Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-20-2011, 10:17 PM
Hades36's Avatar
Hades36 Hades36 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 71
Default Monogamy...huh?

So, I know the question has been asked a dozen times on this forum (although I couldn't really find them, although I didn't look very hard, either)...

But where exactly did the concept of monogamy even come from? Not saying its wrong or anything, but just curious as to why and how it developed and stuck. I've read "Sex at Dawn" and a few other books but I didn't feel like they were being really clear.

Any ideas or suggestions?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-20-2011, 10:31 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

It was a method the romans merged different societies to itself to propagate its own growth (financially intellectually or geographically). In this merging they absorbed the good of the societies, and tossed out the bad.

Taken to further growth by christians in order to.. well do lots of things. Destroy the pagans, create a dissected caste system separating the pure bloods from the poor folk...or just in general, a method of pure unadulterated control over everything (including the monarchy) until a certain king challenged the concept of divorce.

In history you most often find matrimony being monogamous, but mating being more, liberal. Look to the romans, english, greek etc for history on this. Being married didn't preclude having some side action.

Monogamy grew with christianity (and western dominance) as did the laws of most western countries...

Thats the bare short of it of course. I am leaving out a lot of details I am sure others may be more interested in listing haha.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-21-2011, 12:54 AM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Are you specifically referring to monogamy in humans or amongst other animals as well?
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-21-2011, 01:43 AM
ImaginaryIllusion's Avatar
ImaginaryIllusion ImaginaryIllusion is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,930
Default

A lot of the popularity of Monogamy I think come from Patriarchy.

Check out the post here:
http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showp...54&postcount=6
It has the links to Gwynne Dyer documentary...about 15 years old now, but I think it answers a lot about how we got to where we are...where as Sex at Dawn has a lot about how we were before that.
__________________
“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.” - Chinese Proverb

-Imaginary Illusion

How did I get here & Where am I going?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-21-2011, 04:16 AM
ray's Avatar
ray ray is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 819
Default

I find it ironic that many people hold on to monogamy as a traditional value when the majority of humans in many societies over thousands of years have practiced various forms of non-monogamy. It's not a new thing. The rise of Christianity really began to cement the construct of monogamy we have today.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-21-2011, 10:36 AM
Hades36's Avatar
Hades36 Hades36 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 71
Default

Talking about in humans specifically.

I mean, from a practical, survival kind of standpoint, having more than 2 people in a relationship seems really beneficial. But there also seems to be a number, a tipping point as it were, where the relationship would be too large and clunky, at least with regards to intimate connections running smoothly. I imagine at that point the group would splinter off somehow and form a new family.

The problem, it seems, with expanding your relationship is attracting people who are truly going to be committed to the concept of "all of us" and not "you and me". Most of us have been raised in a society that promotes rugged individualism (either/or thinking) over a more group-centered (tribal) psychology, right? Add into that all of our fears and insecurities and you have a train wreck.

Being polyamorous seems like a reaching back to something both simpler and more complicated that could be found in our species ancient history, but I wonder if we've come to far in the direction of imagined growth and prosperity for many of us to be able to evolve our relationship style and beliefs into that form again?

I've always believed that polyamory was the most realistic approach to loving and bonding that could exist. Since I was 16 years old I've believed that but, of course, been in nothing but strictly monogamous relationships, which included all of the joys and horrors of such a high-pressure construction. Like, our entire concept of love and romantic bonding is built around the idea that 2 people meet, fall in love, get married and have a baby; almost every romantic book, play, novelization, song, painting, poem, music video, article, lecture, workshop, website, etc. is focused on this idea, right? But I've always thought it was just silly to think that love, with all its complexities and mysteries and miracles, could be squeezed into a single connection with one other human being and put under wraps until that relationship ended and then it was applied to a new partners and so on.

