Thread: Monogamy: to be or not to be?

A bit personal? One does not have to answer, but it's interesting from time to time. They are taking a common phenomenon and trying to tie some science into it.


Women are 'genetically programmed to have affairs'

'Lifelong monogamy does not characterise the primary mating patterns of humans,' says Dr David Buss from the University of Texas


Ancestral women had to keep looking for viable mates due to low life expectancy Getty

Women are predisposed by their genetics to have affairs as "back-up plans'" if their relationships fail, according to a research paper.

Scientists at the University of Texas say they are challenging the assumption that humans have evolved to have monogamous relationships.

The team's research has put forward the "mate-switching-hypothesis" which says humans have evolved to keep testing their relationships and looking for better long-term options.


The senior author of the research, Dr David Buss, told the Sunday Times: "Lifelong monogamy does not characterise the primary mating patterns of humans.

"Breaking up with one partner and mating with another may more accurately characterise the common, perhaps the primary, mating strategy of humans."

For our distant ancestors – when disease, poor diet and minimal healthcare meant that few people lived past 30 - looking for a more suitable partner was necessary, researchers assert.

Despite anecdotal claims about cheatng, no study has shown that humans are predisposed to monogamy or non-monogamy.

A study carried out by Rafael Wlodarski and a team of researchers at Oxford University looking into infidelity found a correlation between the length of a individual's ring finger and the likelihood that they would cheat on a partner.

However, they stressed that they could not find a causal link.

Professor Robin Dunbar of Oxford University said the differences were “subtle” and “only visible when we look at large groups of people”.

"Human behaviour is influenced by many factors, such as the environment and life experience, and what happens in the womb might only have a modest effect on something as complex as sexual relationships," he said.

Women are 'genetically programmed to have affairs' | Love & Sex | Lifestyle | The Independent

Monogamy is unnatural, lets face it. I've never practised it.

They also say you're a fucking idiot.

Hmmm... I must be both, cause I have lots of shoes...55

By my own admission, I used to be a playboy... but since I met my wife - I've curtailed that evil part of myself... (so far, so good)...

It's nice to not worry about my phone, texts from girls, etc...

I think it's the best gift you can give your partner, i.e. being faithful.
It's bloody hard though... so many temptations.

If my wife wasn't such a nice person, I'd probably stray...

ok already... not probably... surely... at least I'm honest haha.

Why own a cow when you can buy a pint of milk?

Originally Posted by Somboon

They say people with lots of shoes like lots of partners.

Somehow I just can't imagine Imelda Marcos being able to attract multiple partners.

So women are sluts by nature.
I'm sure Socal will now feel vindicated.

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

Hmmm... I must be both, cause I have lots of shoes...55

By my own admission, I used to be a playboy... but since I met my wife - I've curtailed that evil part of myself... (so far, so good)...

It's nice to not worry about my phone, texts from girls, etc...

I think it's the best gift you can give your partner, i.e. being faithful.
It's bloody hard though... so many temptations.

If my wife wasn't such a nice person, I'd probably stray...

ok already... not probably... surely... at least I'm honest haha.

Yes but this is about the fact your wife is genetically predisposed to stray as much as you.

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Originally Posted by Somboon

They say people with lots of shoes like lots of partners.

Somehow I just can't imagine Imelda Marcos being able to attract multiple partners.

Wasn't bad back in her Miss Philippines day...pushing 90 now.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Originally Posted by Somboon

They say people with lots of shoes like lots of partners.

Somehow I just can't imagine Imelda Marcos being able to attract multiple partners.

Wasn't bad back in her Miss Philippines day...pushing 90 now.

Don't tell me there isn't a granny grabber out there that wouldn't fancy a millionairess?

Originally Posted by sabang

Monogamy is unnatural, lets face it.

....and certainly should be instinctively understood.

Not withstanding any such scholarly [quasi-officialdom] social scientific breakdown, analysis, or learned theories that contradict the forced upon and conditioned existence that we usually succumb to.

^He's fookin' off...






















His fookin' rocker!

Stephen Stills would have agreed ' Love the one you're with'.
Get it on if the chemistry is fired up.

Originally Posted by charleyboy

^He's fookin' off...

His fookin' rocker!

What could possibly have led you to that conclusion.

Originally Posted by Cold Pizza

a research paper.

In primitive times men and women produced many offspring to compensate for high mortality rates.
Some species will only breed if conditions are right and there are sufficient resources to sustain the progeny.
Many educated women understand this and choose to have few or no children. They are also adept when choosing a partner who is likely to improve the gene pool.
This is why you are single and likely to remain so.
All you need to know is that men and women are different.

Originally Posted by Cujo

So women are sluts by nature.
I'm sure Socal will now feel vindicated.

Yeah, but where is Looper? He'd be horrified at this.

Women are 'genetically programmed to have affairs'

So I was right after all to be a manipulating, obsessive, paranoid arsehole who demands all online and phone passwords from that slag

Despite being a hypocrite with my own playboy boozing and denauchered past

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

They also say you're a fucking idiot.

The best truth so far

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Originally Posted by Cujo

So women are sluts by nature.
I'm sure Socal will now feel vindicated.

Yeah, but where is Looper? He'd be horrified at this.

Ssshhhh, FFS, man!! He'll hear you!!

"Human behaviour is influenced by many factors, such as the environment and life experience, and what happens in the womb might only have a modest effect on something as complex as sexual relationships," he said.

Might/might not. We don't need "research" to tell us something "might" or might not be true. Might as well toss a coin.

Originally Posted by Neverna

"Human behaviour is influenced by many factors, such as the environment and life experience, and what happens in the womb might only have a modest effect on something as complex as sexual relationships," he said.

Might/might not. We don't need "research" to tell us something "might" or might not be true. Might as well toss a coin.

Kudos, Nev......
Someone else is getting it.

Evolution is a fact, unless you're some kind of holy-book thumper. Evolutionary psychology, however, is a bunch of conjectures. An evolutionary psychologist looks at any fact abut human behavior and can make up a story about how that behavior improved survival in our evolutionary past.

Do humans prefer symmetrical facial features in a mate? That's because relative symmetry indicates genetic health. Do males prefer women with a certain waist/hip ratio? That's because certain ratios signify fertility. Ad nauseum.

There's a story about David Buss, the researcher cited in the OP: He was at Cornell and gave a talk on his latest theory. In the Q and A session, a young professor stood up and said "This theory is really fascinating. I wonder if it can explain this result we just found. We expected to find Result A but instead we found Result B." And she related a complicated scenario and described how her research group found Result B. David Buss thought for a minute, then launched on a long, complex, but highly plausible description of how Result B is perfectly consistent with evolutionary theory. The young professor got up again and said "Actually, we found Result A". This was told to me by a guy who was actually there in the room.

So if you find female promiscuity, you can explain it on the basis of hedging your bets on mate survival. If you find female chastity, you can explain it on the basis of how females need to know who the father is so they can get maximum help in raising the child.

Originally Posted by sabang

Monogamy is unnatural, lets face it. I've never practised it.

How about yer mrs? the thread is about women after all