It's a question I often wonder. Please don't give me the answer that "Yes -- because the Bible says so" or "because it's a commandment" -- I'm looking for answers from people who have the ability to think about this on their own. One of my friends has an interesting theory -- he says that being monogamous when marriage was first conceptualized was easy because life expectancy wasn't that long. Since the average person only lived until 30-35 and you got married at 20 -- "till death do us apart" wasn't really asking a whole lot. However, now that we have life expectancy in the 90s -- it's unreasonable to ask people to stay with the same person for so long.
2006-08-17 18:34:33 · 11 answers · asked by highiq 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
I think it just depends on the human. Myself, I just can't see myself with anyone but my boyfriend.
2006-08-17 18:38:25 · answer #1 · answered by i luv teh fishes 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some cultures (the ancient Romans come to mind) have had frequent divorces and marriages, before death at age 40 or so.
I believe there's going to be a historical TENDENCY towards monogamy in most cultures, for several reasons. (1) Religious influences: this is your spouse, given to you/ordained by the Eternal; hang on to him/her; raise children together. (2) Costs of multiple partners: whether you are paying bride-price, milk-money, dowry, setting up separate households, or what---it costs $$$$ to pair in almost every culture. Hanging onto the same partner can make good economic sense (even if they HAVE gone out of warranty--grin). (3) Good old familiarity. Once you've found a reasonable marriage-partner---one who's suitable to your family, culture, economic status, etc.---and gotten used to them---do you really WANT to go through that, all over again, for another life partner? Why not just take a lover, a mistress, or a prostitute? (4) Problems in fertility control.
In earlier times, women were "remembering Jesus....venereal diseases...and the chances of having a child". We couldn't control our fertility very effectively, so that rather limited our sexual expressiveness. If you ran the risk of holding the baby, you'd BETTER stay put. But things have definitely changed (thank goodness for the Pill!); between that and increased economic power, it's more likely that people can contract new relationships as their needs change over time.
2006-08-17 21:52:42 · answer #2 · answered by samiracat 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, just like any other creature of the wild.
No, seriously, I have to agree with your friend's theory. People lived shorter lives WAY back then, and so they BELIEVED love would last forever because they all died young.
Now that people are living longer they're like YIKES! Forever is TOO long a time. Let's see other people, honey.
2006-08-17 18:37:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
humans are meant to be INFORMED so that their relationships will be good and satisfying.
"now that we have life expectancy in the 90s -- it's unreasonable to ask people to stay with the same person for so long."
........what an unreasonable statement!
'staying' (short or long) isn't nearly as important as KNOWING HOW TO MAKE A RELATIONSHIP GOOD - regardless of how long it lasts!
fortunately for some of us, there is ample information and role models out there for us to LEARN HOW TO MAKE A RELATIONSHIP HAPPY, GOOD AND SATISFYING.
2006-08-17 19:19:11 · answer #4 · answered by jimrich 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think your friend is on to something there...
I don't think we are meant to be monogomous and have read and watch documentaries on this subject and many experts in the field believe this too. Pairing with one partner for the rest of your life is a choice and we are certainly capable of doing that, if we choose to, but I think we all have urges to be with other partners sexually every once in awhile. I know I feel that, even though I don't act on it.
2006-08-17 18:39:34 · answer #5 · answered by joandi_99 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We're no different than any animals in the wild. The males impregnate as many females as they can to "spread their seed". Females are the "keepers" of their nest (or brood or whatever) and tend to stick with one mate. However, we are humans. We are "supposed" to be rational (although I sometimes wonder about this) beings. With rationality comes choice and monogamy IS a choice.
2006-08-17 19:44:47 · answer #6 · answered by cheetah7 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you have not found the person to love then you'll think that way.
When you are sick and have erections problems you would love to have a monogamous wife who would take good care of you and be your sole companion cos no one else will do it.
2006-08-17 19:04:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I tend to agree with the life expectency theory.
2006-08-17 18:37:59 · answer #8 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if more people WERE we'd have fewer AIDS deaths as well as other horrible diseases.
2006-08-17 18:38:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
very difficult question, i think men are polygamous by nature.
2006-08-17 18:52:44 · answer #10 · answered by hemanta s 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