Why is monogamy so common?

[Athalos]

I know I don't have much to draw on here since I'm fairly new.... but shouldn't people just play how they want to play? Then... they can be judged IC, by each individual character, the way that specific character views it.

There are a specific set of societal rules we all get in the help files, but surely that just determines how we should react to things and characters, not how we should OOC judge people and how they play.

In the end - to me anyway, it's a game, and we should just all have fun bringing it to life, however we want to.

Also:

Prediction: multi-partner relationships cohabitating apartments discover inventory management is now, foreplay

Code Select Expand


>remove leggings
You can't carry that many items.

>put leggings bed
There's no more room for that here.

>put leggings backpack
A dusty leather backpack doesn't have enough room left for a pair of leggings.

You say, in sirihish, "We could just cuddle?"

Thanks for making me laugh my ass off ahaha

[Strongheart]

Totally! I was really hoping this thread would have died out awhile ago because that seems obvious enough after much discussion.

[Cind]

I once was in a triangle that worked out pretty well, save for one of the guys leaving a sword lying in the other guy's apartment (? lol) and he'd be the slightly jealous one (as in not killing us, which he easily had the power to do) and it was pretty fun as none of us had conflicting careers or anything like that, and we were all citizens of the same place. We were like our own Hong Kong Triad.

I think I ended up seeing someone outside of those two guys, a Templar. Although I had not actually slept with him before I stored, although the homeboys seemed to think so. I decided to be pregnant after a while, so, that was fun, although I did not play my pc long enough to have the baby. I would chat with the Templar several times over the way before heading on to a new character, and would not really elaborate on the fact that both my short-distance hubbies were desperately wanted criminals. Fun!

It makes for great stories. Math gets more complicated the larger you go, right?

[sleepyhead]

I once was in a triangle that worked out pretty well, save for one of the guys leaving a sword lying in the other guy's apartment (? lol) and he'd be the slightly jealous one (as in not killing us, which he easily had the power to do) and it was pretty fun as none of us had conflicting careers or anything like that, and we were all citizens of the same place. We were like our own Hong Kong Triad.

I think I ended up seeing someone outside of those two guys, a Templar. Although I had not actually slept with him before I stored, although the homeboys seemed to think so. I decided to be pregnant after a while, so, that was fun, although I did not play my pc long enough to have the baby. I would chat with the Templar several times over the way before heading on to a new character, and would not really elaborate on the fact that both my short-distance hubbies were desperately wanted criminals. Fun!

It makes for great stories. Math gets more complicated the larger you go, right?

Haha, I think I remember this.

[satine]

Monogamy is biological. It has to do with shared parental raising of children.

(A bunch of dubious social, not biological, arguments.)

The social behaviors arise from what works to successfully propagate genes. An example of a behavior arising from reproductive success: men who pursue sex are more likely to reproduce than those who don't care about it. So men in general end up have strong sex drives, which leads to various sorts of social behavior.

In a society with sparse resources, a woman raising a kid is going to have a better chance if the man contributes than if the man just spreads his seed and walks away. I don't understand why this isn't obvious.

A man who sticks around to contribute is going to want a commitment from the woman, because those who don't care if the children aren't theirs end up having the genes that led to their not caring shrink out of the gene pool.

Yes, behavior is not 100% determined by genetics, but it's huge factor.

And yes, men will sometimes be polygamous when they can get away with it. In the past, the ones for which this was a successful reproductive strategy were the apex males who had the resources for more than one family. Few men can be apex males.

And yes, women will sometimes be polyamorous, although they tend more to serial monogamy. Generally when they have enough of their own resources that they don't need a partner, they can just take them for pleasure. But this historically has been rare. They're more likely to simply cuckold their male partner and pass the child off as his.

except bonobos which is a biological argument.

if anything your response seems more rooted in sociology than in biology.

with bonobos, individuals mate freely with each other... and bonobos care for each others offspring not knowing how related they are to each other.

Just a reminder, this is the world discussion forum and not the rp discussion forum. If you want to have a chat about the way people rp relationships go to that forum.

The question here is a world based discussion. Points like... why are only two people allowed to share an apartment are more valid than "well, bhy dont you just let people rp what they want". We arnt talking about rp. We are talking about the world.

