Saturday, April 21, 2007
etcetera.
It's become apparent to me that in recent times, it seems that most relationships are predicated on polygamy. I know it sounds too crass and guilt-compounded, but that's what I genuinely feel. Most relationships are quite worthless to begin with. It stems from the loneliness that people share almost exclusively. I guess with so much love to give (or attention to be had), people are willing to settle with almost anyone. Usually it's the first person that notices them, which subsequently happens to be, on average, an odious, narcissistic twit.
Perhaps, our bereavement of love and hope, perpetuated over time, can influence us to do stupid things. Perhaps, that is why people engage in polygamy, to restore the sanity that once defined them. I wouldn't go as far as to encourage polygamy, but I find it hard not to play devil's advocate. Sure, it seems fraught with guilt and anguish; usually gets people in trouble and without doubt, vilifies the premise of relationships. I don't think this applies to all relationships, as I do believe the contrary holds true, extensively, to a smaller group.
It's hard to fathom people staying together through tormenting years, and not contemplate adultery. I guess it's one's disposition to formulate such thoughts, and completely different to act on them. But perhaps the fine line that separates the two isn't so obvious.
There are many complexions--some meagre, some blatant--that change the ideas behind polygamy. Hypothetically, if you were in a relationship-- bound exclusively to your significant other--and happened to entertain a friend over coffee. You may possess feelings for this person, or vice versa. As such, you decide to hide it from your SO. Would it be wrong? Surely, by definition, it's not polygamy. But it fancies the notion of wrong-doing.
This is a common situation and happens everyday among thousands of people. Where is the line drawn between what's right and wrong? But these are the situations that people long for. They harbour emotions of angst and displeasure towards their SO and consequently, they feel liberated while in the company of another. If they were to leave their current SO for said person, it may just repeat the cycle. Maybe it's quintessential for these people to continue living fabricated relationships to be successful at it.
Now this poses several questions. What defines success? What defines happiness? Etcetera etc...
Perhaps these frivolities are being overemphasized. Perhaps there's a resounding notion that supports it. Morals are relative, it seems; people don't learn from mistakes, which is why the world continues as it does. With frivolous amounts of money squandered on shrinks and surplus; consumerists quantifying their happiness with their bank accounts and BMW's, it's bound to become the pragmatic approach to life, work and relationships. Etcetera, etc...
I don't think I'd embrace polygamy the same way others seem to do so. I do believe it fills an intrinsic void, but not with character or elation, but with fear and potential remorse. It's a short term fix for an endless, spiraling complex of desolate hope.
I think this is why a lot of people remain single until they find that "one true love". It seems paradoxical, but that won't preclude the masses from striving towards it. I think a relationship should be about trust and nothing but. Expectations fall and rise; superficial qualities never finish first. Trust isn't just that of which you give to your significant other, but one that compounds your own mindset and intentions. Trust is what you use to compromise the bad with the good. It seems folly to presume otherwise. If you can trust yourself and your significant other enough, the need for polygamy is rendered obsolete.
And now a word from our sponsors:
Perhaps, our bereavement of love and hope, perpetuated over time, can influence us to do stupid things. Perhaps, that is why people engage in polygamy, to restore the sanity that once defined them. I wouldn't go as far as to encourage polygamy, but I find it hard not to play devil's advocate. Sure, it seems fraught with guilt and anguish; usually gets people in trouble and without doubt, vilifies the premise of relationships. I don't think this applies to all relationships, as I do believe the contrary holds true, extensively, to a smaller group.
It's hard to fathom people staying together through tormenting years, and not contemplate adultery. I guess it's one's disposition to formulate such thoughts, and completely different to act on them. But perhaps the fine line that separates the two isn't so obvious.
There are many complexions--some meagre, some blatant--that change the ideas behind polygamy. Hypothetically, if you were in a relationship-- bound exclusively to your significant other--and happened to entertain a friend over coffee. You may possess feelings for this person, or vice versa. As such, you decide to hide it from your SO. Would it be wrong? Surely, by definition, it's not polygamy. But it fancies the notion of wrong-doing.
