What is the point of monogamy?

[Lothario]

Title should be: What is the point of monogamy for men?

This is my first post here, and it may ruffle a few feathers. That is not my intent, if you find my query offensive please ignore it, but I ask that you don't lambaste or vilify me for asking. This is meant to be an objective, academic discussion.

I understand that man needs woman for sex and to procreate, but beyond that, what is the point? Specifically, for the man, what is the point of monogamy? I definitely understand the point for a woman -- someone to provide for her and her children, provide and protect, etc. And that makes sense, if I were a woman, I would seek to ensnare some guy too. But I'm not, I'm a man. And I like women, all kinds of women, and I like variety in women. I personally think it's unnatural for one man to stay with (and have sex with) only one woman "till death do them part." Yes many men do just that (although I think the % is smaller than we'd think), but I posit that they do so because they have no other choice -- better to get sex from someone rather than no one. That being said, why would a successful, affluent, good-looking man who could have his pick of women on any given day electively choose to "settle down" with just one? After all from a male point of view, no matter how beautiful a woman is, after a while of having sex with her only, she is no longer arousing -- and at that point, the man needs someone else, anyone else -- maybe that someone else isn't as attractive as the previous woman, but she is different and new, and that after a while is all that matters.

So why then would a successful, affluent, good-looking, and overall very desirable male (gulp) get married? What is the point? And please don't say childbirth -- b/c childbirth has been around since the beginning of human existence and has nothing to do with marriage. Marriage, at some level, is an institution invented by society -- like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

Evolutionary psychology backs me on this. Anyone care to counter? I am open to and appreciative of solid counterarguments, thanks.

[HeartIsAching]

From a purely biological standpoint, there is none. Women have an imperative to find a stable mate that provides well (evolutionarily speaking, not relevant in modern society) and men have an imperative to spread their seed as far and wide as possible.

However, we're not just biological machines. We may be merely an "advanced breed of ape" as Stephen Hawking put it, but we DO have the capacity to look at the stars and wonder what's out there. The biological differences between Chimpanzee and a Human are very slight - on the order of 2% difference, but the gulf between us is deep if not wide.

[MerryH]

Some people choose to be monogamous. You're allowed to disagree or not understand, just how people are allowed to disagree with or not understand polygamy or polyamory or whatever.

This is a tired argument that is always rife with sexist generalizations being thrown around. It's an argument over opinions. This is just as pointless as debating politics or religion ([URL="http://www.loveforum.net/love-advice-forum/8522-loveforum-rules-guidelines.html"]#7[/URL]).

[RockNRoll]

Because he believes that she is the best one? and therefore someone else would be worse and there is no point (and interest) to mess around, especially if you are risking to lose "the best one"?
We like doing presents to those we care about. Can you think of a bigger gift, rather than saying (verbally and with actions) that she/he is the most special and the only one?
People tend to do what they enjoy doing.

(Edited)

So why then would a successful, affluent, good-looking, and overall very desirable male (gulp) get married?

Do you think monogamy is for the less lucky guys? Actually, they would have less chances to get into a monogam relationship

[smackie9]

Ya I agree with the other poster that your view is of a biological standpoint. There are benefits to being in a monogamous relationship. For one thing couples are happier and live longer. You work as a team, and can build a strong financial future together, and generally you take care of each other physically and emotionally. Men are not the only ones that desire variety. Women are programmed to procreate with the best genes, so there are those who may seek out another man, while she has the good provider at home.

Some couples choose to have an open marriage which could be a win win situation for some. So there are different strokes for different folks.

[Lothario]

Interesting thoughts. Think about this: If we accept that we all have an evolutionary drive to procreate -- i.e. have as many offspring as possible -- how many offspring could that be? Well for a woman, she only has one uterus, so her lifetime limit is -- what? Maybe 30 max? What about a man? That's right -- much, much, much higher. In fact there is some ancient ruler (egyptian I think) who had over 8000 children!

So, I posit that woman want to hold on to a "good catch" -- yesterday's successful hunter and sabertooth tiger slayer, or today's Donald Trump. Man however, particularly very successful man, wants to avoid being "caught" and instead wants to spread his seed maximally among as many mates as possible. In fact we see reality of this even today, very wealthy and powerful men have numerous concubines, yet those women only have that one man. Why? Because at some primal level they realize that only having 1/4th or 1/10th or whatever of Wilt Chamberlin is still better than having 100% of Joe Schmo auto mechanic.

Because he believes that she is the best one?

That's the point -- there is no "best one" -- the best one is the new one, and there's always going to be a new one.

You work as a team, and can build a strong financial future together, and generally you take care of each other physically and emotionally.

Yes this is fine for Average Joe America, but for the truly wealthy and successful, how many did it "teaming up" with their spouse/wife? That's right -- ZERO. The billionaires of the world did it themselves, with few exceptions. A nagging woman would have been nothing but a distraction when they were building their empires. Sure there are sparse exceptions here and there, but that's all they are, exceptions.

