1 Woman for the rest of your life?

Playboy

Having an interesting debate with some people at work and would like to garner the opinion of some of the guys on here.

Can Men be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life? I'm not saying you cant stay with one woman but just that you are sacrificing/suppressing an instinct/desire in order to maintain a relatiosnhip. All of us have been touched by infedility at some stage in their lives whether its personally or our parents, friends, relatives etc.

I mean all guys would generally love to be able to have a nice loving wife, home, kids etc. but would also like free rein to see as many other women as they want without upsetting their partner. Would this be the ideal situation for most men? To be honest not too long ago it was practically acceptable/common for a man to have a mistress as well as a wife. In many cultures it has been seen as acceptable to have multiple wives.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is.. can men ever be truly happy and satisfied with just one partner or do our biological instincts and desires force us to have affairs and cheat in order to have a 'socially acceptable' life while decieving our partners in order to maintain our 'happiness'.

What other reason do men cheat for if not to have it all? Do so many men just not meet the right woman? Are so many men just mean/decitful ba*tards like women think we are? Can men seperate our feelings of love and respect for our partner while pursuing our desire for other ladies?

Are men in a catch 22 .. damned if we do and damned if we dont so the only option is to be decitful? If we stay faithful then some would say that after a number of years men would become bored and miserable which would impact the relationship/family and potentially lead to divorce. If we cheat then the marriage and family is more stable/happy as long as we can get away with it but if we get caught we destroy the lives of our partner/family who we love and respect and do not wish to hurt.

Discuss!

common sense brigade

Can Women be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life?
It works both ways!
Would an affair for a woman based on pure animal sex, enhance her homelife/marriage because she is getting great sex with no ties. Once she covers her tracks and no one gets hurt.

Wolfe Tone

I wouldn't like to be tied to the one woman for the rest of my life, although I doubt any 19 year old guys would!

Playboy

common sense brigade wrote: »

Can Women be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life?
It works both ways!
Would an affair for a woman based on pure animal sex, enhance her homelife/marriage because she is getting great sex with no ties. Once she covers her tracks and no one gets hurt.

I'm not asking the question with regard women .. thats a different debate! I'm not sure of the prevelance of infedility among women in comparison to men .. maybe its similar but the perception in society would be that Men cheat more commonly. Even if infedility levells are similar then potentially the reasons for cheating would be different .. I think we have to start examining evolved mating strategies in the different sexes and the evolutionary psychology with regard those strategies. I guess the common idea from a biological perspective would be that men are programmed to mate with as many women as possible whereas women are programmed to find the best mate possible who will protect/provide for her and her offspring. My question was more aimed at how men deal with an innate instinctual/biological desire to go forth and multiply in a society where it is only acceptable to have one partner at any one time.

common sense brigade

I'm not asking the question with regard women .. thats a different debate!

Sorry Playboy! I was just trying to muscle in!!. Im a woman obviously. I think the debate is actually relevant to women also. I know personally I like/desire sex as much as a man. I feel a biological need for it. :

DMen cheat more commonly

Maybe women are better at not getting caught.!

Playboy

common sense brigade wrote: »

Sorry Playboy! I was just trying to muscle in!!. Im a woman obviously. I think the debate is actually relevant to women also. I know personally I like/desire sex as much as a man. I feel a biological need for it.

I suppose its a question that is very difficult to answer .. do women desire sex or in particular sex with multiple partners in the same way that men do? Are we women more or less satisfied with one partner as men are?

PK2008

1 woman for the rest of my life would be a 100% increase for me

common sense brigade

after ejaculation in males and orgasm in females, human males release a hormone that has a sedative effect, while human females remain sexually receptive . Seems to me while you boy's are sleeping it off!:DUs Birds are rearing to go.:D Can you be sure one male can ever fully satisfy a female? He he I love this thread.

Playboy

PK2008 wrote: »

1 woman for the rest of my life would be a 100% increase for me

a 100% increase of zero is still zero!