This is a common situation and happens everyday among thousands of people. Where is the line drawn between what's right and wrong? But these are the situations that people long for. They harbour emotions of angst and displeasure towards their SO and consequently, they feel liberated while in the company of another. If they were to leave their current SO for said person, it may just repeat the cycle. Maybe it's quintessential for these people to continue living fabricated relationships to be successful at it.
Now this poses several questions. What defines success? What defines happiness? Etcetera etc...
Perhaps these frivolities are being overemphasized. Perhaps there's a resounding notion that supports it. Morals are relative, it seems; people don't learn from mistakes, which is why the world continues as it does. With frivolous amounts of money squandered on shrinks and surplus; consumerists quantifying their happiness with their bank accounts and BMW's, it's bound to become the pragmatic approach to life, work and relationships. Etcetera, etc...
I don't think I'd embrace polygamy the same way others seem to do so. I do believe it fills an intrinsic void, but not with character or elation, but with fear and potential remorse. It's a short term fix for an endless, spiraling complex of desolate hope.
I think this is why a lot of people remain single until they find that "one true love". It seems paradoxical, but that won't preclude the masses from striving towards it. I think a relationship should be about trust and nothing but. Expectations fall and rise; superficial qualities never finish first. Trust isn't just that of which you give to your significant other, but one that compounds your own mindset and intentions. Trust is what you use to compromise the bad with the good. It seems folly to presume otherwise. If you can trust yourself and your significant other enough, the need for polygamy is rendered obsolete.
And now a word from our sponsors:
Comments:
<3 the sponsors
I do agree with many points brought up. From a purely sociobiological point of view, the purpose of why we tend to feel sexually attracted to another outside of a relationship is for the possibility of propogating the best genes in reproduction. I know it sounds really stupid but the incidence of cheating amongst mammals occurs just as often as in humans (I forgot the exact numbers), which might say a lot about our biology. The whole point of keeping a partner around is to share the costs of raising offspring if a relationship was founded on such a baby-making premise. Perhaps humans are just terrible at choosing partners... when a couple settles down in presumed monogamy (ie. marriage), we just assume that the significant other is the best of the best (aka possessing cream of the crop attainable genes). This might explain our natural behaviours of jealousy if a S/O expresses attraction towards another person because there might always be a better person out there. So, the choice is kinda two-fold:
a.) Have sex with the other person outside of a relationship because biology dictates it so (ie. better genes, better kids) by starting a new relationship or cheating in secret
b.) Override those inevitable feelings of attraction and stick with the current partner because they're providing and sharing the costs of raising kids... plus, it's not worth the investment to leave the relationship
This all probably sounds like a load of bull but this is just a purely biological viewpoint. Maybe humans are meant to be promiscuous in nature or maybe the whole institution of marriage and committed relationships are meant to test the trials of trust. Do other creatures of the animal kingdom harbour feelings of "love"? Human relationships do seem to be more complex than screaming, self-pleasuring sex-frenzied bonobo monkeys (though I do question that sometimes, lol). In the end, how important do factors like personality, humour, honesty, etc. come into play when the purpose of a relationship is for the propagation of children? Is there a cultural bias? Whether polygamny is morally right or wrong is really up to the individual to decide depending on the societal/cultural environment.