Consider this: How does a woman entice a man who is out-of-her-league looks-wise to sleep with her? Answer: Offer no-strings attached sex. How does a man entice a women who is out-of-his-league to sleep with him? Offer monogamy. It is a well known phenomenon that men can get much better women if they agree to be monogamous. The opposite is true for women.

Also, let me ask this question: What is the single most marketable attribute for a woman? Looks. What is the single most marketable attribute for a man? Money. (If anybody disagrees with this it will blow my mind, this is the way the world is like it or not.) This is why women peak in their marketability around age 23 or so, then slowly decline. Men however, as long as they keep earning more and more money, continuously increase their marketability, some to stratospheric levels. Whereas an incredibly beautiful woman (take your pick) is only slightly more beautiful than simply a very beautiful woman, a wealthy man can be many orders of magnitude wealthier than his relative #2 (e.g. 1 billion vs. 200k/year).

I appreciate y'all's input. MerryH is having a hard time keeping things objective, but that's not uncommon for women re: this topic, many take personal offense to it for some reaons.

[xxazurexx]

That's right -- ZERO. The billionaires of the world did it themselves, with few exceptions....

Ever heard that saying:

'Behind every great man, there was a 'greater' woman'.....lmao

Look...if you are looking to have an affair because your partner has become an 'old dog' who no longer arouses you, go ahead and have one. Don't come here trying to justify your reasons for having one...k!!

[VincenzoG91]

A lot of people appreciate stability. Like having a regular job instead of a temp job, or having a home instead of looking for dry patch of ground to sleep on each night. I'm guessing that you're young, Lothario. As you get older, the idea of constantly looking and acting your best in hope of attracting new companions loses appeal. Sometimes it's just nice to have somebody appreciate you for who you really are instead of your current appearance.

[Lothario]

Ad hominem comments are fine and don't bother me one bit, but I think they do prove that those who make them have no sound logical rebuttle.

[xxazurexx]

^Or we just arent' interested in what YOU think....lmfao

[Lothario]

A lot of people appreciate stability.

Touche, this is a good point. But to some degree, I think stability comes precariously close to stagnation -- I mean, is a wife, 2 kids, house in the 'burbs, white picket fence, cog in the machine at work, hate your boss, 4 weeks of vacation/year, and building up the 401K for retirement -- is that what life is about? Is that what man was put on earth for? No offense to anyone, but that sounds like life imprisonment to me.

[HeartIsAching]

Touche, this is a good point. But to some degree, I think stability comes precariously close to stagnation -- I mean, is a wife, 2 kids, house in the 'burbs, white picket fence, cog in the machine at work, hate your boss, 4 weeks of vacation/year, and building up the 401K for retirement -- is that what life is about? Is that what man was put on earth for? No offense to anyone, but that sounds like life imprisonment to me.

Yes. That is what life is all about - specifically the offspring, and providing a stable and safe place for them to grow up.

[girl68]

sounds like life imprisonment to me.

Best of luck to you and avoiding this beautiful thing we call life.

[Lothario]

Yes. That is what life is all about - specifically the offspring, and providing a stable and safe place for them to grow up.

I accept that, but why does a man have to stay with one woman in a nuclear family environment forever to accomplish that? There are numerous "serial monogamist" moguls out there who have multiple offspring in many generations (again, Trump is a well known example), and they provide for, protect, and nurture their children (and their children's mothers) just fine -- maybe they don't change the diapers themselves, but their financial resources provide much, much more to these women and children than Mr. White Picket Fence ever could.

[Lothario]

Best of luck to you and avoiding this beautiful thing we call life.

If that scenario sounds good to you then by all means you should pursue/continue it. Just keep in mind that at some level, you are a pawn in the great game called How the World Works. This allows me to segue into another related theory of mine: The concept of lifelong, monogamous marriage is an institution invented by the controlling minority -- world business and financial leaders -- perhaps 1/100th of 1% of the population -- with the intention of keeping Joe Taxpayer in line... slaving away 40+ hours/week, with mouths to feed and a nagging wife that will take him for all he's worth in a divorce. In this situation, what choice does poor Joe have but to remain in this arrangement? He has to keep on working, making the elite 5 dollars for every 1 dollar he makes, taking crap from his wife forever. Let's say Joe was actually independent, and decided to shun marriage and monogamy, he would have no real reason to keep playing The Game -- if it were just him alone he could rough it out, he could tell his boss where to shove it and go it alone... do his own thing, maybe start his own company, launch his own product... maybe even, GASP, challenge the status quo and defeat the incumbents. But no, poor Joe can't do that, he's got mouths to feed and bills to pay after all... too bad for him he bought into the "hype" and never thought for himself, never challenged conventional wisdom...