Are humans really polygamous by nature?

[trees4blue]

I had someone tell me that. I feel like it’s true. Thoughts?

[Sangita93]

I strongly believe that humans are not by "nature" monogamous, monogamous behaviour is a cultural influence. Women are just as non-monogamous as men and are just as culturally influenced. Polygamy translated literally from late Greek as "many married" is a marriage which includes more than two partners. When a man is formally married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and when a woman is formally married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry. Monogamy is a form of marriage in which an individual has only one official spouse during their lifetime. Humans were polygamous in their beginnings and started becoming monogamous only relatively recently - a few thousand years ago - in their history. Polygamy means multiple marriages and marriage is a much more recent institution in the course of human history. When humans were hunter-gatherers, we walked around in groups raising children from all the people in the group. No one cared whose kids were their own and no one really cared who they had sex with. Currently, we have polyamory, which means more than one romantic relationship. The concept of romance is also pretty recent. In a way, I think the most natural model for humans is what we call now 'open relationships.' Two people are together and they also have sex with others and they may date others if they like. That may be the most natural for most human beings, though I personally prefer polyamory. Anthropological and archaeological evidence shows conclusively that humans have been mildly polygamous throughout evolutionary history. In fact today we almost universally do live in a legitimately serial monogamous society i. e. we tend to have one intimate relationship after another rather than at the same time, which is still largely considered illegitimate, contemptible and morally questionable in most societies. It is starting a new relationship when the older one ends, rather than having simultaneous partners. When it comes to recognition legally and by society, in many parts of the world it is actually illegal to have more than one maritial partner at the same time. To sums up scientific findings:I believe that we are promiscuous and polygamous by nature, with a tendency to social pair-bonding which usually is less strong than the sexual instinct, hence all the, gallivanting.

[iseekpinetrees]

Yea I agree. But it's the fact we have morals and want a quality relationship that stops us from everyone doing it.

[genericname85]

we are neither poligamous nor monogamous by nature. the only determining factor for human procreation is the fact that babies have to be taken care of for at least 4-6 years before they can at least function as semi autonomous human individuals. that's what several strategies of survival have evolved around. in polygamous societies, the obligation of rising the children is spread among a bigger group of people. in societies, where the obligation for the rising of children is not spread, monogamy must be in place for it to work.
both those strategies can work quite efficiently. which one is the prevalent one seems to be mostly subjective choice.

[genericname85]

incidentally by nature we are not primed to be "long term" monogamous at all. because just spreading our genes with one partner significantly hampers our species biological diversification, which is the means of long term guaranteeing evolutional success. in fact we are primed to lose interest in a partner after 4-5 years so that we can spread our genes more so that the gene pool gets bigger. so our social constructs of life long marriage actually works against evolution.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Actually, having only one partner but having many babies with them creates maximum diversification. Lets say that you bred with 100 women, now all those offspring have your genes instead of many different guy's genes. As a result of this, any offspring they have with each-other will be produced by half siblings, making them genetically prone to birth defects. polygamy creates genetically more homogenized tribes. Increasing the risk of inbreeding and unviable births for the next generation.

[genericname85]

@TheSpaceGnome you're wrong for 2 reasons. 1: you assume that not all men behave the same. if one man bred with 100 women, yeah all those women will have spread "his" genes. but so do all men. 2 even if you make that fallacy, that would still cause more genetic variation than every one man only procreating with one woman across each respectible livetimes. if one man would have sex with multiple women and one woman would have sex with multiple men, that would cause more genetic diversity than monogamy. you can't possibly argue against that of course the limiting factor on genetic diversification is NOT the male potential to breed women. but the female potential to bear children in her lifespan. but that bottleneck can neither be circumvented by polygamy nor by monogamy. if you speak from point of evolution and diversification of gene pools, then very clearly: monogamy < Polygamy. of course there can be other limiting factors around general survival strategies outside of procreation mechanics that can invalidate one or the other depending on the structure of the particular society.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Your first "correction" of me is incorrect because you assume that any given woman would be able to breed with 2 or more men in a 9 months span, all the father need do is knock her up after the birth of his child and he maintained his genes yet again and blocked everyone else's for another 9 months. Secondly, in polygamy situations in nature, it becomes territorial, as in one alpha male and a bunch if other beta males who get there ass kicked or killed for attempting to have sex at all. Because even without monogamy males gets jealous. The only exception is bonobos, but they don't have a perpetual breeding season like we do, so they have the luxury of recreational sex without pregnancies as a social tension breaker As for your second "correction" thats simply false, having more fathers to a given generation of children is always going to result in higher generic diversity and thus more viable offspring for the next gen.

