Lindaland
  Sweet Peas In The Rain
  Monogamy Is Harder For Women

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Monogamy Is Harder For Women
mockingbird
Knowflake

Posts: 1627
From:
Registered: Dec 2011

posted May 24, 2013 03:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mockingbird     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Or at least the female's innate biological tendency towards multiple partners is more pronounced than generally accepted in the west, according to a bulk of scientific evidence:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/unexcited-there-may-be-a -pill-for-that.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
(Long, but worth the read.)

Though we may be less inclined towards promiscuity due to societal factors.

What do you think of these assertions?

Does is jibe with your thoughts and experiences?

Should it matter?
That is, do you think that long-term monogamy is on its way out? Or do you think that, cited biological predilections aside, we should strive for monogamous relationships?
Can "commitment" and "monogamy" be independent from one another or are they inextricable?

I'm interested to hear everyone's views.

------------------
If I've included this sig, it's because I'm posting from a mobile device.
Please excuse all outrageous typos and confusing auto-corrects.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 24, 2013 03:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Really? I would think it's the other way around. It's my natural male instinct to want to boink everything female that moves. It's only common sense and values that stop me from doing so. I walk into a pasture and the cows stop moving.

IP: Logged

mockingbird
Knowflake

Posts: 1627
From:
Registered: Dec 2011

posted May 24, 2013 04:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mockingbird     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Reeeeeaaad the article, YTA

Apparently studies have shown that women require more novelty for consistent sufficient arousal whereas men don't.
Men still appreciate/are more aroused by novelty, but don't seem (as a whole) to *need* it like women (as a whole) do.

------------------
If I've included this sig, it's because I'm posting from a mobile device.
Please excuse all outrageous typos and confusing auto-corrects.

IP: Logged

mockingbird
Knowflake

Posts: 1627
From:
Registered: Dec 2011

posted May 24, 2013 04:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mockingbird     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I honestly don't know.

We've only been married for four years and, while we no longer go at it like bunnies, we're still at once a day or so.
Sometimes twice.
Maybe more on the weekends if you stretch definitions.
Less, obviously, if he's traveling.

------------------
If I've included this sig, it's because I'm posting from a mobile device.
Please excuse all outrageous typos and confusing auto-corrects.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 24, 2013 04:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Interesting article Thanks.

Men are aroused more based on physiological need and less on emotional attachment.

IP: Logged

PixieJane
Knowflake

Posts: 2352
From: CA
Registered: Oct 2010

posted May 24, 2013 11:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PixieJane     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have a lot of thoughts on this, some of them contradictory. I recall reading of those into polyamory who would agree with the article (women, too) and say it's the only possible way to be, at least for themselves, and trying monogamy is doomed to misery for both themselves and their partner. Swingers and the like seem to keep the erotic spark alive much better, too. Part of me thinks this makes sense because any treat, no matter how good, can become stale if you have it everyday. Heck, small children gorging on Halloween candy can even feel sick at the sight of candy for a few days later, but the desire for it eventually comes back.

And monagamy is a social construct that women became dependent on back when they were more property or at least restricted to domestic duties, and the patronymics also become important to their children. In societies where the lineage is matrilinear then the women seem far more promiscuous...but this may have been survival as most are tribal with high mortality rate for men and thus women find it necessary to bond with more than one man. One Chinese ethnic group (can't recall their name, but I think they're a very small, rural group) is also matrilinear, and while they seem more promiscuous than average they are still less promiscuous than men in general, though I don't know if it's because survival isn't an issue or if it's because of some religious beliefs they have.

Other parts of me wonder about the emotional aspects. One, too many women jump at any guy because she feels like a loser without a guy, and that means settling, and that means she's going to be tempted when something better comes along. 'Course both genders sell themselves but once they relax then the less refined parts come out, which can be agitated by the love endorphins in the brain (which have amazing ups & downs, a real drug) dwindling away...real love can survive that decline in endorphins but not anything less than that. Furthermore, both genders often have unrealistic expectations and can be disappointed when what they expect doesn't happen, including an eternal glow of the love endorphins.

