Are we REALLY not made for monogamy?


Reply
  • Page 2 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
 
Topic Tools Search this Thread
nightling is offline nightling Post #11  July 30,2010, 9:14am
nightling's Avatar

all I'll leave are smoke rings in the dark.

Power Poster

Joined: Sep 2009

Misery

Posts: 6,901

See profile

So thinking about this a little bit more and how I've experienced it ...

I do sort of feel that I"m only ever interested in one person at a time romantically, and yet, if that person isn't interested in me back, I am quite capable of turning that circuit with them off and just seeing them as friends and pursue someone else.

This suggests to me that while the factors that allow you to be attracted to someone may be somewhat outside your control, there is a certain amount of voluntary control as to which of the choices that do make it into your attraction range you will focus on.

I don't know that that made any sense to anyone else, but it did to me. I've had lots of coffee.
 
  Reply With Quote
Can_I_just_be_Jo is offline Can_I_just_be_Jo Post #12  July 30,2010, 9:42am

blames self-help books

Power Poster

Joined: Oct 2009

STL

Posts: 4,879

See profile

nightling wrote :
So thinking about this a little bit more and how I've experienced it ...

I do sort of feel that I"m only ever interested in one person at a time romantically, and yet, if that person isn't interested in me back, I am quite capable of turning that circuit with them off and just seeing them as friends and pursue someone else.

This suggests to me that while the factors that allow you to be attracted to someone may be somewhat outside your control, there is a certain amount of voluntary control as to which of the choices that do make it into your attraction range you will focus on.

I don't know that that made any sense to anyone else, but it did to me. I've had lots of coffee.
Ahh yes grasshopper but once that person is interested in you and you progress to a physical stage do you find that level of attraction for another guy without making a choice to allow it.

My hypothesis is that once you are in the level of whatever that it takes to have a monogamous relationship you could still be attracted (as you describe it) to another guy but use that control to never go beyond that and keep them in the friends bracket even if this next guy is attracted to you as well. This is why I don't think people accidently have affairs.

The other part of this is I think we are able to turn this on and off, or maybe some people can, which is why some can have FWB relationships and others cannot. Makes me wonder if we could get a study together to see if people who can make FWB relationships work have a higher rate of cheating in a monogamous relationship.

Now I get to be the one confusing people.
 
  Reply With Quote
jtkdp is offline jtkdp Post #13  July 30,2010, 10:08am
jtkdp's Avatar

gets right on to the friction of the day...

Veteran

Joined: Jun 2008

Colorado

Posts: 1,086

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
I actually believe that humans can be very satisfied & unbelievably happy with a partner with a very similar sex drive.

If that need is satisfied then one is far less likely to stray.
+1
 
  Reply With Quote
nightling is offline nightling Post #14  July 30,2010, 10:17am
nightling's Avatar

all I'll leave are smoke rings in the dark.

Power Poster

Joined: Sep 2009

Misery

Posts: 6,901

See profile

Can_I_just_be_Jo wrote :
Ahh yes grasshopper but once that person is interested in you and you progress to a physical stage do you find that level of attraction for another guy without making a choice to allow it.
only if he's lost my attention, through being cold and hurtful or doing other things that lessen the feelings of attachment and love. Anger occupies a large portion of that same circuit that The One occupies, see. My theory on that is, it prepares you to defend yourself from a lover who suddenly became an enemy.

So when you do things to a partner that engages their anger ... you are kind of turning their love for you off and turning on a protective mechanism in them that pushes you away. If you don't do enough feely good things in a relationship, I think it also gets all deflated like a balloon and it's weak and pitiful so you go off looking for some air.

So those two things ... I think if you do them often enough in a relationship — make someone angry at you and/or not put air in their balloon often enough — then I think the relationship becomes very vulnerable to wandering attentions.


My hypothesis is that once you are in the level of whatever that it takes to have a monogamous relationship you could still be attracted (as you describe it) to another guy but use that control to never go beyond that and keep them in the friends bracket even if this next guy is attracted to you as well. This is why I don't think people accidently have affairs.
I don't think I disagreed with this assessment? But if the relationship reaches a certain point in breaking down, then I do think the wandering attention becomes a little involuntary. You're not getting what you need from the relationship for whatever reason and for whoever's "fault" it is.

Likely you've tried to address it with them and failed for whatever reason and whoever's at fault for it.

So the system acts to find you a better mate.

I don't know if I'm making much sense.

But I will say we totally agree that affairs don't happen by accident.


The other part of this is I think we are able to turn this on and off, or maybe some people can, which is why some can have FWB relationships and others cannot. Makes me wonder if we could get a study together to see if people who can make FWB relationships work have a higher rate of cheating in a monogamous relationship.