Playboy

common sense brigade wrote: »

after ejaculation in males and orgasm in females, human males release a hormone that has a sedative effect, while human females remain sexually receptive . Seems to me while you boy's are sleeping it off!:DUs Birds are rearing to go.:D Can you be sure one male can ever fully satisfy a female? He he I love this thread.

Thank god for viagra then!

common sense brigade

With the Agricultural Revolution, the natural promiscuity of “mixing” lovers was turned into the grave sin of “cheating” or “infidelity,” for which the punishment—especially for women—ranged from ostracism to torture to public execution.
Thus chastened, ladies learned to hide their desire, along with their lovers. And civilization developed the notion that human females are naturally “choosy” and reserved about sex.
Though you’d think it would have been dashed by common sense. If females are indeed the “choosier,” more sexually reserved gender by nature, why would men throughout history have gone to such great lengths to control the female libido?

Uriel.

common sense brigade wrote: »

Can Women be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life?
It works both ways!
Would an affair for a woman based on pure animal sex, enhance her homelife/marriage because she is getting great sex with no ties. Once she covers her tracks and no one gets hurt.

I am guessing that because the OP posted this in "The Gentleman's Club" rather than "The Ladies Lounge" he wishes to discuss the topic focusing on the male and the male perspective.

OP, I think it really depends on the person. I think a man can find "true love"/a soul mate and not want to be with other women for the rest of their lives. Other men won't ever be able to settle down in a monogamous relationship and play by the rules.

The environment in which they where brought up in, life experiences and the behaviour of their social circle will all play a role in a man's viewpoint and how they see relationships/interactions with the opposite sex.

IN short, I don't think there is a one size fits all answer to your question as such. Animal instincts can be "un"learned without knowing you possessed them in the first place.

common sense brigade

am guessing that because the OP posted this in "The Gentleman's Club" rather than "The Ladies Lounge" he wishes to discuss the topic focusing on the male and the male perspective.

Wow you sure told me. Playboy I will exit the debate. Leave it to the men. It was fun!

hightower1

common sense brigade wrote: »

Sorry Playboy! I was just trying to muscle in!!. Im a woman obviously. I think the debate is actually relevant to women also. I know personally I like/desire sex as much as a man. I feel a biological need for it. : Maybe women are better at not getting caught.!

Its less relevant to women seeing as its been shown and proven that women typically have lower hormonal sex drives than men. Given thats exactly what the OP is talking about its certainly not as relevant to women as it is to men.

Personally imo I belive men would be happier with a family / multipal sexual partners but we have a cultrural / social / socially moral obligation to not do this while this is in fact in exact opposition to what we want biologically.

Its not one persons place to say if a culture that sees multipal partners is acceptable morally or not , its simple fact that in OUR culture its not accepted while globally speaking every mans genes wants to have sex with as many different women as possible no matter their family status.
So perhaps emotionally depending on how your menatl make up is you COULD be happy IF your emotional needs outweigh your biological wants.
If your biological wants outweigh your emotional needs then you wont be happy with just one partner however you may stay with one partner to fufil your emotional needs / morality.

frecklier

If there was another way for them to have kids, I wonder how many men would get married and commit to one woman for the rest of their lives in the first place? I suspect not too many.

Playboy

common sense brigade wrote: »

With the Agricultural Revolution, the natural promiscuity of “mixing” lovers was turned into the grave sin of “cheating” or “infidelity,” for which the punishment—especially for women—ranged from ostracism to torture to public execution.
Thus chastened, ladies learned to hide their desire, along with their lovers. And civilization developed the notion that human females are naturally “choosy” and reserved about sex.
Though you’d think it would have been dashed by common sense. If females are indeed the “choosier,” more sexually reserved gender by nature, why would men throughout history have gone to such great lengths to control the female libido?

Really interesting debate but maybe one for another thread. Its a conversation id happily particpate in

grungepants

Personally this topic runs through my mind every time i leave the house...
Trying to suppress it is a real drag
But i satisfy my woman to the extent that she dosent need to cheat
for me its not all about ejaculation its about mutual satisfaction.
Men are capable of a one woman relationship...

