4 ms·

Per what I know and have read: The emotional aspects of love last about seven years. After that, pragmatics and mutual understanding need to take over. We ha

Per what I know and have read: The emotional aspects of love last about seven years. After that, pragmatics and mutual understanding need to take over. We have invented the notion of marriage and seem to have overturned what nature may have intended to be. Marriages predate written history. I cannot be sure what led to the concept, however, I can guess. I have read that non-monogamy is more common in the world than what most people realize. It seems to me that when the notion of marriage was brought in, people would have needed brainwashing into it. I see several cultural aspects around marriages, some still being followed, that hint this. Then, of course, is the welfare of the children which is critically important. I am chosing not to write more, but have perhaps hinted upon my viewpoints on this topic.

throwaway211116 5y ago
Non-monogamous societies have solved welfare of children in different ways. I am not able to say if any method of taking care of children is better. On the other hand, monogamy absolutely had a massive impact on STD reduction in a world with absolutely no notion of medicine.
- throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
  Agreed. A question I have is if the STD issue mentioned still valid, as a motivation for monogamy?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway211116 5y ago
    I am not qualified to answer. I would tentatively say, decreasingly so. The issue, as I see it, is that although we have preventive measures and prophylactics and treatments (all imperfect), we do not yet have a culture of responsibility and building such a culture is hard. Theoretically we could compensate for the deficiencies of our medicine, through social responsibility. In reality this does not happen. The clearest proof is the behavior of people during the Covid pandemic. Covid Zero was only achieved in a few countries. Human society is not mature enough to be responsible. Monogamy (with regards to STDs) is like social isolation for Covid and has the same strengths and weaknesses. In the case of STDs this would mean pervasive use of testing, condoms, dental dams, etc.. Apparently the porn industry gets tested very frequently because for them an STD represents lost income. The general population not so much. When was the last time you heard of someone using a dental dam during a one night stand? It should mean a push for testing from dating apps. It would mean that someone who has an affair should actually warn the cheated partner, instead of waiting for symptoms to appear. These responsible behaviors do not happen, or at least are not as common as they should be. As long social responsibility is not a viable solution, the only solution left is developing vaccines. On this side progress is being made, but it is slow. If either solution is achieved, the potential for STDs becomes irrelevant in the choice of preferred *gamy. Note that monogamy is far from foolproof. Cheating happens, a lot. Also you can get infected through means other than sex and then transmit the disease via sex. Personally I believe humans do not hate disease enough to care. I support a strategy of genocide against harmful microbes. Nothing less than complete extermination will be satisfactory.
    - throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
      Thanks! I am not qualified enough to know a good answer either. Albeit I have alternative thoughts for some points you have made, you seem to know this better than I do.
      - throwaway211116 5y ago
        I'd like to hear your points. I am curious of your viewpoint.
        throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
        To start with, I'll reiterate that I am not qualified enough here, and you seem to know more than me. :) Since you asked still, below is my current understanding: 1. Biological evolution itself depends on spreading of genes. So the big picture cannot be an evolutionary path where having more than one partner is less optimal, whether for reasons of STD or otherwise*. Unless it is so bad that had we not picked up on monogamy, the homo sapiens population may have phased out altogether. Most species are continuing to live by nature, do not follow monogamy and are still thriving. May be we have increased our average lifespan by mitigating STD via monogamy practices, while the lifespan of animals continues at the baseline. * I have read and noted in other comments here that emotional love between men and women lasts for about seven years. I suspect that nature purposely evolved us this way to keep the parents together when the children are very young, and once children are sufficiently grown up, the parents open themselves up to new partners. 2. In the modern times, we are more capable of solving such a challenge than we were in the ancient times. Surely, COVID challenged us, however, we have made it work out overall. (No disrespect intended for the people who have lost loved ones, suffered on health, finances, or otherwise.) If monogamy is to be taken out, more precautions would naturally come in to compensate for a negative impact of STD. We however did not have provisions for such precautions in the ancient times. 3. Likewise, while the progress for vaccines may be slow, that would not have been if we did not have the practice of monogamy. In other words, if we were to redesign things for today, we may have worked the optimal solution to be non-monogamy plus vaccines. I have more thoughts to write.

throwaway211116 5y ago

Non-monogamous societies have solved welfare of children in different ways. I am not able to say if any method of taking care of children is better. On the other hand, monogamy absolutely had a massive impact on STD reduction in a world with absolutely no notion of medicine.

throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
Agreed. A question I have is if the STD issue mentioned still valid, as a motivation for monogamy?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway211116 5y ago
  I am not qualified to answer. I would tentatively say, decreasingly so. The issue, as I see it, is that although we have preventive measures and prophylactics and treatments (all imperfect), we do not yet have a culture of responsibility and building such a culture is hard. Theoretically we could compensate for the deficiencies of our medicine, through social responsibility. In reality this does not happen. The clearest proof is the behavior of people during the Covid pandemic. Covid Zero was only achieved in a few countries. Human society is not mature enough to be responsible. Monogamy (with regards to STDs) is like social isolation for Covid and has the same strengths and weaknesses. In the case of STDs this would mean pervasive use of testing, condoms, dental dams, etc.. Apparently the porn industry gets tested very frequently because for them an STD represents lost income. The general population not so much. When was the last time you heard of someone using a dental dam during a one night stand? It should mean a push for testing from dating apps. It would mean that someone who has an affair should actually warn the cheated partner, instead of waiting for symptoms to appear. These responsible behaviors do not happen, or at least are not as common as they should be. As long social responsibility is not a viable solution, the only solution left is developing vaccines. On this side progress is being made, but it is slow. If either solution is achieved, the potential for STDs becomes irrelevant in the choice of preferred *gamy. Note that monogamy is far from foolproof. Cheating happens, a lot. Also you can get infected through means other than sex and then transmit the disease via sex. Personally I believe humans do not hate disease enough to care. I support a strategy of genocide against harmful microbes. Nothing less than complete extermination will be satisfactory.
  - throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
    Thanks! I am not qualified enough to know a good answer either. Albeit I have alternative thoughts for some points you have made, you seem to know this better than I do.
    - throwaway211116 5y ago
      I'd like to hear your points. I am curious of your viewpoint.
      - throwaway_sjfgd 5y ago
        To start with, I'll reiterate that I am not qualified enough here, and you seem to know more than me. :) Since you asked still, below is my current understanding: 1. Biological evolution itself depends on spreading of genes. So the big picture cannot be an evolutionary path where having more than one partner is less optimal, whether for reasons of STD or otherwise*. Unless it is so bad that had we not picked up on monogamy, the homo sapiens population may have phased out altogether. Most species are continuing to live by nature, do not follow monogamy and are still thriving. May be we have increased our average lifespan by mitigating STD via monogamy practices, while the lifespan of animals continues at the baseline. * I have read and noted in other comments here that emotional love between men and women lasts for about seven years. I suspect that nature purposely evolved us this way to keep the parents together when the children are very young, and once children are sufficiently grown up, the parents open themselves up to new partners. 2. In the modern times, we are more capable of solving such a challenge than we were in the ancient times. Surely, COVID challenged us, however, we have made it work out overall. (No disrespect intended for the people who have lost loved ones, suffered on health, finances, or otherwise.) If monogamy is to be taken out, more precautions would naturally come in to compensate for a negative impact of STD. We however did not have provisions for such precautions in the ancient times. 3. Likewise, while the progress for vaccines may be slow, that would not have been if we did not have the practice of monogamy. In other words, if we were to redesign things for today, we may have worked the optimal solution to be non-monogamy plus vaccines. I have more thoughts to write.