[genericname85]

@TheSpaceGnome one woman can have children from more than one man in her lifespan, therefore i'm not wrong. what you said about polygamy under your second point is not entirely true. the other men must be granted sex with the women too, or else they won't take part in that particular society, so those societies, where only the alphamale has sex with all women can't exist. also consider that in such societies, there's women that the alpha doesn't want, cause he has litterally all the choices, so that issue gets evened out. "having more fathers to a given generation of children is always going to result in higher generic diversity" exactly my point. thus polygamy is better.

[genericname85]

you rationalized your position in hindsight upon introducing a selection of the variables that can change the effectiveness of polygamy or monogamy which i have said exist and which can sway the conclusion both ways. if you purely look at procreation mechanics, then i'm right that polygamy > monogamy.

[Browneye57]

No, actually they're not. Their brains are wired to mate and stick together for the best outcome of the resultant offspring.
That said, love is not exclusive. Meaning, just because you're in love with someone doesn't mean you can't love another.

At 19, if you're not sure you can commit to a guy, please don't take up with them. It's just not fair to them.

[The_Maphio]

HUmans are animals. If we had to determine our actions by insticts alone, every man would take two or more women for themselves and knock you up constantly, whether you liked it or not.
What makes us better now is the widespread concepts of social life, a modicum of knowledge and the culture that we built from ground 0 thanks to religions and such.
Mankind as an animal species wouldn't be much different than a pack of wolves.

[HawkPerception]

Spittin gold again

[NathanDavis]

Nature is about variety, not a one path set straight for absolutely everyone.

Variety and possibilities, that's natural.

[kkirk4442]

When polygamous, it's by choice. We are, most of us, rational human beings, who can make rational choices.

[TheSpaceGnome]

I'm not, the idea of having lots of partners or no partners as my two choices would have me picking none.

[DeltaCharlieEcho]

No.
.

[JamieLoves]

No... genetically yes. We were designed to procreate, but we have brains ! At least many of us and can control what we do

[In_Trance]

You need to review human history

[RCLJT]

Yes indeed

[lycanthrope3]

Yes, religion changed things

[NibirX]

In many perspective... men are, as from evolutionary perspective... but it's not good... I think.

[Anonymous]

Males are biologically polygamous
Women are not. The reason goes back to the provide and protect animal pack programming.
Men would provide and protect and didn’t need to settle down, they spread their seed to repopulate.
Women needed men to provide and protect and them would band together as “sisters” to help with the raising of the pack and keeping the “house” in order.

Which is why men are ok being loaners and women generally are not.

[Anonymous]

No. It’s a mix.

[Anonymous]

We are animals after all dear. What do you think?

[Anonymous]

My girlfriend likes it but it's not really my thing

[trees4blue]

Interesting thank you

[IMADLAD]

Likes what! Gang bang?

[trees4blue]

@imadlad you’re funny- but not what he meant.

[Opinion Owner]

What do you mean by it

[IMADLAD]

Sounds like what he said to me..

[trees4blue]

Like... liking/loving more than one person at once. If I had meant threesomes I would have written threesomes lmao

[IMADLAD]

Its basically threesomes

[Opinion Owner]

What about not loving but having other sexual partners

[trees4blue]

Love doesn’t equal sex lmaoooo and I just clarified that I am not talking about sex 😂😂

[IMADLAD]

Love=sex or what would a woman do to me that makes me happy! Never seen a man date a woman because she has a good sense of humour!

[trees4blue]

Then you must have had a very rough time with dating. Sorry.

[IMADLAD]

Anyways, girls like a lot of men specially at a younger age because they got more opportunities and it's normal. It's tempting and understandable just take care and don't be one of those girls.

[IMADLAD]

Like men at the same time*

[trees4blue]

I’m not I was just curious as to what the general consensus was because I’ve been told that by so many people.

[Anonymous]

Men are poly women no because they got ine uterus.

[Opinion Owner]

One*

[trees4blue]

We have emotions though

[Opinion Owner]

Those are just external emotions once upon a time women dreamed of only being with one man but because girls get affect easily society changed them, like for example in the 60's girls never wore mini skirts but now.. on the other hand men are still wearing the same thing.

[Tyrael]

That's just all wrong. Every bit of it.