I did like seeing this because I've suspected this myself based on other things I read but this is the first time an actual psychopharmacologist said it:

quote:
This interplay of experience and neural pathways is widely known as neuroplasticity. The brain is ever altering. And it is neuroplasticity that may help explain why hypoactive sexual desire disorder is a mostly female condition, why it seems that women, more than men, lose interest in having sex with their long-term partners. If boys and men tend to take in messages that manhood is defined by sex and power, and those messages encourage them to think about sex often, then those neural networks associated with desire will be regularly activated and will become stronger over time. If women, generally speaking, learn other lessons, that sexual desire and expression are not necessarily positive, and if therefore they don’t think as much about sex, then those same neural networks will be less stimulated and comparatively weak. The more robust the neural pathways of eros, the more prone you are to feel lust at home, even as stimuli dissipate with familiarity and habit

I do wonder how much of the brain is caused by thought rather than the other way around, from clinical depression to the brain maturing at age 25, which might be because of how the brain is used rather than a manifestation of the natural brain pattern (one reason, for example, is how much more mature teens used to be in previous centuries, some of them very responsible leaders and military commanders, whereas in modern society the brain isn't encouraged to "stabilize" until about age 25 anyway).

Of course psyche meds (and drugs in general) and exhaustion take their toll as well.

And interesting enough to me is that while the sex industry doesn't find it profitable to target females (though it's not unknown for some phone sex lines to allow women to call in for free to talk dirty with men who have to pay, the woman paid nothing, and I did hear of a Japanese place that charged women to strip in front of cheering men just as it charged men to watch) there seems to be a reversal in tabletop RPGs. There women explore relationships, including pure sex, whereas men tend to ignore it focusing on political intrigues if not steam venting & power gaming (ie, combat), possibly because it's a safe place to do so (though it can get either hilarious and/or disturbing when a man roleplaying a female character tries to seduce the female character of one of the women ), or OTOH maybe it's just a socially accepted way to vent repressed desires, IDK. And it would suggest that women need more than simple eroticism, things that men get tired of, and that's also backed by a lot of erotica aimed at women, and the dissatisfaction of that could also cause women to lose desire.

LBD (Lesbian Bed Death) does exist (for SOME), though they should just call it bed death as it seems to affect all genders and orientations to various degrees. Also, it's not necessarily permanent (in the lyrics of Sometimes When We Touch by Olivia Ong, "At times I think we're drifters, still searching for a friend, a brother or a sister, and then the passion flares again," and btw you can hear that beautiful song set to a heartwarming TiBette, a pair of lesbians--one who's a cheater and a player while the other very monogamous and loyal--who fight, forgive, go months without sex before throwing themselves at each other again here). It's a topic in the lesbian community (though one some like to avoid), and from what I gather it seems to come from when the endorphins drop so what was once cute becomes annoying and then they bicker passively aggressively, which in turn just creates repressed hostility and thus LBD. I also wonder how many men find they have ED (erectile dysfunction) because of similar behavior turning him off and that's why he goes to porn, because there he doesn't have to feel hyperdefensive and trying to figure out what the hell is going on.

Another reason I think this is the cause is because many men AND women, gay and straight, have reported that an angry argument could rekindle their lost passions and make for the best sex ever (there are even obscene terms for that kind of sex and apply to both make-up and break-up sex).

Finally, I don't trust lie detectors, and I don't trust how they were used to gather information in this study as I'd expect those results and not because they were lying, so I'm ignoring it. I also question Tuiten's objectivity given what inspired him to pursue this study (though if it's repeated, and it should be attempted, then ok, and I also trust Goldstein's objectivity).

Such are my immediate thoughts upon reading the article.

ETA: to clarify on why I'm questioning Tuiten's objectivity is because this was all inspired by the fact he was dumped (according to him, it was sudden, but I bet it was a slow process for her), and he believes it couldn't possibly have anything to do with him or for any legite reason of her own, she must be crazy! Something misfiring in her brain! After all, it was all going so well, it was so perfect, and then she had to disagree and leave. In short, had he not been devoted to his field of study I'm sure he'd be another man who just said, "Women are ****** !" I can't find it in me to be surprised that he was dumped given that he was the type of person to react this way.

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 25, 2013 01:45 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The research is incomplete.