Uriel.

common sense brigade wrote: »

Wow you sure told me. Playboy I will exit the debate. Leave it to the men. It was fun!

There's no need to be so dramatic.

PeakOutput

i imagine once you fall in love that you dont really want to be with anyone else so its not a case of suppressing anything

of course guys are capable of it it happens all the time

28064212

Playboy wrote: »

I mean all guys would generally love to be able to have a nice loving wife, home, kids etc. but would also like free rein to see as many other women as they want without upsetting their partner. Would this be the ideal situation for most men?

Yes, that would be a great situation. However, it is far from an all-or-nothing. If it came down to a choice between the loving home and the free rein, many, many men would pick the former. Many, many women would pick the latter.

Playboy wrote: »

I guess what I'm trying to get at is.. can men ever be truly happy and satisfied with just one partner

Yes. Millions of men do it all over the world

Playboy wrote: »

do our biological instincts and desires force us to have affairs and cheat in order to have a 'socially acceptable' life while decieving our partners in order to maintain our 'happiness'.

No. Unless someone is holding a gun to your head, no-one is forced to do anything. If you can't afford a new car because you bought a house, are you forced to steal the car?

Playboy wrote: »

Are men in a catch 22 .. damned if we do and damned if we dont so the only option is to be decitful?

No, since it is not an either/or situation

Playboy wrote: »

If we stay faithful then some would say that after a number of years men would become bored and miserable which would impact the relationship/family and potentially lead to divorce.

Then they should talk to their wives, or they should get a divorce

Playboy wrote: »

If we cheat then the marriage and family is more stable/happy as long as we can get away with it but if we get caught we destroy the lives of our partner/family who we love and respect and do not wish to hurt

Then they shouldn't have gotten married

Personally, I think there's far too many marriages (or rather, marriages with a promise of fidelity). If someone is incapable of staying faithful, then don't promise to be faithful. It's very, very simple, and is applicable regardless of gender

Playboy

grungepants wrote: »

Personally this topic runs through my mind every time i leave the house...
Trying to suppress it is a real drag

This is the point I was making .. every man thinks about it all the time and its a real pain. Men are constantly trying to supress a natural urge in order to conform to societal norms .. my question was can we ever 'truly' be happy and/or satisfied in this state of denial?

grungepants wrote: »

Men are capable of a one woman relationship...

I know we are capable .. that wasnt the point.

We

PeakOutput wrote: »

i imagine once you fall in love that you dont really want to be with anyone else so its not a case of suppressing anything

of course guys are capable of it it happens all the time

Capability is not in question here..

Personally, I think societies ruling is the only reason why guys ever fully commit to one girl. I'm not sure how we got ourselves into this mess but I find myself dealing with it every time I meet a new girl that I like..
Right now, in fact, I'm faced with the dilemma of whether I should commit(should it go down that path) to a girl I'm lightly involved with at the moment.. I really like her, but the idea of not being able to 'take advantage of future oppertunities' scares me.. Furthermore, I know that if I do commit and we do the whole bf/gf thing, I know the attention I get will only increase and will make things even harder to deal with.
I dont want to cheat, I hate the idea of being dishonest in anyway, and often I've told girls in the very beginning that I'm seeing other girls.. but that alone takes away a chunk of the spark and despite the fact that most of the time they seem to be understanding and cool with it, its clear that security is more important to them and the relationship dwindles..

The trade off, as I saw it a few months ago was that I'd prefer that in the future, I wouldn't feel like I wasted my best oppertunity(21/college) to get as much sex as I can, and that there'd be plenty of time for relationships in the future, for which I'd probably better equipped, having been with so many different personalities and having a better understanding of how girls think..

What I'm realising now, after probably about 20 mini relationships and countless one-nighters since the beginning of summer, is that despite all these girls, without sounding too bent, I still felt as lonely as I would if I was seeing no girls If girls know that your not going to commit, I honestly believe that while they may hang around for a bit, they're always going to hold back a bit on an emotional level.. Turns out that for me, what they are holding back on, is much more important to me than the buzz and jacked up confidence of seeing loads of girls..

