Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!dweasel!loren From: loren@dweasel.llnl.gov (Loren Petrich) Newsgroups: sci.bio Subject: Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous? Message-ID: <86483@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> Date: 21 Nov 90 03:03:29 GMT References: <1990Nov16.203058.7780@ariel.unm.edu> <1990Nov16.211050.8786@ariel.unm.edu> <1693@beguine.UUCP> Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lines: 82 Nntp-Posting-Host: dweasel.llnl.gov In article <1693@beguine.UUCP> danielg@uncmed.med.unc.edu (Daniel Gene Sinclair) 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. *** ***Apologies if this seems to simplistic to Netters at large. *** **Then explain the high rate of divorce. That is an interesting question in itself. Divorce is a cross-cultural phenomenon. When people are not economically tied together, there is little to stop them from separating. Which they proceed to do. If a tendency to have monogamous relationships is biologically programmed, then a tendency for them to evaporate after a couple of years, especially for younger adults, may also be biologically programmed. One shouldn't be ashamed of breaking up a relationship that isn't working too well. Just work it out, one way or another, with one's partner. I saw an article on this subject in a _Natural History_ called "The Four-Year Itch". Its main conclusion was that temporary monogamy is the "natural" condition for our species -- the condition arrived at when under a minimum of outside constraint. Other styles are governed by economic conditions. It may be economically impractical for people to get divorced under some conditions. The article discussed selection pressures for various lifestyles in various animal species, though it wisely concluded that similar behavior in our species is usually cultural in origin -- a genetic origin would require ridiculously fast evolution, for one. *I suggest that this is for at least two reasons. Firstly, men and women *were created to firstly have a relationship with God. Because we choose *to leave God out of marriage these days (as well as on the periphery of *our lives), we do not enjoy the help and blessing of God. * *Secondly, because we have not personally received Christ and surrendered *to Him, we instead surrender to our own inherent selfishness. When times *get hard, it is easy to blame your partner, who is just as imperfect as *you. The only way to conquer this is to know Him. Period. * *No Jesus, No Peace. *Know Jesus, Know Peace. * *Of course people call me a fundamentalist! But if you knew Jesus, you'd *be bananas for Him too! *============================================================================== * S A V E T H E W H A L E S , K I L L O U R U N B O R N ?? *============================================================================== Take this religious twaddle to talk.religion.misc or soc.religion.christian. Not everybody enjoys this kind of proselytizing. Not everyone would enjoy the thought of being one of Jesus Christ's slaves. And believing in Jesus Christ has not stopped a heck of a lot of people from getting divorced. Ask a certain Ronald Wilson Reagan. And if you keep this up, I may have to e-mail you my Biblical Satanic Verses -- everything in the Bible you don't want to hear about. Nudity, incest, violence, arbitary rules, gross-outs, you name it. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster: loren@sunlight.llnl.gov Since this nodename is not widely known, you may have to try: loren%sunlight.llnl.gov@star.stanford.edu Crucifixes are sexy because there's a naked man on them -- Madonna