Monogamy is a bad system to Humans

Post Reply New Topic

This is not scientifically true, it not true of Chavs as they are as feral as animals with bear in their hands. Actually it is not true of Aspies either. I suffer from such chronic loneliness, that I have lost so much respectability. I would do about anything to reduce this loneliness. I am as much under the hand of mother nature as the other animals.

Yes , the actual rules of monogamy does suppress the rules of mother nature. You are wrong and I am right. Maybe it's in your society not everyone can really get married , why? Because the west society is leaning more and more toward Polygamy: Guys and girls can start freely the dating game since the teenage , the guy asks the girl out , the girl would keep rejecting till she is asked by a 'suitable' guy to date ....the girl would keep dating till she finds a 'suitable' husband : a form of natural selection. The 'sex bomb' in the west was the start of the open polygamy in the west and the gradual ending of the monogamy.

In the traditional/less-developed countries like India and China , guys and girls can't have open relations like in the west. The girls is usually r married through arranged marriage system , the arranged marriage system is created by religion , that's why the more religous the society is the more you see arranged marriage and vice-versa. Even in muslim countries where it's allowed 4 wives for 1 man , wives are selected by men (the husband and the girl's father) =Suppression of women's natural role in natural selection = bad , so the 'polygamy' in muslim countries is also artificial , unnatural and fake.




Instead of keeping saying ' you are very wrong' because you are unable to accept my ideas try to scientifically justify why I am very 'wrong' and how monogamy enforces the rules of Mother nature.




HAHAHAHA ! Are you sure of that? You didn't live in the old Christian days. I am quite sure that a good-looking guy like you won't have any difficulty in finding a bride through arranged marriage . In fact you don't need to be too good-looking or too social or even too tall , maybe you just need have some money ...and what you need mostly is having parent who know other parents = easy!

You would get many opportunities for marrying a woman through arranged marriage. I , myself, since my first job my old auntie arranged 3 brides for me (successively) , imagine that! Easy 3 opportunities for getting a wife! I , the guy , who failed miserably the dating game in a French secular school where dating was possible , I who was rejected loads of times , I who was rejected even to have a dance by many taller girls (because I am shorter than them), I who was never flirted . I, who , was a failure in sports, I who was called shorty/cuty/shrimpy by most girls at school and despite of all of this I was offered 3 brides thanks to the traditional arrange marriage!And I am not really rich. Even the one girls I dated in University left me because she made it very clear that she was not physically attracted to me .

When I compare myself to other guys and when I compare my romance/sexual life with the other guys . I can easily find out that I am very-omega male , a male whose his genes are naturally destined to be out of the genetic pool....yet the arranged marriage gave me the opportunity to transmit my genes to the next generation.
I rejected all the offers because I felt no one of them really liked me and I felt too MUCH faking in the arranged marriage system. I made clear to my auntie that I am not really willing to marry soon( in fact I am not willing at all).



Wow, you must be an alpha , isn't the free sex a form of an open polygamy? A sign projected by the freedom of natural selection? 'The relaxed rules' that you are talking about are not part of Monogamy.

Didn't the Nazis try something like this?
I guess we have an imperfect system, but it allows more freedom and choice than other systems that have been tried throughout history.

This system seems very open to inbreeding as it'd be hard to track the children of the different fathers and their close relatives.

Mmmm arranged marriage…... Though normal Christian marriage rules would leave me at a disadvantage, you do have a point concerning arranged marriage.

Arranged marriage appears to implement a form of survival of the weakest. I remember back when I worked in garden centre, a guy with learning difficulties got an arranged marriage. The sod wouldn’t have been married otherwise.

However, I am sure that if arranged marriage brought on more weaknesses then strength then arranged marriage system itself would be the loser of the rule of natural selection itself. However, it isn’t. So one must come to the conclusion that arranged marriage has the blessing of Mother Nature and isn’t an artificial system. But currently we don’t understand the factors that give so much clout.

Maybe arranged marriages are oriented towards survival of the fittest family not individuals like in west.
For example a family with high proportion of people with aspergers are more likely to wealthy in comparison with families with high proportion of slightly ret*d NTs. So as a result the family with high proportion of aspies can choose to marry of a son/daughter to a high flying family.

No surprise that India has a high proportion of intelligent people.