Its cool having this forum so that we can see what other people think and are experiencing.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-21-2011, 10:42 AM
Hades36's Avatar
Hades36 Hades36 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 71
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImaginaryIllusion View Post
A lot of the popularity of Monogamy I think come from Patriarchy.

Check out the post here:
http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showp...54&postcount=6
It has the links to Gwynne Dyer documentary...about 15 years old now, but I think it answers a lot about how we got to where we are...where as Sex at Dawn has a lot about how we were before that.

Great vids. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-21-2011, 01:24 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,680
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hades36 View Post

Like, our entire concept of love and romantic bonding is built around the idea that 2 people meet, fall in love, get married and have a baby; almost every romantic book, play, novelization, song, painting, poem, music video, article, lecture, workshop, website, etc. is focused on this idea, right? But I've always thought it was just silly to think that love, with all its complexities and mysteries and miracles, could be squeezed into a single connection with one other human being and put under wraps until that relationship ended and then it was applied to a new partners and so on.
Looking at movies and songs, you'd think NRE lasted forever. All the love songs that sell are based on a NRE feeling, that intensity: you're perfect, I want you and no one else til the end of time.

Songs based on a marriage 7 years in don't sell so well.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-21-2011, 02:11 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
..........
Songs based on a marriage 7 years in don't sell so well.
Gotta love this Mags !!

But back to the OP question about roots and survival of the mono.

From almost any angle you want to analyze it from it really comes down to a control tactic. As evil and manipulative as that probably sounds, it has it's innocent side too. As a species we're kind of dependent on control. Our security gets shaken unless we have our hand on the control lever - or at minimum, believe that someone else we trust has. So some of the junk that comes with monogamy is a pretty easy sell. We're offered some safety and security (supposedly). It's only after we discover that the sweet security we were sold was only a thin coating over something much more bitter. And that the REAL security only comes from our own internal strength.

Evolution is a slow process...............

GS
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-23-2011, 04:16 PM
BlackUnicorn's Avatar
BlackUnicorn BlackUnicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hades36 View Post
I mean, from a practical, survival kind of standpoint, having more than 2 people in a relationship seems really beneficial. But there also seems to be a number, a tipping point as it were, where the relationship would be too large and clunky, at least with regards to intimate connections running smoothly. I imagine at that point the group would splinter off somehow and form a new family.
Trust the aspiring social scientist to start the nit-picking!

If we are talking of purely human evolution, there are many explanations as to why monogamy is the most popular (even in societies where some form of non-monogamy is condoned, it tends to be a minority relationship model) relationship form. Of course, when we are talking about monogamous vs. polygamous societies, we need to acknowledge that most known forms of culturally-sanctioned non-monogamy are in practice polygyny (having many wives) of the rich elite men. Some anthropologists have put forwards an argument that wives in most societies are akin to any other form of goods to be exchanged and accumulated among leading class men. This theory has some historical support from the fact that the ideal of female sexuality being strictly marital in expression has always been more heavily policed in the higher echelons of society. During much of Western history, rape was a crime against another man's rights of ownership, not against the woman who was raped.

Comparing monogamy and polyamory is hard because polyamory is a form of relating, whereas monogamy refers to the institution of marriage specifically. The opposite of polyamory would be monoamory, such as the opposite of polygamy would be monogamy. As to your point of relationships becoming too unwieldly with too many participants, this is only in assuming that each new partner would join the existing family unit in what could more aptly be termed as 'group marriage'. Since I guess the majority of polys are not in closed poly-fi arrangements, the practical limits of how many partners you could possibly have tend to be a bit different in origin.

Additional differences: lifetime monogamy vs. serial monogamy; double vs. single standard; monogamy as an ideal and monogamy as a practice; hierarchal vs. egalitarian polyamory etc.
__________________
Me: bi female in my twenties
Dating: Moonlightrunner
Metamour: Windflower
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bonobos, boobs, breastfeeding, chimps, mono poly, mono/poly, monogamy, sex at dawn, tribal sex customs

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
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 Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:26 PM.