Another thing that I started to understand, but didnt expect was that when one of the girls I was seeing would find a guy that would commit, it did bother me. I figured in the beginning that I wouldn't care so much, and even told the girls when I first started seeing them that if they were to meet a new guy they liked to go for it and not let me get in the way at all. My logic was that 'I have 3-4 other girls on the go at any time, and will meet a new girl if she leaves, no biggie'.. Unfortunately when I did see the girls with their new boyfriends, it actually really depressed me... blahhh enough rambling for one day

Playboy

28064212 wrote: »

Yes, that would be a great situation. However, it is far from an all-or-nothing. If it came down to a choice between the loving home and the free rein, many, many men would pick the former. Many, many women would pick the latter.

Thats beside the point... The point is that we have to make a choice and how does that choice impact our happiness/satisfaction.

28064212 wrote: »

Yes. Millions of men do it all over the world

How do you know? Have you interviewed all these men with regard this question?

28064212 wrote: »

No. Unless someone is holding a gun to your head, no-one is forced to do anything. If you can't afford a new car because you bought a house, are you forced to steal the car?

The point was that in order to achieve our desired 'ideal' emotional state we either have to lie/cheat or supress our natural desires. We dont have an innate biological desire to steal cars... its not something we have to think about all the time.

28064212 wrote: »

No, since it is not an either/or situation

It mightnt be an either or situation for you but I would wager that it is it for a very large section of the male population

28064212 wrote: »

Then they should talk to their wives, or they should get a divorce

:rolleyes:I think you are missing the whole point of the thread?

28064212 wrote: »

Then they shouldn't have gotten married

Personally, I think there's far too many marriages (or rather, marriages with a promise of fidelity). If someone is incapable of staying faithful, then don't promise to be faithful. It's very, very simple, and is applicable regardless of gender

A very simplistic and female centric answer to a complex problem. So if 70-80% of men are incapable of marriage then none of them should get married? What happens to society then? You are talking about a social norm that is rooted in the psyche of every man and woman on the planet in some form or other. Its an arrangemet that has been central to the development of civilization over the last few thousand years. Its not easy just to opt out of it .. many men/women dont know they are capable or incapable of fidelity until after the have been in a marriage/relationship for an extended period of time. The social pressure to conform to this standard of behaviour is enormous even in modern society...

We do have an issue where the pace of our cultural evolution is creating a conflict with our physical/biological selves (as with the issue of obesity). For millions of years we have evolved complex biological tendencies, instincts and strategies that are now in direct conflict with cultural landscape that we exist in in the modern western world. The implications of this for men and the life satisfaction of men in relation to this is what is being questioned here

Playboy

We wrote: »

If girls know that your not going to commit, I honestly believe that while they may hang around for a bit, they're always going to hold back a bit on an emotional level.. Turns out that for me, what they are holding back on, is much more important to me than the buzz and jacked up confidence of seeing loads of girls..

So this imo is the crux of the issue. We want and need the emotionally stability of a relationship but the tradeoff is that you have to sacrifice the other girls.

When you do eventually sacrifice the other girls and commit then you will be happier for a period of time as you have satisfied that desire/need.. but then you will miss the attention, thrill, excitement of being with other women.

So what happens is you have people staying in relationships for a few years .. honeymoon period ends so they break up and meet someone else .. honeymoon period ends and on and on until they settle on one person to marry. Its not easy to end a marraige where there are kids involved so men turn to cheating to satisfy this desire. This is a behaviour we see and can understand in men everywhere but for some reason men dont really discuss it and the reason why we do it.

28064212

Playboy wrote: »

How do you know? Have you interviewed all these men with regard this question?

Have you? You're making the assumption that they're unhappy

Playboy wrote: »

The point was that in order to achieve our desired 'ideal' emotional state we either have to lie/cheat or supress our natural desires. We dont have an innate biological desire to steal cars... its not something we have to think about all the time.

The biological desire thing is a complete cop-out. We all have desires that, in a perfect world, we could act on and it wouldn't close any other options or have any effects. In reality, that's not possible. The "I-want-I-want-I-want" mindset is the same for any desire.