Ohhh!! I'm good

LePetitPrince also brings up a good point about the system employed in Western nations; it is sometimes considered "serial monogamy", which is sometimes considered to share much with polygamy.

Monogamy is a strategy, so is polygamy. One is not inherently better than another, it depends on the existing conditions, and the desires/needs of the people involved. Human physiology reveals that a weak harem strategy prevailed for most of our history. That is, a strong male gathered a harem of females, and excluded other males from mating with them. This system results in sexual dimorphism, the difference between male and female body size. This is seen in the extreme in Gorillas and Elephant seals, where the males are MUCH bigger than the females. In humans males are only somewhat bigger, so the harem exclusivity was not enforced, or could not be enforced completely. Monogamy is very rare in nature. Even birds that were previously considered to mate for life cheat on their mates quite often.

Why do you say that?

"There is a REASON humans are smarter than animals."

twoshots:Because it was advantageous. Any teleologies(sic) beyond this are superfluous.
A matter of opinion I suppose...

"We are supposed to come together as a society for the common good."
twoshots:Herd think. If we were to come together for the common good we would all lay down our bodies for a future utopia. Just as the OP has proposed.

If all genes were good, no one would care, because there would be nothing to compare it to. It'd be pointless. No one would appreciate their individual strengths and weaknesses.
Sure, a future utopia would be a common good. But people are worth something. That's the point. Every hardworking citizen on the planet, that's the reason this stuff is here in the first place, so it doesn't make sense to sacrifice that.

"This DISGUSTS me. "
twoshots:A typical response conditioned in those who are to serve society.

Is that supposed to be an insult or something?

"Respect life."
twoshots:Eugenics does respect life. Just not the propogation thereof.

I'm not even sure how to respond to that...Eugenetics is a philosophy of the bioethicists, and all their stupid philosophies about increasing the "total amount of happiness". These are the type of people who say "kill the ret*d kids" (and I sincerely wish that was an exaggeration). These are also the people who set monetary value on human life. This stuff is scary.

As for Chav, I'd say they probably don't have a very civilized society. And you're only controlled by your instincts if you let them control you. If you just submit, then there you are. But that doesn't mean it's impossible to resist.

I don't do insults. It was merely an observation because I find strong emotions puzzling and distasteful. They do not contribute to discussions, and usually they are parasitic on their host.



Guilt by association: no one has suggested we do such things. And I'm not sure about "bioethicists", but "increasing the total amount of happiness" sounds more like the philosophy utilitarianism (which I am a devoted opponent of). All we are talking about here is deciding which genes get passed on. Saying that "you can't reproduce" is equivalent to "let's kill everyone we don't like!" is slippery slope nonsense. Your hatred of eugenics is influenced by your hatred of people who have believed in it in the past, which is tantamount to an ad hominem fallacy (and there are plenty of other great reasons to hate eugenics!).

I would love to be more of a thorn in your side, but the moral issues of eugenics are not the OP's exact intentions.

Anyway I've been accused of being a sociopath enough for one day...

It is easy to resist cheap sex just to make a point, but how easy is to resist chronic loneliness. The loneliness that is as painful as a break up every other day.

I didn't read the whole OP, but maybe this is relevant . . . .

According to several of my biology teachers, no species is truly monogamous. Species that form life-long pair bonds have been shown to cheat, just like humans do. In a wolf pack, only the dominant pair are permitted to mate, but they both will secretly mate with other pack members if given the opportunity.

If you think about it, some non-monogamous behavior is advantageous because it increases genetic diversity and chances of conception (since not every individual is capable of reproduction). Socially-imposed expectations of monogamy are advantageous because they keep polygamous behavior in check, thereby decreasing the spread of STDs. In other words, both forms of behavior are beneficial to a species, especially in moderation.

It is hard to classify humans are monogamous or polygamous because this depends on the culture, and the individual. I think there is nothing inherently wrong with either monogamy or polygamy.

Reduction of STDs are not the only reason. Look how animal breeders do their work.

I think you and Hitler have a lot to talk about, my good man. Even he wasn't stupid enough to go through the whole eugenics thing.

The point I was trying to make is, animal breeders tend to have a prise animal they call a stud which they use to bread with most of the females. Not because letting all the animals bread with each other freely will increase STD.