Were humans meant to stay monogamous? Married forever?

[amerikajin]

We all know that adultery hurts the other person and that infidelity runs against social mores, but is it time we re-evaluate the state of the modern marriage?

 

Of course there are couples who remain faithful to each other until death, but I doubt that's true for a majority of marriages. More often than not, one partner strays, the other gets hurt, claims the trust isn't there anymore and files for divorce.

 

Is it time that we re-define marriage? Should we think of marriage as something permanent or something indefinite? Instead of the idea of permanent marriages, should we allow couples different options? What about a five year marriage license? Don't like each other after five years, you part ways on terms agreed upon before marriage (kinda like a prenup but something that wouldn't stand out as such, as it would be part of the overall marriage agreement itself).

 

Some communities in the States are proposing so-called "covenant marriages," which makes divorce doubly difficult and includes a waiting period. A good idea?

[EnigmaXOXO]

Some communities in the States are proposing so-called "covenant marriages," which makes divorce doubly difficult and includes a waiting period. A good idea?

 

Don’t like this one at all, Amerikajin. If one already feels “stuck” in an unhealthy/abusive marriage, making them wait even longer for the divorce (if and when they even find the courage to file for it) will only prolong the agony.

 

With a no-fault divorce (such as in my case) you already have to be separated legally for a total of two (2) years before the divorce is finalized. During this time, you are required not to have sexual relations with your partner…otherwise, you must start the two-year trail period all over again. As a matter of fact, I had to bring a witness to my hearing with the Magistrate to testify in my behalf that there was no evidence of a reconciliation between my husband and I, and that we had been living separate and apart during the time of our separation. I have seen friends get immediate divorces only in cases where adultery could be proven.

 

Rather then change the institute of marriage; I’d rather see the same two-year trial period placed on “getting” the marriage license itself. For instance, a couple may file for the marriage license but it would require a two-year waiting period. During that time they would be required to undergo relationship counseling and parenting classes to insure that the couple has acquired the skills they needed BEFORE entering into a legal and binding contract rather than two years after the fact.

 

We all know that adultery hurts the other person and that infidelity runs against social mores, but is it time we re-evaluate the state of the modern marriage?

 

Aside from pain and “social mores,” adultery is a direct breech of contract. Perhaps it would be better to stiffen the penalties (monetarily) in cases where infidelity on either spouse’s part could be proven. Maybe reinstating the Alienation of Affection clause may serve as some deterrent. Of course, one can include any clause they want in a Prenup, so long as both parties agree to sign.

[Debster]

IMO, those that chose to cheat and destroy their marriages should not influence what a marriage is. To me, they just should never have gotten married in the first place.

 

There ARE people out there who believe in the concept of marriage - 1 person for life.

[PUHLEEEEZE...]

The 5-year contract sounds nice and uncomplicated, but what happens to the kids?

[supermom]

How about jailtime for infidelity? Or a major fine? Why modernize marriages, when you take vows BEFORE GOD, do you think GOD would like to moderize his expectations?

[shamen]

I personally am a serial monogamist (I try to take breaks in between). I just don't get married to them and I don't think that I will ever get married (I'm 35).

 

Redefining marriage? Enigma has some good points. I especially like the one about the two year waiting period for the actual marriage. I don't think that enough people really take the time to think about the whole concept of marriage before they actually do it.

[CurlyIam]

Change is the only constant thing in one's life.

 

The trick about marriage is that its essence encapsulates the "forever" thing. Take that away and you'll have a partnership contract.

 

When reading the post about gay marriages, the there was this idea that marriage would be about rights and benefits... dyermaker was talking about the privatisation of marriage...

 

I think society changes us deeply. But not to the point of excluding the possibility of "union forever". I mean think about the implications of it: it would mean that us as a society don't give any happy couple one chance of survivng. Out in the open!! Now go,have kids and be happy!

 

MArriage ain't something you can change your mind about. One should not have this possibility! IT should be about commitment! Willingly, from both partners!

 

 

 

Oh, I can't help but see how naturaly you were talking about cheating and marriage, as if they were a couple of words that go together just fine. Cheating is not the inevitable end of all relationships. It is not the utter reality that swollows all people.

 

Amerikajin, you are convinced of it, aren't you?