[Bast]

Why is everyone always so up in each other's loin cloths? Let people play their characters the way they want and that includes how they wish to pursue romance if they care about it at all? I've been away a couple years but there is a never ending marry go round about what is or is not appropriate in arm relationships. Bottom line people are complex their characters should be as well some people just don't want to deal with multiple relationships some people are selfish... nobles, I would expect to get rather pissy at the thought of sharing a lover with some flea bitten commoner with who knows what kind of STD's. Obviously there are social stigmas like the whole elf human thing but when it comes to who is banging 4 people and who would rather just be with one other person I am not interested in playing rollplay police. I will say I think the day we get coded STD's there is going to be sharp curve in how quickly some pc's jump into each other's pants but I generally try to think of my concept and how I think they feel about multiple lovers and if someone has issues with it they are welcome to bring it up in character. I've played PC's that were  very casual with sex and PC's that were more committed to a single partner. Generally speaking I find it's easier to stick with one person so I'm not spending the entire time I have on the mud dealing with 5 active lovers. Who has time for this really??

[Strongheart]

Welcome back! And I couldn't agree more, I was hoping this thread would have died out awhile ago though to be honest.

[ShaiHulud]

Whore to devoted one, both done, and without any stigma.  Play what you want.

[BadSkeelz]

"Why is monogamy so common?"

Reduced chance of getting stabbed by jilted lovers.

[PriestlySiren]

It's easier than seducing multiple people at once.

[Jihelu]

I mostly attribute it to the fact it's hard to maintain a relationship with 4-5 people at the same time to an intimate, even physically, level as opposed to: That one person who I /KNOW/ gets on at this time and wants to get the D.

That and I assume most of us live in good christian white areas that have the subtle influences of monogamy in them.

[valeria]

It's really hard to detach the monogamous programming, even when you're polyamorous af irl.

But this is the best answer yet:

"Why is monogamy so common?"

Reduced chance of getting stabbed by jilted lovers.

[MeTekillot]

Monogamous pair bonding is a natural result of the natural human psychology of hierarchies. You always have a favorite, and eventually their comfort in the sureness of the relationship is more important than strange on the side.

[Namino]

If y'all don't stop citing a psychology/evolutionary biology consensus that doesn't exist on this subject...

There is no consensus in scientific literature whatsoever as to if primates, let alone humans, are meant to be polygamous or monogamous, or which strategy produces more offspring or results in higher fitness.

[MeTekillot]

I'm just going off of what I know from people and how almost every single organization functions -- hierarchy.

[Namino]

I don't have a dog in this fight obviously. I've never let anyone else tell me how to play something as inherent to my character as their sexuality and don't ever plan to, either.

What irritates me is people casually behaving as if there's some sort of default human condition that determines monogamy or polygamy as our natural biological preference. That's patently untrue. Make whatever arguments you want, but that humans have some sort of psychological or biological consensus leaning towards one or the other is provably false, hence my irritation.

Behold.



As you can see, certain cultures are monogamous and others are polygynous (very seldom polyandrous, which composes something close to .5% of mating systems in the human species). Additionally, the mean reproductive success is variable and almost certainly based on conditional factors specific to one culture or another. Simply glancing over the table shows that some monogamous cultures have higher reproductive success for both male and females than some polygynous cultures (Ache versus Brazil), while the reverse is also true in several cases (the Kenyan Kipsignis males are doing very well for themselves, for example, in their polygamous mating).

Even the cultures that are polygamous also often have serial monogamy as a secondary mating structure, which resembles Armageddon pretty tightly (ie, some people have multiple partners, other people have committed relationships in succession). Sadly this table only has European sampling after the rise of Catholicism/Christianity, so there's no polyandry represented there but, well, that's religion for you. Unless Tek is going to outlaw a mating strategy, I think we can safely say a lack of consensus is the only true human condition that applies to Armageddon.

The ultimate point being is that for every primarily polygamous human society there is also a monogamous human society so if we can please FARK OFF acting like there's some sort of conclusive biological or evolutionary advantage to one or the other, I'd be tickled pink.

[MeTekillot]

Nevermind.

[path]

Monogamy is my kink.

[Veselka]

Mahogany is my kink.

[PriestlySiren]

[satine]

I just cant belive this thread is still here.

Though i would like to note that in that little chart posted above that areas where it is harder to survive tend towards poly. :0



And, man.... I still can't get over how hard it was for people to understand that this wasn't an rp discussion.

[chrisdcoulombe]

opens drawer and gets a whip....I'm gonna need all ya all ta bend over.

[Alesan]

To be fair, this thread is still here because people keep bringing it back from the dead once a month or so.

[satine]

*bends*