Is monogamy "natural"?

Question

Is monogamy "natural"?

Answer 1

It depends on the species.  For example, some species live in monogamous pairs and some live in groups where each individual has multiple mates.  It all depends on the social situation.

Individuals strive to increase their "fitness" (or their ability to pass on their own genetic information through offspring).  

Sometimes offspring are unlikely to survive if they are only cared for by their mother, because the mother is unable to provide enough food and protection on her own.  In this case, the offspring are more likely to survive if they have two parents that bond for life and take mutual responsibility for their offspring.  In such a case, the male increases his fitness through monogamy.

However, if the offspring are perfectly fine growing up with just a mother's care, then a male can increase his fitness by having as many children as possible and not wasting time caring for them (since his care is not needed).  In this case, monogamy would not be the best option.

Therefore, each species evolves its own sexual tendency that will ultimately increase each individual's fitness.  So, monogamy is natural with some species, and unnatural with others.

Answer 2

Going by human t******e size, we are naturally only partially monogamous.

Gorillas-tiny testes, monogamous

Chimps-massive testes, sexually pretty promiscuous

Humans-medium sized testes, moderate sexually promiscuous behavior.

The logic behind this...males from promiscuous species need to produce a lot of sperm to out-compete their rivals.

It's normal for women to be a lot more picky over their choice of sexual partner, but that's as good as you'll get.

Answer 3

of course not

Answer 4

Natural, sure. The norm? No.

Answer 5

No, it was more natural for a man to produce as many children as he could to spread his seed.

Answer 6

Historically speaking , monogamy has not been practiced in totality, And all major religions in the world allow polygamy including Christianity  as there is nothing forbidding it in scriptures. And I think it is coz it can be a solution for increasing women population as compared to men. And according to human rights every women should be able to be married or have a man. In spain the men to women ratio is 1:5 what about them.

the strict practice of monogamy was professed in late 18th century by Christian reformers in Europe declaring it a must for Christians. However all the cultures who practice polygamy have certain rules to abide by..........but  No I dont think monogamy is natural.

Answer 7

it makes more sense to be monogamous.  Since the goal of every species is the "survival of the species" you would have better odds being with just one person.  If a man sleeps with 10 women he would have some pretty slim odds on being able to find those 3 days each woman was ovulating.  But if he were to sleep with the same woman for 10 days then he has better odds of being with her during her ovulation period.  So for procreation purposes it makes better sense to have only one mate.

Answer 8

It most certainly is

Answer 9

Many theories support both sides, but I believe that monogamy is not hard-wired 'natural' unless you look at social monogamy, which is the explantion for mutual offspring-raising.  Sexual monogamy is much less common than social monogamy across most species of animals.  For example, over 90% of bird species have males who help raise the young, but less than 10% only reproduce with a single mate.

i.e. Social monogamy: For a woman and a man, the bond of love can result in offspring and survival chances of the offspring are increased with two versus one parent providing care and resources (Baumeister and Leary, 1995).

i.e. Social monogamy: 'Back in the day', a man who needed to perpetuate his gene pool would not necessarily be driven by love (as we might say in this day and age), but would be 'attached' to the woman who bared his offspring through resouce allocation and child-rearing.  

i.e. Social monogamy (and perhaps sexual monogamy): A 2001 National Opinion Research Center study showed that 40% of married adults consider themselves "very happy", as compared to 23% single, 19% divorced, 16% seperated.  Now this is a stretch to link with monogamy, but it makes sense.

Having said all of this, I believe it is becoming nautral for humans to be sexually monogamous.  Humans are very intelligent, and I would like to say that although monogamy in the sexual sense is not hard-wired biologically (based on theories I am familiar with), we have developed/are developing into loving and emotionally-driven creatures who would be sexually monogamous in a loving relationship becuase the pros outweigh the cons of not being monogamous (in many ways).  

I'd like to think that we are re-routing, so to speak, and evolving into both sexually and socially monogamous creatures.

Answer 10

No way!  I know of plenty of people who s***w around on their mates.  Giving them crotch diseases and such.  It wouldn't be called love if they didn't do it!