Xref: utzoo sci.bio:3910 alt.romance:5438 soc.singles:73456
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!amdahl!netcom!barry
From: barry@netcom.UUCP (Kenn Barry)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,alt.romance,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?
Message-ID: <16984@netcom.UUCP>
Date: 17 Nov 90 05:43:30 GMT
References: <1990Nov15.141028.25126@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> <1990Nov15.194025.27299@ariel.unm.edu> <1990Nov16.203058.7780@ariel.unm.edu>
Organization: Netcom- The Bay Area's Public Access Unix System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 20

In article <1990Nov16.203058.7780@ariel.unm.edu> bevans@gauss.unm.edu (Mathemagician) writes:
>For me, centuries of spontaneous monogamous behaviour is enough to
>convince me that SOME of us ARE naturally monogamous and that
>promiscuity, where it exists in SOME, is largely a culturally
>imposed phenomenon.

	This doesn't make sense. In cultures where polygamy has been
sanctioned, it has also been practised by those who could afford it. In
cultures like our own, where monogamy is considered the ideal, it is
given only lip service by over half the population. A zoologist studying
some other species with mating habits identical to our own would not
describe them as "monogamous", I'm sure. We tend to both change
partners, and "cheat" on those we have.

	There's really no point I can see in worrying about this
sociobiology crap, anyway. If you're sure what's natural for *you*, why
worry about species and instinct? If you feel monogamous, be monogamous;
if not, don't.

						Kayembee