Playboy wrote: »

A very simplistic and female centric answer to a complex problem. So if 70-80% of men are incapable of marriage then none of them should get married? What happens to society then? You are talking about a social norm that is rooted in the psyche of every man and woman on the planet in some form or other. Its an arrangemet that has been central to the development of civilization over the last few thousand years. Its not easy just to opt out of it .. many men/women dont know they are capable or incapable of fidelity until after the have been in a marriage/relationship for an extended period of time. The social pressure to conform to this standard of behaviour is enormous even in modern society...

I very specifically said marriages with a promise of fidelity. If you don't think you can promise fidelity, don't promise it. That doesn't mean don't get married. If you do promise it and change your mind, you discuss it with your partner

And I very specifically said regardless of gender. You're just assuming that the vast majority of men want to cheat and the vast majority of women don't, based on nothing other than your own opinions. Put the original premise of the thread to women: "all girls would generally love to be able to have a nice loving husband, home, kids etc. but would also like free rein to see as many other men as they want without upsetting their partner". Do you think their will be a significant difference between what the men will say and the women will say?

hightower1

As a poster pointed out its a conflict between our society and biology.

One demands one partner while the other demands multiapl partners.
All men feel this on one levels or another.

Personally if there was a "man pill" for want of a better word that halted my biology / wandering eye but kept my attraction / sex drive with my OH I would be on it in a second. Its not easy dealing with urges you cannot morally act on and I dont think I would be alone in wanting rid ether.

Playboy

28064212 wrote: »

Have you? You're making the assumption that they're unhappy

No I'm not .. that is the question I want to discuss. You are the one assuming they can be happy. I'm questioning whether we can or cant and if you believe either then support your position with a logical argument

28064212 wrote: »

The biological desire thing is a complete cop-out. We all have desires that, in a perfect world, we could act on and it wouldn't close any other options or have any effects. In reality, that's not possible. The "I-want-I-want-I-want" mindset is the same for any desire.

No its not... human beings have evolved to procreate and maintain their own lives. the two most basic and strongest urges a human being can have is to eat and to have sex. We are seeing the implications in the modern society of humans being unable to control the desire to eat when faced with an abundance of food. Most people find it very difficult to control the urge to eat more and eat unhealthily every day.

Situation is similar with sex with multiple partners. Men want it but find it difficult to control. Sex is a desire/need that is central to our well being and happiness. Denying ourselves one of our most basic urges does have an impact on how we feel and how satisfied we are with our life.

I'm not talking here about right or wrong .. I'm talking about how culture has evolved in a way that is potentially oppresive to men and the cause of great unhappiness.

28064212 wrote: »

I very specifically said marriages with a promise of fidelity. If you don't think you can promise fidelity, don't promise it. That doesn't mean don't get married. If you do promise it and change your mind, you discuss it with your partner

lol .. that would be an interesting discussion! Even if most people had the level of emotional maturity to be frank about sexual desire and fidelity, i can only see one outcome for that discussion.

28064212 wrote: »

And I very specifically said regardless of gender. You're just assuming that the vast majority of men want to cheat and the vast majority of women don't, based on nothing other than your own opinions. Put the original premise of the thread to women: "all girls would generally love to be able to have a nice loving husband, home, kids etc. but would also like free rein to see as many other men as they want without upsetting their partner". Do you think their will be a significant difference between what the men will say and the women will say?

I havent assummed that the vast majority of women dont cheat or dont want to cheat! Neither am i assuming that all men want to cheat .. that is one of the questions I'm asking the men on here!? There is a difference between desire and action...

I dont really understand your point here? Women or Men more than likely will not get married without a promise of fidelity? What is marriage if not mainly a commitment of fidelity and a means to maintain it?

Your other point might be true but its not the discussion I want to have here and its not a comparison I'm trying to make.

Playboy

hightower1 wrote: »

As a poster pointed out its a conflict between our society and biology.

One demands one partner while the other demands multiapl partners.
All men feel this on one levels or another.