I do agree with many points brought up. From a purely sociobiological point of view, the purpose of why we tend to feel sexually attracted to another outside of a relationship is for the possibility of propogating the best genes in reproduction. I know it sounds really stupid but the incidence of cheating amongst mammals occurs just as often as in humans (I forgot the exact numbers), which might say a lot about our biology. The whole point of keeping a partner around is to share the costs of raising offspring if a relationship was founded on such a baby-making premise. Perhaps humans are just terrible at choosing partners... when a couple settles down in presumed monogamy (ie. marriage), we just assume that the significant other is the best of the best (aka possessing cream of the crop attainable genes). This might explain our natural behaviours of jealousy if a S/O expresses attraction towards another person because there might always be a better person out there. So, the choice is kinda two-fold:
a.) Have sex with the other person outside of a relationship because biology dictates it so (ie. better genes, better kids) by starting a new relationship or cheating in secret
b.) Override those inevitable feelings of attraction and stick with the current partner because they're providing and sharing the costs of raising kids... plus, it's not worth the investment to leave the relationship
This all probably sounds like a load of bull but this is just a purely biological viewpoint. Maybe humans are meant to be promiscuous in nature or maybe the whole institution of marriage and committed relationships are meant to test the trials of trust. Do other creatures of the animal kingdom harbour feelings of "love"? Human relationships do seem to be more complex than screaming, self-pleasuring sex-frenzied bonobo monkeys (though I do question that sometimes, lol). In the end, how important do factors like personality, humour, honesty, etc. come into play when the purpose of a relationship is for the propagation of children? Is there a cultural bias? Whether polygamny is morally right or wrong is really up to the individual to decide depending on the societal/cultural environment.
I think you make some very valid points. Definitely, I believe that it's our animal instinct to "spread the seed", so to speak. It's our morals that negate this primal instinct, which of course is governed by culture and religion. Maybe us humans weren't designed to remain monogamous. Animals tend to pursue their natural instincts, perhaps because they haven't the capacity to maintain such boundaries. From an evolutionary standpoint, we did ascend from Apes, so it makes sense. But some mammals do remain monogamous. I can't remember which ones, I just remember watching on a TV show one time.
But in the end, I think it has a lot to do with economics in that successful families boost the economy, which in turn advances the nation. This is how it's always been. Maybe these religious views were conceived by economists, lol. I don't know what makes more sense, but I am sure the answer is up there, some where.
But in the end, I think it has a lot to do with economics in that successful families boost the economy, which in turn advances the nation. This is how it's always been. Maybe these religious views were conceived by economists, lol. I don't know what makes more sense, but I am sure the answer is up there, some where.
Most of us are wanting two potentially conflicting things out of life, as our bread and water: security and freedom. Sometimes you can have both, but not always.
Wow, this is a really good post man. Really got me thinking! I think Mai is right, there is always that conflict. As for the monogamous thing, I daresay there is NO person in a relationship who is not attracted to anyone else in the entire world (and if they say they are, they're prolly lying...cynical, I know), but yet I do believe in true love.
So we have agreed, attraction is more the biological standpoint (in a polygamous sort of way) whereas the relationship is the moral/culture standpoint (monogamy) , but who says monogamy is right? Polygamy is an equally valid view IMO, I just don't happen to believe in it...if that makes any sense?
So we have agreed, attraction is more the biological standpoint (in a polygamous sort of way) whereas the relationship is the moral/culture standpoint (monogamy) , but who says monogamy is right? Polygamy is an equally valid view IMO, I just don't happen to believe in it...if that makes any sense?
I think it's just that from a sociological standpoint, polygamy doesn't work in today's society. With equal rights movements etc., polygamy would just result in alot of unnecessary conflict, especially since we've now learnt how to function quite well as a primarly monogamous society.
Who knows, maybe if there's some sort of sizeable, population-denting plauge or natural distaster, polygamy will be the only way to cope and as a result we'll resort to it.
Who knows, maybe if there's some sort of sizeable, population-denting plauge or natural distaster, polygamy will be the only way to cope and as a result we'll resort to it.
Some really tight responses, and even though it deviates a bit from what I was trying to say, I enjoy the discussion. I personally don't believe polygamy is necessary. In fact, I think monogamy, and even in some cases, abstinence is truly necessary, considering the current population levels. But that being said, I think it truly comes down to expectations and greed. People will always want more, and the strive for perfection will ruin us all. Settling isn't so bad when you're happy.
Post a Comment
