Man Was Not Made For Monogamy

I know anyone who has ever had a conversation with me about life and love probably read this blog title and thought, “what the fuck Sade! What have you been smoking and who’s the dealer!! This is soooo not you.”

:) Sorry to disappoint but NO, I’m NOT stoned out of my mind...I'm just throwing some things out there for you to think about and offer your view.

How many times have you heard the truism (deliberate choice of word) that “ALL MEN CHEAT” or better yet, the popular retort, “WAIT!! WOMEN AIN’T NO GOOD NEIDA”?

Hold that thought.

A couple years back someone said to me, “Man wasn’t made for monogamy. It’s a social construct contrary to our innate desires.” Curiously naive, I responded with all the Disney indoctrinated concepts of “true love”, “finding your soulmate” and “being meant for each other.”

DISNEY DOGMA
Older, colder, I turn these concepts over in my minds and see how truly unlikely they all are. True love? How can something which by its very nature is built on giving deliberately crafted impressions and is preserved largely by half-truths and omissions to protect those on the receiving end of this affection, possibly be characterised as true. Further, love being such a subjective and evolutionary concept, is it really possible to measure its authenticity? I mean who feels it, knows it. And the reality is that loves that burn ever so deep one day, years later often pale in comparison to the love now possessed. Many would say: "I never knew love like this before”, but tell that to the you that cried all night for that now almost inconsequential love. I put it to you that much like the human mind can remember the EXISTENCE of pain but not its actual feeling, so too does it record past loves.

As to soulmates, one’s soul is really a spiritual manifestation of self. You change every day, who you are today will not be who you are in 4 years time- life, losses, trials, triumphs, society, successes – they all mold you...inclusive of your spiritual self. No two journeys could ever have the same or even mutually complimentary twists and turns and REMAIN that way. In essence, your soulmate at 25 is destined to become no more than your comfortably indispensible lover at 45 (best case scenario). Unless of course you find a way to fall in love over and over again with the new yous...

Now my personal favourite “meant for each other” – this is premised on the crux of the issue: that man was made for monogamy and somewhere, somehow, each person is destined for another and should they be so blessed as to find each other, they would and could live happily ever after. All I said on soulmates bears repeating here.


BIOLOGICAL BASIS
Biologists have long understood that monogamy is rare. Of about 4,000 mammalian species, only a handful have ever been called monogamous (many of which erroneously so, research reveals). That said, I googled around this topic(God bless Google) and found an interesting article by David P. Barash, a professor of psychology at the University of Washington entitled ‘DEFLATING THE MYTH OF MONOGAMY’ [source:http://www.trinity.edu/rnadeau/fys/barash%20on%20monogamy.htm]. The article more or less discussed just how few creatures are actually monogamous, least of which being mammals and those who were or rather appeared to be, did so for reasons which included being well provided for by their mate and having offspring with particular traits they considered attractive. (I laughed a little at this.)


REALITY CHECK
So being both spiritually and biologically predisposed to multiple experiences of the highly subjective concept of love, man was not made for monogamy. It’s a social construct contrary to our innate desires.

A man once told me something to the effect that: if he loves multiple women, for his various reasons, and treats them all well and ensured none felt disrespected, they shouldn’t concern themselves with each other. In his mind, the existence or absence of one had no bearing on his relationship with the other. He then went on to comment on the fact the demand of exclusivity was more about possession than love- ‘my man’, ‘my woman’ – and the desire to possess walked hand in hand with pride. Pride is stronger than love, so a woman would walk away from the man she wanted because she was too proud to share him.

Taking a similar position, a young lady said to me just this morning that she is a firm believer in “what she doesn’t know can’t hurt her”. As long as her man isn’t disrespectful with his infidelity, practices safe sex and fulfils his obligations to her, why should she fight a losing battle? What more could she ask for than what he would be giving? “I’m not insecure about myself or how he feels about me so as long as he always makes me feel that way, I would have no need to feel jealous or to compare myself to anyone else in his life. I think people would all be happier in open relationships.” Presumably, less effort would be put into deception and pretensions and more into loving and living.


CONCLUSION
Even as I start this sentence I don’t have a real conclusion. Truth is, I think love, pride, jealousy, possessiveness and yes infidelity are inextricably linked. I mean, everyone at some point in time has cheated, whether in thought, word or deed. No partner is EVERYTHING you need, how, when and as long as you need it, so we turn to others, whether it be for a listening ear, a good laugh or better sex. However, western social constructs say the right way to do it is for man to marry woman and be committed to each other until death do you part. With this in mind, those of us who conform to this ideal, do so by suppressing lustful desires and emotional cravings for what may not necessarily be more but certainly is different. (Consider the 80-20 rule). We deny ourselves the opportunity to satisfy impulses that are apparently quite natural because we are taught we ought to.

That said, perhaps the reason “ALL MEN CHEAT” or “WOMEN AIN’T NO GOOD NEIDA” is because they were meant to be. Arguably, with changing needs and countless desires, no one person could ever completely satisfy or be completely satisfied by another.