I think it likely that those who can do a FWB relationship just don't have as much attachment juice poured into them during sex as some of us do. It's a good thing for the survival of the species that we are not all the same about things.
Now I get to be the one confusing people.
You're not confusing I'm the confusing one goash blammit!!!!
 
  Reply With Quote
jayjay is offline jayjay Post #15  July 30,2010, 11:48am
jayjay's Avatar

...things seem to have gotten quiet around here.

Sage

Joined: Jun 2008

Brownsville, TX

Posts: 10,932

See profile

My take on this is that there are motives and advantages of being monogamous (faithful) and there are motives for being unfaithful. There are also the biological drives that might be good for the species....but which might not be conducive to our own happiness as individuals. Each of us deal with all this various motives and drives as we are best able. For some that's going to result in monogamous and faithful behavior....while for others it isn't. I think it's quite simplistic to make a statement that we 'are made to be' one thing or another. There are far too many factors involved.
 
  Reply With Quote
olneyjeeps is offline olneyjeeps Post #16  July 30,2010, 2:40pm
olneyjeeps's Avatar

...

Veteran

Joined: May 2009

no

Posts: 1,794

See profile

nightling wrote :
At the risk of sounding like an egg head here ... Is that in response to the talk about the "frying pan"?

The way I understand things in general, the romantic circuit for "The One" can really only be occupied by one interest at a time. So if you have such an interest you generally won't be interested in someone else.

But if the person occupying that circuit is losing your attention for whatever reason ... then it's pretty easy for someone to come in like that and capture that circuit for themselves.

This just my limited understanding of the current research brot to you by your friendly neighborhood science nerd. I don't mean to take the magic out of anything here. I actually just think the science is cool and interesting and to me makes it more magical.
It is my opinion that there is no romantic circuit for "the one". There is a circuit for the one who makes me feel better (including but not limited to physically and, more importantly, psychologically "better about myself"). Monogomy is seen / valued as a type of psychological guarantee that can be used to verify a level of trust (as interpreted in vastly different ways by males and females, but that is a whole other book on that)

I think that there is little argument that the larger portion of sexual gratification is psychological... what is being perceived.
With "training" any person can perceive whatever they want at virtually any time, hence people go seeking the physical (or psychological) gratification that they are not receiving outside of their relationship.

nightling wrote :
So thinking about this a little bit more and how I've experienced it ...

I do sort of feel that I"m only ever interested in one person at a time romantically, and yet, if that person isn't interested in me back, I am quite capable of turning that circuit with them off and just seeing them as friends and pursue someone else.

This suggests to me that while the factors that allow you to be attracted to someone may be somewhat outside your control, there is a certain amount of voluntary control as to which of the choices that do make it into your attraction range you will focus on.

I don't know that that made any sense to anyone else, but it did to me. I've had lots of coffee.
nightling wrote :
You're not confusing I'm the confusing one goash blammit!!!!
Glasshoppah learn velly much wen ristening to sef

"This suggests to me that while the factors that allow you to be attracted to someone may be somewhat outside your control, there is a certain amount of voluntary control as to which of the choices that do make it into your attraction range you will focus on."

Although it is easy to dismiss "subliminal" paradigms as outside of control, I very much disagree. In thinking about what we think and why we think it, we have ability to identify and change paradigms. Habitual thoughts / reasoning are the fruit of practice. Changing only requires thoughtful practice of a replacement / new paradigm.

Because you can change, it is not outside your voluntary control, the thoughts remain that way only because you choose not to change them.
Last edited by olneyjeeps; July 30,2010 at 3:03pm.
 
  Reply With Quote
olneyjeeps is offline olneyjeeps Post #17  July 30,2010, 2:57pm
olneyjeeps's Avatar

...

Veteran

Joined: May 2009

no

Posts: 1,794

See profile

Can_I_just_be_Jo wrote :
Ahh yes grasshopper but once that person is interested in you and you progress to a physical stage do you find that level of attraction for another guy without making a choice to allow it.

My hypothesis is that once you are in the level of whatever that it takes to have a monogamous relationship you could still be attracted (as you describe it) to another guy but use that control to never go beyond that and keep them in the friends bracket even if this next guy is attracted to you as well. This is why I don't think people accidently have affairs.
People have affairs because they are seeking to fill a physical or psychological need which is not being met, period.


Can_I_just_be_Jo wrote :
The other part of this is I think we are able to turn this on and off, or maybe some people can, which is why some can have FWB relationships and others cannot. Makes me wonder if we could get a study together to see if people who can make FWB relationships work have a higher rate of cheating in a monogamous relationship.

