Monogamy is the Prime evil of society (or one the primevils)

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Ok so it’s like, I am a loving person. I want everyone to love and be loved. That is why I am a vegetarian, I want animals to experience the joy of love in their lives. But at what point do you say that Love is the prime moral compass because it is also Love that causes fighting between animals over a mate. It is also Love that causes humans to love the taste of meat and kill animals for it. At what point do you say love is the main moral compass after realizing that fact about love, the answer is no, you cannot say it is the prime moral compass after realizing those things.

Monogamy is the Prime Evil (or one of them) and has no place in Enlightened civilized society. I will explain why.

Say you have two girls, or three maybe, maybe four. You love them all very much, you love them and love them spiritually maybe even a little bit physically, and you want to enter them with your spirit and touch them and not harm a single one of them. Monogamy says no, you can’t do that. Monogamy says, No, pick one, and let the rest suffer what they must. That is what Monogamy does, what monogamy is.

Now on the other hand, extreme polygamy is pushing it because, a lady with 5000 boyfriends is really pushing it and spreading it thin. That’s really not love at all and they aren’t “special friends” if there’s 5000 of it. Not enough clock to go around. The rule of thumb is that a man should have 5 girls no more than that, anything else and you just devote your attention to the new 6th person, or the new 6th person becomes the one that doesn’t get any attention and doesn’t really fit in, it’s a mathematical fact that you see in My LIttle Pony. There are six it has always been six in all tv shows, my little pony has six, bioncle has six, starwars has six, han, luke, lea, threepio, r2d2, chewbacca. Anything else just becomes the focus of the show - the 7th toa, yoda, vader, obiwan, Trixie, Sunset Shimmer, etc. Rule of thumb is keep it to no more than 5, its all the human brain can handle. But on vacations, maybe have a 6th to make it a seventuplet.

That is true love and everybody wins, the rest is as Ecmandu said the road to ruin and a stratified unhappy society. Give it time for people to see the light, and they will.

2

From Wiki:

In Sex and Culture (1934), Unwin studied 80 primitive tribes and 6 known civilizations through 5,000 years of history and found a positive correlation between the cultural achievement of a people and the sexual restraint they observe.[1] “Sex and Culture is a work of the highest importance,” Aldous Huxley wrote;

Unwin’s conclusions, which are based upon an enormous wealth of carefully sifted evidence, may be summed up as follows. All human societies are in one or another of four cultural conditions: zoistic, manistic, deistic, rationalistic. Of these societies the zoistic displays the least amount of mental and social energy, the rationalistic the most. Investigation shows that the societies exhibiting the least amount of energy are those where pre-nuptial continence is not imposed and where the opportunities for sexual indulgence after marriage are greatest. The cultural condition of a society rises in exact proportion as it imposes pre-nuptial and post-nuptial restraints upon sexual opportunity.[2]

According to Unwin, after a nation becomes prosperous it becomes increasingly liberal with regard to sexual morality and as a result loses it cohesion, its impetus and its purpose. The process, says the author, is irreversible:

The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs.[3]

Also, theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/21PbAr/ … zation.htm

Neither average human males nor females are biologically wired to be monogamous, and yet, monogamy seems to be one of the prerequisites of a group’s survival and progress (not in the sense so called “progressives” talk about progress)

3

I think it’s a case of correlation does not equal causation.

Loose sex is often associated with hippies and their ilk, the kind of psychology that never puts anything together, just writes a couple of sloppy diaries and sloppy guitar songs.

If it was placed in the hands of a type more creative, say a bunch of scientists, I think the polyamory would benefit the scientists.

It’s like, Arabic culture has certain cultural potentials, and the males have more than one wife. If it wasn’t so backwards their culture you must admit has some potentials. Their problem is they are limited by their book and other things which I can’t say due to political correctness.

I think so far we’ve only had a taste of, hippy squalor drug addict polygamy, or scrubby sitcom polygamy, or super scientist monogamy, or middle east polygamy which is backwards in many ways. So we haven’t had the opportunity to experience a well balanced or evolved formula of polygamy yet.

4

Human beings are not naturally monogamous and the further you go back into ancient human history you’ll see that. At one point human beings resembled the social and sexual interaction of modern day Chimpanzees.

It’s because of this ancient primordial origin of sexual behavior why affairs, divorces, and infidelity is still prevalent even now. With all that being said there are benefits and cons of monogamy where for now I’ll focus on the benefits.

For one monogamy cuts down on sexual disease and sexual conflict. The first is quite obvious and what I mean by sexual conflict can easily be observed in a lot of species of mammals or others in which males through sexual competition kill each other for reproductive access. Monogamy in practice limits and manages that conflict.

I’m not sure if I would associate monogamy as being natural but instead as some sort of useful adaptation to higher population densities in human beings.

5

You are a needy person, that’s your problem. You need to reduce your needs, not demand that your needs be satiated.

6

In my humble opinion polygamy decreases neediness and monogamy increases it. They become obsessively attached to one person and their entire essence becomes dependent on it, and if that conneciton is lost they cease to function, their delusions about that person increases and they cannot judge them unbiasedly, the person could make bad decisions or treat them unfairly yet always have their high esteem. Polygamy lessens the attachment and reduces the amount of biased judgement, such as always feeling the need to apologize to females who did everything in their power to irritate you in the first place. With polygamy they don’t feel so grandiose and the attachment delusion loses some of its power.

7

You are focusing too much on the external.

Neediness is a consequence of the inability to stop your needs from going beyond your limits. You cannot blame external factors for it.