Xref: utzoo sci.bio:4004 alt.romance:5591 soc.men:23922 soc.women:30077 soc.singles:74134
Newsgroups: sci.bio,alt.romance,soc.men,soc.women,soc.singles
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!alternat
From: alternat@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Ann Hodgins)
Subject: Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?
Message-ID: <1990Nov29.180827.10813@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <5869@crash.cts.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 90 18:08:27 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <5869@crash.cts.com> rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe) writes:
>rodvan@microsoft.UUCP (Rod VAN MECHELEN) writes:
>>partner "marriages" appeals to me most because it solves many problems
>>at once.  But this is a very sane kind of a relationship.  I'm not
>>sure I'm ready for anything *that* sane.  <-;
>
>     No relational arrangement is more "sane" than any other.  It all depends
>on what best suits your particular belief system. ... 
Every other commune in the 60's had a copy of
>"Stranger in a Strange Land" that they took their living arrangements from. 
                                ********
My own beliefs about humans and monogamy are the result of coming of age in
the 60s.  Many people then truly believed that they could simply shed their
'hangups' and by following their hearts could have many happy and free sexual
relationships with a variety of men and women.
The consequences of this were tragicommic.  People tried not to feel emotions
like jealousy but did anyway.  Eventually, the 'laid back' hippies
would lose their self-control and erupt into screaming and fisticuffs. 
 
After watching these scenarios unfold for a while and after much soul
searching I decided that the so called 'hang ups' were a basic part of
human nature and something we have to face and accomodate.

ann hodgins