Personally if there was a "man pill" for want of a better word that halted my biology / wandering eye but kept my attraction / sex drive with my OH I would be on it in a second. Its not easy dealing with urges you cannot morally act on and I dont think I would be alone in wanting rid ether.

Picasso's happiest day was when he got older and lost his mojo! Said he could finally concentrate on his work!

Rycn

Playboy wrote: »

1 woman for the rest of your life?

Heather Brooke

Max Power1

Playboy wrote: »

Can Men be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life? I'm not saying you cant stay with one woman but just that you are sacrificing/suppressing an instinct/desire in order to maintain a relatiosnhip.

+1 to this.

As men (or women, whichever is applicable) you are making a choice to supress natural urges due to society's stipulation that relationships must be monogamous (for the most part).

Its a question of finding the woman that is worth the sacrifice for imo.

Smyth

no

Galvasean

Max Power1 wrote: »

Its a question of finding the woman that is worth the sacrifice for imo.

This.
If you love her enough you'll happily sacrfice sleeping around in order to be with her.

Iago

Genuine Answer?

I used to think the exact same way until I met my wife, haven't really given it much thought since to be honest.

Otis Driftwood

I dont think that anyone,other than those that are in a long term,monogamous relationship can really answer honestly.Its one of those "if you had a million quid what would you do" questions but FWIW I do think that men can commit to 1 person for their life.Id like to think that at some stage I will meet someone,settle down and have everything that comes with that.Any relationship Ive ever had Ive remained faithfull and had no problem doing so but that goes back to the original point that Ive never been in a really long term relationship.

Tar.Aldarion

Well it's probably an individual thing, personality traits. I happily could, I'm not sure about the girl. I was happy to before and one cheated in the end(so much happier now without her though) etc.

Eric Cartman

tbh I think its down to personality traits, Personally I hate most women (aside from the sex, and theyre fun to look at) and dont think monogamy is ever something I could do

most men seem to though , although some for the wrong reasons, I know a fair few who only get into relationships to get laid, wrong way of approaching it..

Taltos

More than happy being with the same woman for the last 17 yrs. And looking forward to spending more time with just her. All about choice really, cheating is easy, staying faithful takes a bit more work.

As to open relationships, well I am way too jealous to ever accept that.

Galvasean

Eric Cartman wrote: »

, I know a fair few who only get into relationships to get laid, wrong way of approaching it..

I've met the type. I know guys who bloody well despise their girlfriends but stay with them because they are good looking and/or put out. It's quite messed up.

parker kent

frecklier wrote: »

If there was another way for them to have kids, I wonder how many men would get married and commit to one woman for the rest of their lives in the first place? I suspect not too many.

Personally I am not bothered about having kids, so that would be one of the big reasons for me NOT to get married. I know I am far from the only guy who is not that interested in having kids.

But that being said, one of my main goals in life is to find one woman that I can share my life with. So to the OP, I would have no problem committing to one woman for the rest of my life, in fact I eagerly await it. At 24, I'm guessing this is not a common thought for a lot of guys, but that is genuinely what I want in life. Although I guess people who are actually married/in a long-term relationship over 5 years are better placed to answer the question.

omen80

Basically I think our sexual instincts are the same as most animals. Females look for the alpha male (successful, good genes etc) to mate with. The alpha male therefore has the opportunity of having many sexual partners.
We are however more intelligent than other animals and therefore we can fight these urges and lean to live with one partner.......the urge however is still there on a deeper level.

I think people often look at this kind of thing the wrong way. It is not really, or at least not solely, about being with one woman for the rest of your life. It is whether you want to be committed to the one relationship for the rest of your life. It is important to think of it in those terms as “relationships” are one of the things in life that are greater than the sum of the parts of the people within them. People often get more from the relationship than merely what they directly get from the person they are in it with. If you are happy with your relationship then you are happy to be committed to the girl you are having it with.

