The concept of monogamy has been within our society since the advent of morals, religion and civility. It truly is an ideal that most would hope they could eventually be satisfied with but in the end fall short of in some minor way. Then, what is cheating? Many will consider cheating as essentially having an external affair with someone other than the person to whom you have committed yourself. The greatest of commitments, marriage is expected to be life changing and of course totally monogamous. But it appears that the more advanced our society becomes the more men and to a lesser but relatively large extent women cheat. In this a western culture there is no polygamy but it appears that despite this the sanctity of marriage apparently dwindles with each passing era. Yet people continue to marry. Whether for financial gain, to avoid loneliness in old age, for love, for appearances among other things, people will always hold firm to the desire to marry.
Great, so we have the inception of happy families, good times, someone to hold our hands when we are dying and life is beautiful. However, despite the benefits of marriage there is the shocking revelation and realization of boredom. This boredom goes both ways men getting bored, women getting bored, family life becoming arduous etc. So the solution, have an affair, something that is kept light not too involved easily broken off at the first sign of trouble and everyone is happy, right? No. The truth is that many of those who cheat will say their marriage is on the rocks but will never be honest enough to say that they have failed. They have failed by no longer trying to live up to the commitment they solemnly vowed in front of god and man. Maybe this is a bit harsh. I have never been married, never truly intend to and therefore cannot say why men and women are unfaithful.
One argument (The Myth of Monogamy, www.polyrlando.org) suggests that humans are incapable of monogamy and that the advent of monogamy is merely a societal construct which coincides with lawful property rights and the legitimizing of offspring. This thinking stems from what is said to be the large numbers of married people who indulge in extramarital affairs which estimates this figure at 60% of married men and 40% of married women (the validity of these statistics is believed to be a conservative estimate with studies now suggesting the figures may go well beyond this because of outdated estimates still presently used from the late 80’s to early 90’s). Thus the argument surmises that monogamy should be abandoned for the failure it no doubt instils in the men and women who are ineffectual at committed relationships.
There are also other biological findings which seek to unravel the mysteries of the almost inability of some human beings to be faithful. Thus by studying the animal kingdom findings have revealed that only a very minute number of animals are totally monogamous.
Biologists have long understood that monogamy is rare in mammals. Of about 4,000 mammalian species, only a handful have ever been called monogamous. The tiny list includes beavers and a couple of other rodents, otters, bats, certain foxes, a few hoofed mammals, and some primates -- notably gibbons and the tamarins and marmosets of the tropical New World[1]
So the animals are going from mate to mate, capriciously and apathetically where then is the justification for us the more complex and higher species? Do we not have the institution of advanced civilization, a more complex and diverse genetic make up? How then can we the greatest of mammals be compared to them, wild animals? Barash’s article points out those evolutionary factors such as the tendency for males to be larger increasing the likelihood of his success in finding mates, the earlier maturation of the female thus “holding out” until the males have matured themselves fuelling competition among themselves, the tendency for males to be aggressive and violent thus more competitive and also that before western colonialism many societies were polygamous. Hence in a nutshell his article proposes the idea that it is the male’s competitive nature that inspires him to be in constant search of the female, once he has achieved his goal he does not end his search but moves on sourcing other females. Likewise the female will move on if the male she has acquired is not a suitable enough candidate. Therefore, this indicates a fairly plausible reason for the prominence of serial dating, multiple partners and adultery in our society.
Social conservatives like to point out what they see as threats to "family values." But they don't have the slightest idea how great that real threat is, or where it comes from. Monogamy is definitely under siege, not by government, declining morals, or some vast homosexual conspiracy -- but by our own evolutionary biology. Infants have their infancy. And adults? Adultery.
However his article is not written in defence of adultery but instead seeks to enlighten the tendency towards it. The fact inevitably remains that monogamy is a choice we make; we choose to remain in one relationship as we do to gallivant with many others. However, I do not stand in judgement but simply propose that being human means being able to quell certain negative traits inherent to us in order to foster the growth and productivity of an enlightened and progressive society.
There is no question about monogamy's being natural. It isn't. But at the same time, there is no reason to conclude that adultery is unavoidable, or that it is good. "Smallpox is natural," wrote
The Biological Theorist and Pro Polygamous theorist both agree that this thing of monogamy is unnatural but of course however engaging in it becomes the choice one will make based on one’s society and needs. Thus I now seek to explore the extra marital affair making an example of the movie “Fatal Attraction”. Scenario, the man who cheated on the good and devoted wife ““The opportunity was there so we took it”. A movie which is undoubtedly a classic in its genre represents the nefarious outcome of what should have been to the star Michael Douglas a beautiful weekend of a “no strings attached” affair. However as beautiful and charming as these things generally begin, married man meets sexy wanton unmarried woman, the end result moves from benign to malignant. What is indeed unforgivable is the protagonist claims to being totally faithful and happily married but yet on a weekend away from his wife and child, he suddenly becomes fevered and heated with the need to act out his instinctive need for copulation with another mate. Therefore the writers initiate a context of perfect stability being easily interrupted for this passionate fling.
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” is the word’s befitting of this outcome. Not only does the forgotten Glen Close not completely grasp the fact that the affair was just that and no more but she also is allegedly pregnant and threatens and attempts to kill his wife but by the end is killed by Douglas. This psychotic and twisted finale is perhaps appropriate for the man who could not last a meagre weekend in what is constructed to be an ideal situation. However the marriage goes on he is forgiven and we assume that with an experience such as it were he would never delve in the hollows of infidelity. It must be noted that in developing a character who is deserving of the psychotic episodes of a delirious woman Douglas’s character must first be placed in an extremely content family setting for the affair to seem shocking. Had the writers made him the product of an okay marriage the affair would have been easily glossed over as bearable and to an extent essential. However, despite his obvious lack of loyalty and his artificial cling to his role as devotee by his intention to keep this secret form his wife, he is by the end portrayed as admirable and deserving of audience compassion while Close is written off as delusional, insane and to an extent more deserving of her demise. The man win’s sympathy the woman is defamed.
Despite the incidence of infidelity as being both a feminine and masculine trait, the fact remains that it is more acceptable for a man to go out and have affairs because society has deemed men incapable of total commitment to one person. Thus when they do it is okay but never when a female engages in said activities. We assume that the men are more inclined to need a steady stream of sex as opposed to women. However there are women who become bored because their men or husbands become complacent. A complacency formulated by our culture, one that teaches us to be passionate when in search but repressed and carefree once we have ended that search. Thus some men are less competent in bed with their wives as opposed to the women they have affairs with. But is my speculation that sex is the root of this evil correct? When the passion dies do we automatically assume that an affair must be the source of it? This could very well be misleading as some wives argue that they lavish their husbands with total and utter sexual pleasure. However each man’s reasoning will be slightly different but at its core our genetic make up and biological roots which make us carnal and natural adversaries, the eroticism, the thrill of the chase, the variety is what makes most that cheat apt to do so willingly and easily.
No comments:
Post a Comment