[moimeme]

I've said my piece on this in the last couple of threads on this topic. I'll just toss my hat in with Enigma. It should not be difficult to exit a marriage; it should be EXTREMELY difficult to marry. IMHO, it is choosing the wrong partner, marrying for the wrong reasons, not understanding what marriage is, and other similar issues which are the downfall of marriage. I think most marriages which end in divorce have been made unwisely.

 

In short, as for health and almost everything else, focus on prevention rather than cure.

[amerikajin]

What if there were no marriage licenses? What if two people just lived together and stayed as long as they desired?

 

Are people really monogamous creatures? Seems like there's just so much temptation out there.

[Thinkalot]

Yes, choosing who to marry is the big test and the big challenge, and the thing that requires the most effort and time and thought. Sadly, many don't devote the required thought and time to the decision, or jump in too quickly.

 

My fiance is not the person I thought he was when I fell madly in love with him. He is at the core of course, and I love him even more deeply now. But I also know all sides of him, good and bad, not just the glossy bits...and he knows that of me. So at least we go into our marriage with our eyes open.

 

I don't think we should change marriage...but perhaps make it harder to get married.

[CurlyIam]

"What if there were no marriage licenses? What if two people just lived together and stayed as long as they desired?"

 

Well, marriage isn't for everyone! One should do whatever makes him happy, get married or not! according to their own will.

 

supposing that the rate of failed mariages is bigger then 85%, this should not be a reason to prevent anyone who does want to get married from doing so.

 

"Are people really monogamous creatures? Seems like there's just so much temptation out there. "

 

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Is it that difficult to imagine one resisting temptation? Plus, the older one gets, the less meaningful phisical temptation is, the less willing one is to risk it all for "giving in to temptation". In time, sexual attraction tends to slowly fades, I understand your point. But it is like a hase: once you're for a long time with the other prson, you have the love, remain and see the essence of your relationship, the other person, the trust, respect, friendship, admiration those things that make a couple so strong together. Don't think that attraction ever completely fades away! It may loose the intensity of first years, but it somehow gets much much deeper. It's for every couple to take it from here, I guess...

 

I'll just quote moi here and say that cheating rarely is about sex!

 

So would you explain what you understand by temptation?

[dyermaker]

Are people really monogamous creatures? Seems like there's just so much temptation out there.

If we weren't monogamous, it wouldn't hurt so much to sever that connection. Right?

[Thinkalot]

We have surely evolved beyond basic creatures, with basic instincts and nothing more. We still have basic instincts, yes, but we also have many complex emotions and standards and so forth, which set us apart from more basic animals.

[InmannRoshi]

Maybe marriage was really just a device developed to help with division of labor more than it ever had to do with affection and romance. Whenever you had to cut your lawn with a scythe instead of a riding lawnmower, and when you had to bake your own bread by hand when instead of running to the cornerstore, marriage was likely not so much a romantic notion of human connection as it was a pragmatic union of necessity needed to get by in the world. Maybe the problem is we're trying to morph marriage into something it was never invented to be in the first place.

[EnigmaXOXO]

Dyermaker writes:If we weren't monogamous, it wouldn't hurt so much to sever that connection. Right?

 

Hey!

 

You know, I think he's got something there!

 

(...although I still refuse to believe you're only fifteen. )

[amerikajin]

For some people severing the connection is a relief.

 

You can love someone deeply and still want to have sex with another person. Maybe you find that person sexually more attractive than your own lover. You can deny it all you want, but the urge never goes away. What's the natural thing to do?

[CurlyIam]

Of course you'll find other people much more attractive than your lover! Lots of them! The same goes fo your partner, don't worry!

 

But as I said before, cheating is rarely about sex.

 

Yes, one sees a nice, available appeling and easy piece an a*s... That piece od a*s may even make the move, just to make it harder on you.

 

Being tempted rises question marks about the relationship. Not finding her attractive, sexy etc, but the actual thought of sleeping with her. Putting your needs first above your relationship.

 

In the end, it's a personal choice. One may realise the hurt and pain and the sorrow his action will have on the his partner and decide not to "indulge" himself with ths treat.

 

Other may decide not to do it because it would mean that the instinct is stronger than their reason - intellectual part... English problem here (you're familiar with the expression of thinking with your "head", something like that). There are quite a few reasons people decide to be faithful.

 

 

 

You are not a hypocrite if you don't act upon your urges. At some point, one has to take his responsabilities and stick to it (one of them being not sleeping around). It's not that hard, trust me!