I guess it is easier for me to think in these terms given my own situation of living with two girls and not one which often forces us to think in terms of the relationship rather than just the people in it. Often when people ask questions about whether we get jealous of each other, or how it works, or does it feel weird, or whether we see it working long term we simply point out that the relationship we are in is more important to us than simply the people within it. We are very happy and it is a relationship we want to nurture and keep alive.

Am I happy that there is a world full of women out there and I will likely never lay a finger on any one of them again for the rest of my life? Yes, very much so and I hope it never changes. I like to look at them, many of them I think are wonderfully attractive and would likely be wonderful to get into bed with, but being with any of them is in no way close to being as important to me as the relationship I am in and those I am in it with.

efb

Know the one that's one too many...

Pherekydes

Playboy wrote: »

Can Men be truly satisfied with just one partner for the rest of their life?

Some can; some can't.

Playboy wrote: »

I'm not saying you cant stay with one woman but just that you are sacrificing/suppressing an instinct/desire in order to maintain a relatiosnhip.

That sounds like a statement about all men. On what basis do you make this statement? How many men have you met/interviewed? What instinct do you speak of?

Playboy wrote: »

I mean all guys would generally love to be able to have a nice loving wife, home, kids etc. but would also like free rein to see as many other women as they want without upsetting their partner.

Another statement involving all men. Any statement involving the word 'all' is nearly always wrong. All women aren't this, and all men aren't that.

Playboy wrote: »

Can men seperate our feelings of love and respect for our partner while pursuing our desire for other ladies?

What is this desire for other ladies you speak of?

Playboy

Pherekydes wrote: »

Some can; some can't.



That sounds like a statement about all men. On what basis do you make this statement? How many men have you met/interviewed? What instinct do you speak of?



Another statement involving all men. Any statement involving the word 'all' is nearly always wrong. All women aren't this, and all men aren't that.



What is this desire for other ladies you speak of?

Unless you are a machine then I'm sure you have evolved like most healthy men to have a strong sexual desire towards the opposite sex? Biology tells us that we 'should' have evolved this desire towards multiple members of the opposite sex .. level of control and desire of course will vary but to deny men dont have the urge is a bit ridiculous?

Pherekydes

Playboy wrote: »

Unless you are a machine then I'm sure you have evolved like most healthy men to have a strong sexual desire towards the opposite sex? Biology tells us that we 'should' have evolved this desire towards multiple members of the opposite sex .. level of control and desire of course will vary but to deny men dont have the urge is a bit ridiculous?

There's a lot wrong with this post, but I'll give it a go.

Only healthy men have a strong sexual desire towards the opposite sex? Are you implying that gay men are unhealthy?

Evolution doesn't happen within the short timescale of a single human life. It happens by natural selection.

This strong sexual desire towards the opposite sex: Why must it be displayed by many notches on a bedpost? Why not one? What does multiple lovers prove over one? I don't see how that proves anything.

How or why does biology tell us "that we 'should' have evolved this desire towards multiple members of the opposite sex"?

I'm certainly not denying men have "the urge". I certainly have it. But it's not an urge to have multiple partners.

Again, just to reiterate: All men are not the same. All men do not have the same "urges", beyond the obvious ones of self-preservation.

cheesefiend

Well, I'm not a man, so obviously I don't really know. But the way I see it men and women were initially born with high sex drives and did have the desire to sleep with multiple members of the opposite sex. However, we then developed romantic love so that we could focus on one partner at a time. We then evolved to be able to form unions with people, to feel deep attachment in order to stay together to rear children as a team.

To say that we are the same as every other animal is wrong. It's a cop out, because we have evolved further than any other animal in many ways. Your sex drive is down to hormones however both men and women produce hormones which cause long term attachment to one partner.

I understand that you say the ideal would be to have one partner and still sleep with others without causing your marriage or relationship any damage. You're asking can you be happy in a relationship where this is not the case and I believe that many people are. You always have to sacrifice something when it comes to the big things. When you have kids you sacrifice much of your freedom to just leave when you want etc. But most think that the sacrifice is worth it. I imagine that it is the same with a long term relationship.

omen80

cheesefiend wrote: »

To say that we are the same as every other animal is wrong. It's a cop out, because we have evolved further than any other animal in many ways.

