First of all, I’d like to say that I’m a lifelong, unrepentant libertine. I’ve never been particularly monogamous, nor have I ever had any real desire to be. I was married once, very briefly, in the early 80s, but I’ve remained legally unentangled since that one misadventure. I’ve had several hundred lovers since I became sexually active in the mid 1970s, and I will no doubt have many more. For the record, I will state that I’ve never had any sort of sexually transmitted disease.
Blessed (or cursed, as some would have it) with a strong libido, I’ve always sought novelty and variety. Different people appeal to different parts of me. With each new partner, I’ve experienced something new, each encounter building from the last. And as it would be ridiculous to limit a gourmet to only one type of food, or a wine connoisseur to only one type of wine, I consider it equally absurd to limit myself to one lover. I shake my head in wonder at those who were virgins at marriage and/or who have known no other lovers since, how and why they manage to do this. Such a thing is utterly foreign to the way I view the world.
Love, I know, is the standard answer. I’ve had lovers over the years who have thought if they just loved me enough, that I’d eventually want to settle down and be monogamous. Though I have indeed been in love a few times in my life, I’ve never seriously considered being monogamous. It simply isn’t in my makeup. Though sex is indeed one way to express love, sex is, at a more basic level, a primal biological need. Sex with love can be some of the best life has to offer, but it isn’t always necessary or desirable Love and sex are two totally separate things that sometimes happily coincide, but this truth does not negate the value of either separately. Sex with friends and acquaintances is often quite satisfying as well. Really bad sex has been quite rare in my experience.
Though I love steak, it doesn’t mean I want steak every night for the rest of my life. Very often, I’ll crave chicken or fish! If I indulge in chicken, fish, or whatever every now and then, it doesn’t mean I’ll never want steak again! And if I occasionally have a cheap meal out of a vending machine, I’ll most definitely appreciate that steak the next time I have it.
From earliest childhood, I’ve never accepted anything at face value; rather, I’ve questioned nearly everything, including the sacred cows of marriage and monogamy. I’d long suspected that monogamy was not innate in humans, as is amply illustrated by the reality of so many people having so much trouble living up to it, despite good intentions. Indeed, the fact that laws are necessary to enforce monogamy is indicative that it doesn’t come naturally. If it did, no such laws would be needed.
I’ve read several books on anthropology, biology, and sexuality that have confirmed my suspicions that humans are no more naturally monogamous than the rest of the animal kingdom. But most such books, after meticulously showing that humans are not monogamous, cop out and conclude that we should abide by it, anyway.
Why?
It seems a cruel, perverse joke to insist that we conform to a system that obliges us to swim upstream against our instincts and only sets us up to fail. What is monogamy for, anyway? Why is monogamy considered by Western society to be the only ethical game in town?
During mankind’s early history, people no doubt followed their instincts and common sense when it came to sex and relationships. From what I’ve read, monogamy apparently came about when people started settling down into communities, acquired property, and the practice of inheritance began. Though women always know which children are theirs, men needed to ensure that the children they passed down their property to were actually theirs. And few men had the economic resources to support more than one wife in a lifelong relationship. Hence, monogamy became more prevalent than polygyny, with men trading off their previous sexual freedom for insurance that their offspring were indeed theirs. Women traded their freedom for economic support and protection for themselves and their children. Personal relationships were no longer simply a private arrangement between the people involved. In other words, monogamy arose for a particular society’s practical needs and not for any ethical or moral reasons.
To give monogamy the force of law, religions, particularly Christianity, put their stamp of approval on it, making monogamous marriage a sacrament. Though we see many instances of nonmonogamous relationships in the Bible, presented without censure, now Christians act as if monogamy was handed down as the One True Way of Relating from the dawn of time.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not advocating that those who wish to remain monogamous go out and “cheat” on their spouses. (I’ve always found that to be a quaint expression. When I hear references to someone “cheating” on their spouse, I think to myself, ‘What is s/he, a test?’) What am I against is a “One Size Fits All (Even if You Have to Cut Off Your Toes!)” approach to intimate relationships. “Different Strokes for Different Folks” works a whole lot better for me.
When all is said and done, if I’m aroused and there’s a willing, suitable partner available, more often than not I’m going to do what comes naturally, without guilt or apology.
No comments:
Post a Comment