 

Much harder is when you meet someone more interesting and sexually apealing. That's the threat. Being tempted to switch your partner, not a casual lay.

 

 

Curly

 

P.S. The thought of never sleeping with someone else scares the s*** out of everyone. Not only men live with this fear. But if you're with the right person, have a good relationship, you won't feel the urge. You won't need it. In the beginning because you'd de doing it alot with your girlfriend, in the end because you'd risk leaving her the house, and half of your assets!

[CurlyIam]

Ignore my last post, lots of BS

 

IF you care, you won't do it! 'cause you promised you won't when you got married. What kind of a man are you if you can't keep your promises? Especially to someone whom you love and is the most important in your life.

[CurlyIam]

When I say "you" it's not necessarily a man, it's anyone really!

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by amerikajin

For some people severing the connection is a relief.

 

You can love someone deeply and still want to have sex with another person. Maybe you find that person sexually more attractive than your own lover. You can deny it all you want, but the urge never goes away. What's the natural thing to do?

 

Curly, all of the things you mentioned are learned values, entirely relative to what we've been conditioned to believe. He asked what the natural thing to do was.

 

I think perhaps we have an evolutionary desire to not cheat on our partners because of a fear of getting our ass kicked?

 

I honestly don't know, it's a good question.

 

Did anyone read "Brave New World"? Monogamy was socially unacceptable, and avoided at all costs. It's interesting to examine just how arbitrary all of the morals we hold dear are.

[CurlyIam]

Curly, all of the things you mentioned are learned values, entirely relative to what we've been conditioned to believe. He asked what the natural thing to do was.it?

 

 

I've never thought of them as values. But we do have an intellect. Why have planes if in the end we do what rabits do - f*ck around for various reasons?

 

We don't have not do it, society accepts this phenomena, so in the end there would be no problem, isn't it? IT's the conscience bothering us, that's what it is. And this is why we try to find justifications.The "natural" thing to do in a society finding everyday new ways to exploit women body in order to sell more... Natural... gotta redefine that too I guess!

I think perhaps we have an evolutionary desire to not cheat on our partners because of a fear of getting our ass kicked?

 

IMO, we never think it's gonna happen to us. Apply that to most cases: from being cheated, to ending up preagant or discovering we have cancer in the last phase...

 

 

I'm sorry, I'm a bit morbid today! I've finished the last project for the last subject for my university! The last project for school in my life! I'll go get something to drink, tonight

[CurlyIam]

I'm super b!tchy today, guys, I'm sorry!

[moimeme]

The thing is that once you've experienced sex with someone you love and with whom you've become familiar in bed and so know how to please each other, you understand that trading that for a little roll in the hay with an unfamiliar stranger is dumb.

 

Really, Amerikajin, how many first-time sexual encounters have you had that were earth-shakingly fabulous?

[Matilda]

I so agree with you Moimeme.

[Wolvesbaned]

I agree with the arse kicking comment. It's theorized that females are the ones that chose the competitive male, for genetic reasons. Strong men back in our primal days were successful hunters, fighters and providers. This still can be seen all throughout nature today.

 

It's also theorized that it's not in a woman's best interest to "cheat" (back in the caveman days) due to the long pregnancy, shorter lifespan, harsh environment, and violence. Back then it (seemed) that life was a lot more simple: Men took care of their women, women took care of the children and men, men would protect their women from any danger and other men.

 

Men are more interested in just spreading their seed, whereas women are inherently more selective (we're hard-wired for that). A man couldn't just get any girl back then because he would get his ass-kicked. If in turn he kicked their ass, it would've been for the better in the woman's perspective because he was the stronger male and thus her children would have a greater chance to survive and thrive. It was all genetics.

 

The problem is that our reality today is lacking the volatile society and harsh environment (hopefully for most of us). We live longer, enjoy the benefits of our capitalist economy and the only ass-kicking we enjoy now is on TV. It's more convenient to cheat.

 

Are we hardwired to cheat? From a purely genetic standpoint, maybe, if we lived in the caveman days when life was simpler. But if you take reality into account, the complications, the grief, the turmoil, the increased chance for depression and abuse --no we've evolved to know that cheating no longer makes sense. Considering nature & nurture, what's required for development, it wouldn't make sense to cheat because it would put added stress into the lives of our children, which in turn could affect their success in life.

 

Cheating is more like violent behavior, it's extinct (or should be) in our modern day society --something reminiscent of our primal days. It no longer makes sense.