Being evolved in many ways is irrelevant to this topic, we are just talking about sexual needs here. I think we are no different than most other animals on a subconscious level when it comes to mating. As men get older they become more attracted to younger women as they would be more suitable for providing a child. Young women are more attracted to older men as they are seen as more confident etc and a good indication of how the offspring will grow up to be.
I'm not talking about intelligence or feelings or love or anything else here, just basic sexual desire.

We

cheesefiend wrote: »

But the way I see it men and women were initially born with high sex drives and did have the desire to sleep with multiple members of the opposite sex.

Unforunately men and women arent the same in this regards, while as a woman you may feel the desire to sleep with different guys, sex with different women is something that inside, we feel is something we're supposed to be doing, but we have to consciously negate. Its more than a desire.

cheesefiend wrote: »

However, we then developed romantic love so that we could focus on one partner at a time. We then evolved to be able to form unions with people, to feel deep attachment in order to stay together to rear children as a team.

We didn't 'evolve' to be able to do this. Somewhere along the way that became the societal norm. Just like sex before marriage, somewhere in history(not too long ago, either) it was forced on us by tthose who feel the least oppressed by it. Monogomous relationships are not natural for us, and thats why infidelity is so rampant.

cheesefiend wrote: »

To say that we are the same as every other animal is wrong. It's a cop out, because we have evolved further than any other animal in many ways.

Sorry, but the latter does not negate the former.. Its not a cop out.

cheesefiend wrote: »

Your sex drive is down to hormones however both men and women produce hormones which cause long term attachment to one partner.

Hormonal balance is not a simple equation of 1 positive hormone - 1 negative hormone = hormonal stability..

cheesefiend wrote: »

I understand that you say the ideal would be to have one partner and still sleep with others without causing your marriage or relationship any damage. You're asking can you be happy in a relationship where this is not the case and I believe that many people are. You always have to sacrifice something when it comes to the big things. When you have kids you sacrifice much of your freedom to just leave when you want etc. But most think that the sacrifice is worth it. I imagine that it is the same with a long term relationship.

I think the main problem with your logic is that it was formed to fit the your ideal, ie. your reasoning was derived from your conclusion, rather than the opposite.

Galvasean

I must cheat on my other half some day and get caught. I look forward to saying, "It's not my fault I'm a naturally evolved polygamist!" It will be small comfort to her, but funny nontheless.

I wonder is monogamy so unnatural. It would be interesting how far back in time you'd have to go to see the first monogomous human society. Monogamy has been observed in certain animals too. However, it is not always the most exclusive.
I think broad statements about monogamy being an unnatural state of the human condition when the case is far from being closed are unhelpful, almost lending a kind of 'evolutionary excuse' to people who cheat on partners.

killerking

The overwhelming majority of men would like to be alcoholic hell-raising serial womanizers like Harris, Reed, Burton and O'Toole but don't know how which is why they decide to be 1 woman men.

Galvasean wrote: »

I must cheat on my other half some day and get caught. I look forward to saying, "It's not my fault I'm a naturally evolved polygamist!" It will be small comfort to her, but funny nontheless.

I wonder is monogamy so unnatural. It would be interesting how far back in time you'd have to go to see the first monogomous human society. Monogamy has been observed in certain animals too. However, it is not always the most exclusive.
I think broad statements about monogamy being an unnatural state of the human condition when the case is far from being closed are unhelpful, almost lending a kind of 'evolutionary excuse' to people who cheat on partners.

Many women tolerate their husband's adultery as long as it is only one night stands and brief flings.

Jackie Kennedy is the classic example - she always knew that JFK would come back to her and she was the only woman he was ever truly close to in his life.

Da Shins Kelly

It differs from man to man, but of course men can be happy and satisfied with just one woman. Human relationships are much more complex than just biological instincts. Monogamy and loyalty is often what sets us apart. Also, monogamy is not exactly unheard of in other parts of the animal kingdom, e.g swans. Monogamy is not as unusual as people seem to think.