cookie.jar

Professor Eric Anderson, Ph.D., is an American sociologist at the University of Winchester, England. He is known for his research on sexualities and masculinities studies. I start with this qualification because recently he has written a very controversial article for the Psychology Today website titled The Monogamy Gap: Men, Love, and The Reality of Cheating. In it, he argues that monogamy is simply too unnatural of a state for men to exist in, and thus will not remain the status quo for much longer. He posits that: "Despite...social-sexual progress… our culture has yet to erode the sexual taboo of engaging in—or even admitting to desperately wanting—sex with someone other than one's monogamous partner. Monogamy is so esteemed it remains virtually compulsory in our relationships."

Although this is a controversial issue, I can’t help but agree with Dr. Anderson’s observation. Our polyamorous nature has been completely suppressed in the name of an antiquated Victorian notion that monogamy is proper, moral, normal, and natural. But, as is always the case with a contentious issue, it is not that simple. Anderson has written a brave article that brings light to an issue that is wrongfully condemned in our culture. It is such a blatant truth that men (and women-he would do well to remember) want to have sex with other people, and that it has no bearing on how much they love their partner. It is evolution, our genes, our nature...whatever one wants to call it. However, where Dr. Anderson fails in his reasoning is his claim that sexual jealousy is only a social script: “open relationships” he claims,  “can wither jealousy scripts that lead to emotional distress in a relationship.” I would argue that sexual jealousy is very much a product of evolution, and developed in tandem with--and as defense against-- our desire for extra-pair copulations. If sexual jealousy were not an adaptive trait, then it would not have survived natural selection because it would have served no reproductive purpose. The reason it has been adopted into our collective morality is because of its function in aiding the successful reproduction of our genes by guarding against cuckolding for males, and the sharing/loss of resources for females. Any introductory evolutionary textbook will tell you this.

In the case of Monogamy vs. Open relationships we are not looking at an either/or situation. Yes, even though it is human nature to try to wrap things into neat little packages, we are regrettably stuck with a both/and situation. We want to both have extra-pair copulations AND fidelity in a relationship. And so, even though Dr. Anderson’s attempt to shed light on the darker side of this topic is admirable, he has not afforded his readers the indulgence of a fully rounded hypothesis. Exposing readers to only the information that supports his thesis means he is treating them like children. I, for one, love the challenge of a paradox. It makes me feel alive and incredibly insignificant all at the same time. Like staring into space and contemplating infinity, I like not having a simple answer to a problem.

We must also consider the evolutionary context of our desires. The way the world is now is not the way it always was. In “caveman times”, as I like to call it, we were surrounded by very few other people, and thus exposed to very few attractive alternatives to the mate we have. Back then, one would encounter as many non-relatives in your whole lifetime as we encounter on one city bus today. This is much different than our current environment, where we are bombarded with encounters with people, thus greatly increasing the chances of seeing an appealing alternative. This has been exponentially increased with the advent of ubiquitous media exposure, where the ideal type (which consists of about 2% of the population) is seen 99% of the time. Unfortunately our brain does not know the difference, and thus we are “convinced” that there are plenty of more attractive options out there.

Cheating evolved as an adaptive behavior to ensure the best chances for our genes. In the case of females, it meant that cheating would occur in a case where extra resources could be gained, or where better genetic material was up for grabs from a very attractive partner. In men, it evolved as a way to ensure that genes are passed on by being indiscriminate with mating- an urge that is curtailed when a female threatens to withhold mating from a male if he is found cheating. Both strategies were adaptive because they ensure genetic material had a good chance of being passed on and that their survival was probable due to extra resources and the desirable genetics of the offspring. It is much like how our desire for high sugar and fat content in food developed in an environment of scarcity. The very tendencies that were beneficial in the past are now the tendencies that we must overcome to thrive in our current environment. Our sexual appetites also want us to indulge indiscriminately, but unfortunately the smorgasboard of sexual satiates (in the form of pornography, and alternative sexual partners) has become a threat to our wellbeing. Sexual habituation will never go away-- just like a sweet tooth cannot be cured by going on a candy binge, having novel sexual partners will be an endless cycle without much true satisfaction. But where does this “sweet-tooth” metaphor end? Should we be allowed to dip our hand in the cookie jar every now and then, as long as we are “committed” to our healthy lifestyle? Well, when we eat unhealthily it only affects us, not the person we claim to love the most.

So in conclusion, Dr. Anderson brings to light an important issue--one that has been swept under rug for far too long. But, I believe he is intentionally oversimplifying the solution. Because, if in the end, it is as easy as simply having your cookie and eating someone else’s too, then us crafty humans would long ago have changed the rules to fit our needs. I believe that there should be a choice in the matter of monogamy, and that the choice should be up for revision during a relationship. But, I also believe that overcoming what he terms ‘social jealousy’ will take a tremendous amount of will and personal justification. I would argue that it is just as unnatural as monogamy: from a biological and evolutionary perspective. And that friends, is a paradox! Like watching a cute gazelle getting chased by a mother cheetah, trying to catch food for her young, we are watching this paradox unfold, and cheering both for the predator and the prey...in each of us.