Now I get to be the one confusing people.
As I posted, ability to turn physical and psychological "switches" on / off / to different circuit is a learned / habitual ability. It is my opinion that everyone can learn to do it ,,, practice and a good teacher (aka mate, friends, any and all sources of knowledge that we expose ourselves to / allow ourselves to be exposed to. )
 
  Reply With Quote
BikerBeagle is offline BikerBeagle Post #18  July 30,2010, 10:12pm
BikerBeagle's Avatar

thinks everyone should just ask themselves, WWBBD?

Virtuoso

Joined: Aug 2008

Kansas

Posts: 2,548

See profile

Honestly, I don't believe we - the human animal - are biologically precluded to monogamy ...but we've evolved that way, partly for survival (safety in societal/familial numbers), but mostly for religious reasons. Let's face facts, it is our religious beliefs - specifically the 6th Christian commandment, "thou shalt not commit adultery" - that *all* of our laws of society in this regard are based on.

It is very possible that, as we become less and less a society centered around religious principles (primarily "until death do us part" monogamy), we may actually be de-volving as a society back into a more natural biological state (serial, but overall temporary, monogamy).
 
  Reply With Quote
bigfincat is offline bigfincat Post #19  July 30,2010, 10:30pm
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Joined: Nov 2008

Posts: 4,077

See profile

"Until death do us part" monogamy does not even exist in my reality so I wouldn't think of the OP's question in that light. Seeing that virginity is such a rare adult quality I don't think that is useful.

I have never considered cheating at any moment. But then again I am not selfish & my idea of variety in the bedroom does not include a variety of bodies. ( Well unless she was into that kind of thing!)

As John Mayer says : her "Body is a Wonderland." A wonderland that keeps on giving.
 
  Reply With Quote
olneyjeeps is offline olneyjeeps Post #20  July 30,2010, 11:48pm
olneyjeeps's Avatar

...

Veteran

Joined: May 2009

no

Posts: 1,794

See profile

BikerBeagle wrote :
Honestly, I don't believe we - the human animal - are biologically precluded to monogamy ...but we've evolved that way, partly for survival (safety in societal/familial numbers), but mostly for religious reasons. Let's face facts, it is our religious beliefs - specifically the 6th Christian commandment, "thou shalt not commit adultery" - that *all* of our laws of society in this regard are based on.

It is very possible that, as we become less and less a society centered around religious principles (primarily "until death do us part" monogamy), we may actually be de-volving as a society back into a more natural biological state (serial, but overall temporary, monogamy).
Incredibly spiritual (more than most could fathom) but big ol pessimist of "church" : those laws were created by self serving, power / profit motivated humans, not God. What is good / God is self evident, not what someone tells you.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply
  • Page 2 of 2
  • 1
  • 2


« How Open-minded Are You? | About You | What the Evolved Man Wants to Hear from You »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Topics
Topic Topic Starter Board Replies Last Post
HEY! I made the NYTimes Editorial Section notyet About You 22 February 28,2010 5:58am
Ladies, what if you made more and worked more than him? simpletonHeart70 Dating 22 August 25,2009 12:35pm
HELP Was I Tricked and Made a Fool of? Duped by Phantom Profile readyforchange Using eHarmony 21 June 12,2009 8:43am
A Movie Made for TP angelpoet AAA Completely Stupid Conversations 28 June 5,2009 1:37pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“The tennis ball story is a good analogy, RD, and that's how I interpret "gut feeling" -- a conclusion/sense of something that's a thought, not a feeling; though it will have feelings associated with ... ” –  Sassafras54

Join the “Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You?” discussion

“Agree. Given where you are emotionally, I would cease all communication with Mr. Trade Show. You're vulnerable. He's up for a challenge. It's playing with fire. You'll be in a bad place in the ... ” –  emma_hazards

Join the “Received lovely email from former poofer” discussion

“How about phone calls, then?” –  barbarella_42

Join the “Advice on Response time” discussion

“I have never spoken to a woman like he has. Yeah, I have never spoken to a woman like that either. It is a hard call to whether he is just as jerk, or whether he is a player. Both are feasible ... ” –  ScottK

Join the “So, men. Explain this to me, please!” discussion

“I have come to this same conclusion. Thank you.” –  bibittyboo

Join the “Confused about date #2” discussion

“Harmonygirl, I do not usually make up my mind on blanket situations but instead would examine each one on it's own merits, so I cannot answer your question. However, just in the going about of daily ... ” –  Ephemera

Join the “Atheism, Religion and Tolerance” discussion

“I was ok until the kiss on the cheek part....That doesn't sound like your defenses were up at all... It's one thing for a guy to walk up and start with the cheesy lines....But as soon as I say, "no ... ” –  Ingytravel

Join the “So this guy walks into a bar . . .” discussion

“ No. It is not wise. You have to throw all your eggs into one basket for love to work at all. Relationships are inherently riskier than careers. You can't use the same rules. You might lose ... ” –  harnomygirl

Join the “Becoming Exclusive” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:16pm.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0