Brotherton, P.N.M. (1997) Female space use is the best predictor of monogamy in mammals. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 264, 1261-1270.
  16. ↑ Altizer, S., et al. (2003). Social organization and parasite risk in mammals: Integrating theory and empirical studies. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34, 517-547.
  17. ↑ Mathews, L.M. (2003). Tests of the mate- guarding hypothesis for social monogamy: male snapping shrimp prefer to associate with high-value females. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 63-67.
  18. ↑ Palombit, R. A. (1999). Infanticide and the evolution of pair bonds in nonhuman primates. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 7, 117-129.
  19. ↑ Weatherhead, P.J. (1979). Ecological correlates of monogamy in tundra-breeding Savannah Sparrows. The Auk, 96, 391-401.
  20. ↑ Young, L.J., Wang, Z., & Insel, T.R. (1998). Neuroendocrine bases of monogamy. Trends in Neuroscience, 21, 71-75.
  21. ↑ Barash, D.P. & Lipton, J.E. (2001). The Myth of Monogamy. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.
  22. ↑ Lickona, Thomas. 1994. "The Neglected Heart." American Educator Summer 1994, pages 36-37.
  23. ↑ International Educational Foundation. 2006. Educating for True Love: Explaining Sun Myung Moon's Thought on Morality, Family and Society. New York, NY. ISBN 1891958070
  24. ↑ Bloom, Allen. 1988. The Closing of the American Mind. New York, NY: Simon & Shuster. ISBN 0671657151
  25. ↑ Bradley P. Hayton, "To Marry or Not: The Legalization of Marriage and Adoption of Homosexual Couples," (Newport Beach: The Pacific Policy Institute, 1993)
  26. ↑ Aron, A., Norman, C.C., Aron, E.N., & Lewandowski, G. (2002). Shared participation in self-expanding activities: Positive effects on experienced marital quality. In J.A. Feeney and P. Noller (Eds.), Understanding Marriage: Developments in the Study of Couple Interaction (pp. 177-194). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  27. ↑ Karney, B.R. & Bradbury, T.N. (1995). The longitudinal course of material quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3-34.
  28. ↑ Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachmenpt rocess. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.
  29. ↑ Brennan, K.A., & Shaver, P.R. (1995). Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 267–283.
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 Feeney, J.A. (1994). Attachment style, communication patterns and satisfaction across the life cycle of marriage. Personal Relationships, 1, 333–348. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Feeney,1994" defined multiple times with different content
  31. ↑ Feeney, J. A. (1996). Attachment, caregiving, and marital satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 3, 401–416.
  32. ↑ Feeney, J.A., Noller, P., & Callan, V.J. (1994). Attachment style, communication and satisfaction in the early years of marriage. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships: Attachment processes in adulthood (Vol. 5, pp. 269–308). London: Jessica Kingsley.
  33. ↑ Fuller, T.L., & Fincham, F.D. (1995). Attachment style in married couples: Relation to current marital functioning, stability over time, and method of assessment. Personal Relationships, 2, 17–34.
  34. ↑ Keelan, J.P.R., Dion, K.K., & Dion, K.L. (1998). Attachment style and relationship satisfaction: Test of a self-disclosure explanation. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30, 24–35.
  35. ↑ Simpson, J.A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 971-980.
  36. ↑ Duemmler, S.L., & Kobak, R. (2001). The development of commitment and attachment in dating relationships: attachment security as relationship construct. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 401-415.
  37. ↑ Gottman, J.M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., & Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting maritral happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 5-22.
  38. ↑ Pinsof, W.M. (2002). The death of 'till death do us part': The transformation of pair-bonding in the 20th century. Family Process, 41, 135-157.
  39. ↑ Constantine, L.L. & Constantine, J.M. (1973). Group Marriage. New York, NY: Collier Books.
  40. ↑ Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. 1986. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  41. ↑ Hart, Archibald. 1995. The Sexual Man: Masculinity without Guilt. W Publishing Group. ISBN 0849936845
  42. ↑ National Crime Victimization Survey. 1992. U.S. Department of Justice.
  43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 Wilson, Andrew (ed.) 1995. World Scripture: A Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts. New York, NY: Paragon House. ISBN 1557787239
  44. ↑ Engels, F. (1884). The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. Retrieved May 29, 2006, from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family
  45. ↑ Penelope, J. (1985). The mystery of lesbians: II. Lesbian Ethics, 1, 29-67.
  46. ↑ Cheng, C. (1991). A speculative analysis of socio-economic influences on the fertility transition in China. Asia-Pacific Population Journal, 6, 3-24.
  47. ↑ Buunk B. (1980). Extramarital sex in the Netherlands: Motivations in social and marital context. Alternative Lifestyles, 3, 11-39.
  48. ↑ Rubin A. M. (1982). Sexually open versus sexually exclusive marriage: A comparison of dyadic adjustment. Alternative Lifestyles, 5, 101-108.
  49. ↑ Rubin A. M., & Adams J. R. (1986). Outcomes of sexually open marriages. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 311-319.
  50. ↑ Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual behavior in the 1970s. Chicago: Playboy Press.
  51. ↑ Trost, M. R., Brown, S., & Morrison, M. (1994). Jealousy as an adaptive communication strategy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Assocation, New Orleans, LA.
  52. ↑ Pines, A., & Aronson, E. (1983). Antecedents, correlates, and consequences, of sexual jealousy. Journal of Personality, 51, 108–136.
  53. ↑ Buunk B. (1981). Jealousy in sexually open marriages. Alternative Lifestyles, 4, 357-372.
  54. ↑ Ramey J. W. (1975). Intimate groups and networks: Frequent consequences of sexually open marriage. Family Coordinator, 24, 515-530.
  55. ↑ Weinberg, M.S., Williams, C.J., & Pryor, D.W. (1995). Dual Attraction: Understanding Bisexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  56. ↑ Bancroft, J. (1989). Human Sexuality and its Problems. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
  57. ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promiscuity
  58. ↑ http://womenshealth.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-abstinence.htm
  59. ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abstinence
  60. ↑ http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0001135.cfm

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

Retrieved from https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Monogamy&oldid=197873

Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Copyright Logo
Powered by MediaWiki