I've seen data on PsychologyToday and scienceofrelationships.com that indicates that women experience greater initial arousal with novel partners but rarely orgasm until the relationship is long-term.

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 25, 2013 01:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As for "is monogamy on its way out?"

We've had this failed social experiment before. People are actually LESS likely to stray today than they were in 1975, and now express more disapproval of infidelity and open relationships than the 70's.

I think there are people out there whose aim is to marginalize monogamists, or force us to at least feign tolerance for what is gross and wrong. It wouldn't be the first time there was a calculated effort to do this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327296/The-Sex-Messiah-tried-world-hooked-free-love-But-wife-slept-Hollywood-orgies-settled-fidelity.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

IP: Logged

aquaguy91
Moderator

Posts: 6638
From: tennessee
Registered: Jan 2012

posted May 25, 2013 01:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for aquaguy91     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Men invented monogamy. Way back in the day only the high status males mated with the women and it created alot of conflict within the tribes. The "smart" tribe leaders decided that it would be a good idea for all the men to take a wife so there would be less quarreling and more cooperation . As a result these tribes became stronger and were able to easily conquer the other tribes in battle. So it was kind of an evolutionary thing.

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 25, 2013 02:01 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by aquaguy91:
Men invented monogamy. Way back in the day only the high status males mated with the women and it created alot of conflict within the tribes. The "smart" tribe leaders decided that it would be a good idea for all the men to take a wife so there would be less quarreling and more cooperation . As a result these tribes became stronger and were able to easily conquer the other tribes in battle. So it was kind of an evolutionary thing.


Indeed, avowed monogamists ARE more intelligent, on average: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 25, 2013 02:03 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

....enough said.

IP: Logged

aquaguy91
Moderator

Posts: 6638
From: tennessee
Registered: Jan 2012

posted May 25, 2013 02:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for aquaguy91     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As far as women needing novelty and spotaniety, its true. In fact this is why I am incompatible with women. I am an aspie and thus set in my ways and hate suprises and unpredictability. Basically i'm the exact opposite of what they are looking for. Lol

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 25, 2013 02:16 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by aquaguy91:
As far as women needing novelty and spotaniety, its true. In fact this is why I am incompatible with women. I am an aspie and thus set in my ways and hate suprises and unpredictability. Basically i'm the exact opposite of what they are looking for. Lol

Uh, Aquaguy, I think you'd be surprised. Polyamorists are disproportionately likely to identify as aspie's/be on the autism spectrum:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14641-monogamy-gene-found-in-people.html
http://books.google.ca/books?id=BkhLnjvweL8C&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=polyamory+aspergers&source=bl&ots=Qw4HAWPtKz&sig=T0VTM4uTlreUHQxlermvzldxbS0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_FagUY_MNcrArQHxnYHgAQ&r edir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=polyamory%20aspergers&f=false

If anything, socially awkward people are the most comfortable with this way of life.

IP: Logged

aquaguy91
Moderator

Posts: 6638
From: tennessee
Registered: Jan 2012

posted May 25, 2013 02:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for aquaguy91     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Lol thats just proof that you can find anything online.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 26, 2013 12:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Like I said. Find yourself another aspie. Nothing changes, no surprises, and both sides are happy. It's great.

IP: Logged

Kerosene
Knowflake

Posts: 2161
From: Mercury
Registered: Dec 2012

posted May 26, 2013 06:51 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kerosene     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aquacheeka:

....enough said.

True!!
Sex would obviously better if two people understand each other.
Understanding each others bodies and minds.

Yeah I don't get random hookups. Its just weird.
Is it too fill up and empty void? LOL..

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 26, 2013 08:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Men invented Monogamy FOR women. Men are fundamentally incompatible with monogamy.

In the old days, the more powerful the man, the more women he had. My mother's father had four legal wives and almost 20 concubines. And all lived under the same roof.

IP: Logged

Aquacheeka
Knowflake

Posts: 2482
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012

posted May 27, 2013 01:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aquacheeka     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
Men invented Monogamy FOR women. Men are fundamentally incompatible with monogamy.

In the old days, the more powerful the man, the more women he had. My mother's father had four legal wives and almost 20 concubines. And all lived under the same roof.



Not true. Men invented monogamy because 40% of men hogging 90% of women (presumably the remaining 10% they did not want were not very attractive) caused the other 60% to become extremely violent. History here:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/women-who-stray/201202/why-men-gave-polygamy

Really, monogamy is for the benefit of the greater society, which is why I have 0% respect for nonmonogamists.

More on why poly societies always fail here: http://www.changesurfer.com/Acad/Monogamy/Mono.html

IP: Logged

aquaguy91
Moderator

Posts: 6638
From: tennessee
Registered: Jan 2012

posted May 27, 2013 03:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for aquaguy91     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
Like I said. Find yourself another aspie. Nothing changes, no surprises, and both sides are happy. It's great.

I hope so because I cant be bothered with entertaining someone 24/7. I find the whole concept of spontaniety very childish.

IP: Logged

frankie2912
Knowflake

Posts: 1124
From: yep,ks,usa
Registered: Apr 2011

posted May 28, 2013 01:40 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for frankie2912     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Interesting discussion..

but for me, I don't care what you do, what she does, what he does, or what people did hundreds to thousands of years ago. Everyone is different, today, in the past, and forever. If a couple wants to have a polyamorous or open relationship..WHO CARES? If it feels right to them, extending your personal disgust or disapproval is your problem, not theirs.

If it weren't for my own jealousy (and my partner's), I would love to have an open relationship. I don't find sex gross and I don't connect love and sex (even though I do believe and have experienced the intertwining of the two and understand its differences) so I would really like to be able to receive and give sexual pleasure to other people without a partner freaking out about it. I suppose we have to overcome our own insecurities to become that comfortable with sex.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 28, 2013 08:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aquacheeka:

Not true. Men invented monogamy because 40% of men hogging 90% of women (presumably the remaining 10% they did not want were not very attractive) caused the other 60% to become extremely violent. History here:


The 60% who can't compete have the problem. It's a world where only the strong survive. The same reality still exists today, where 40% of men still get the attention of 90% of all women.

IP: Logged

aquaguy91
Moderator

Posts: 6638
From: tennessee
Registered: Jan 2012

posted May 28, 2013 01:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for aquaguy91     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:

The 60% who can't compete have the problem. It's a world where only the strong survive. The same reality still exists today, where 40% of men still get the attention of 90% of all women.


honestly its more like 90% of women are chasing 20% of guys,atleast that's the way it seems. I know a lot of good guys who have a lot of trouble finding girlfriends, but most of them will never admit it out of pride. I am the exact opposite of most guys in this regard because I don't mind admitting these things, I prefer to be honest. All I know is my brother is struggling to meet a good girl and if a guy like him is struggling we have some serious problems.

IP: Logged

Padre35
Moderator

Posts: 1908
From: Asheville, NC, US
Registered: Jul 2012

posted May 28, 2013 06:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Padre35     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:

The 60% who can't compete have the problem. It's a world where only the strong survive. The same reality still exists today, where 40% of men still get the attention of 90% of all women.

Eh, do your guesstimate is to high, more like 60-40, problem is the non upper 20% want to be in the 20-10% in a relationship and it rarely happens.

I have seen it happen usually due to the non upper echelon have some unique quality about them, education, charm, sense of humor etc.

As for monogamy itself, imo it more boils down to it is harder on whomever loses an advantage by being monogamous. IMO women have more opportunities not to be monogamous then men.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 28, 2013 06:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Like I always say, the reality is sad. Education, charisma, charm, manners, whatever. The top 20% of men invariably have one of three things: the looks of Pitt/Cruise/Clooney whatever, the weenie of John Holmes, or the ability to swank around like Richard Branson. I've seen with my own eyes. Dweeb with a fat belly and bald head walks into a party and he leaves with four hot ones for his evening entertainment. No other reason because no self-respecting woman would want to go cowboy riding on such an old dweeb.

IP: Logged

YoursTrulyAlways
Knowflake

Posts: 5256
From:
Registered: Oct 2011

posted May 28, 2013 06:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for YoursTrulyAlways     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Padre35:
IMO women have more opportunities not to be monogamous then men.

I personally know two average guys who choose to lease by the hour. Their version is that it isn't love, so it doesn't count against monogamy. Lol.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2013

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a