• We date multiple people with no physical forever attachment mode. We divorce, break up, have one night stands, and have multipeople marriages.

    Seriously, we only became monogamous because our growing intelligence and changing shape made birth harder therefore successful ones often had multiple parents there. Our kids are helpless because of their giant heads, that they can't lift. So they have issues walking. And sitting up. And anything. And guess what? Those lasted till the kid could walk with it's mom and eat with her. Maybe even talk with her. The men would leave to start new ones. This CONSENSUAL, NOT biologically mandated, relationship between the sexes results in us being the most hung and lacking our dick spines. We CHOOSE it. It is SOCIAL. Other animals can't have another at ALL when they are monogamous. Like male anglers. They egit CAN'T leave their women. Seahorses NEVER separate, they are physically or psychologically/instinctively compelled into this. We however are taught it. Like religion it is not NATURAL it is LEARNED. Not to say it CAN'T happen, just we aren't FORCED to. And naturally tend to do date multiple people. It's much more like that of lions and its a social behavior that we developed between the sexes for higher population success rates.

  • They very much are

    Humans will have had many partners in their lifetime, been attracted to many people. They are attracted to various human beings, but it is only socially acceptable to date one human at a time, otherwise it will be considered cheating.

    But if we were truly monogamous, we would only be attracted to one single human throughout our entire lifetime, rather than being attracted to various humans in general, and there would be no such terms such as cheating, infidelity, and adultery, if we were truly monogamous. The existence of these terms, means that humans are polyamorous, and attracted to many human beings.

  • Nature Finds A Way

    From a purely evolutionary perspective, it seems obvious that polyamory is natural. It increases the chances of insemination in women, relieves stress when one partner isn't available, facilitates bonds and decreases the chances of bad mutations caused by incestuous relationships which became rather popular among royalty in the past.

    Whether that means as an individual you should choose to be have multiple partners, is another matter. I don't know about you, but I learn more about people when I have those kinds of close relationships with them. I learn more from them as well, and it facilitates growth in me as a human. I haven't personally experienced such a relationship myself, involving multiple partners, but assuming you are open and honest about it, I see no reason why partaking in one would do anything less than teach you many lessons, and help you grow as a person, so long as communication between everyone involved is always a big priority.

  • I stand on both sides.

    You are a human being and have a choice. This is part of the organic process we call evolution by natural selection. Humans aren't naturally suicidal but if put in the situation to sacrifice their life for others they care about deeply, they will. On a day to day basis, most humans choose to live making it a circumstantial choice not a predispositioned trait forced upon us. If you feel there are reasons that your life would be more fulfilling monogamous then choose that. If you don't require monogamy then fill free to experiment with a more open lifestyle. It's your life just make sure you have some logic to your sexual lifestyle.

  • Love more then one

    We enjoy the life of polyamory. All 4 of us care and love each other. Making life so much more ..Then what most can even imagine. There is no desire to cheat/stray, we get everything thing we need from each other. Will even invite another couple to join us 4.

  • Love is infinite

    Parents do not stop loving their first born child right after the second one is born. So why do you think that is suppose to happen with your spouse and or partner? People have social, emotional, and psychological needs that need to be met by a lover. If one person can not do it, why can not another lover do so?

  • I believe that humans are naturally polyamorous.

    I believe that humans are naturally polyamorous. It is only religions that say that we should
    be monogamous. In many ancient civilizations,
    people were polyamorous. It is man’s
    nature to be attracted to the female form.
    It is in man’s nature to be attracted to more than one single woman.

  • Sperm competition and female multiple orgasm as the powerful evidences of Polyandry

    It seems the the cave men and women had to choose the best genes to pass to other generations for better survival during evolution and even now practically. Also, the genes changed the biology of human sexual organs accordingly. In my opinion the brain system also has evolved too to help this survival need-- that is moral, which we now choose certain way of life or focus on particular partner (monogamy) or love someone more or limit our desires to devote ourselves to some other special aims. Moral, that is society values, and desire should work together. Even real Islam, respects human desires because they help us to survive and pass the better genes and moral helps us to bring up offspring better as monogamy system of family while polyandry, thought effective in better gene selection but fails to perfectly bring up new generation in the HERD. Pair Bonding also helps this better bringing up but not effective as monogamy. So we are Polyandrous in terms of reproduction and sexual organs but monogamous in terms of our logical and moral system of our brain evolution.

  • Humans are only "naturally" conditioned...

    We are affected every day by our environment, even more so as younglings. Almost every observable human behavior is the result of environmental conditioning. What this means is, people may be "polyamorous" reflecting their culture and/or environment. "Free will" is not real, everyone is affected by their environment, and consequently cannot "choose" something outside of their current cultural values.

    So in short, no, we are not "naturally polyamorous", and someone whom is, should not be criticized as we are all victims of our culture.

  • Yes, we naturally feel love for multiple people.

    This is evident in the love we share for multiple members of family, or for our children, or for our closest friends. The step from that inherent type of 'platonic' polyamory towards multiple sexual relationships means dealing with jealousy and attachment, but I think that that is a separate thing based more on ideology, culture, upbringing, etc.

    There are cultures which exhibit sexual polyamory and others which don't - this suggests to me that our biological nature isn't the full story.

  • We are not apes.

    It is ridiculous to justify the actions of humans based on the actions of animals. We have not evolved from apes. Somewhere along the line, we probably shared an ancestor, but the line split and we evolved differently. Humans are different from apes and chimps and other animals because we can choose monogamy, we can choose our actions, we are not just animals acting upon primitive instincts. We have a conscious, we have morals, and we are people.

  • Polyamorous

    No, I don't think that humans are polyamorous or that they have to be. I have been married to and with the same man for 14 years and have no intention of ever being with anyone else. Yes, there may be some, actually a lot of people out there who crave love from someone else, but not everyone is that way.

  • No

    There are animals in this world who choose one mate for life. While plural mariages are possible, and people often have different partners. I believe there are animals, like humans who choose one partner for life. Birds, lizards, horses. All of these species show a monogamous lifestyle. Penguins for instance are one species that the husband takes care of the egg while the wife goes fishing for weeks the husband stays with the baby egg. When mother returns she comes home to baby bird and her mate.

  • Evolution . .

    I think people aren't polyamorous naturally because evolutionary because biologically it is favorable to stick with one partner who will stick with you to help raise the children. Polyamory doesn't really make a lot of sense in terms of kin selection or any current theories. That being said, it doesn't mean that you naturally stay with one person through your whole life.

  • Humans are naturally neither monogamous nor polygamous.

    Since we have to use the general animal kingdom as a looking glass to determine if humans are naturally inclined towards one or the other, careful research on the mating patterns of a myriad of species show that pairings are far more dependent on the circumstances as a method of adaptation for an individual versus a natural inclination. For instance wolves in captivity demonstrate a tendency towards polygamy, however in the wild they are almost exclusively monogamous. It could be argued that polygamy is more natural in sort of "closed systems" since there is more competition over available mates but monogamy is more natural in "open systems" because not only are there less options but also less pressure to deviate from a particular mate. I believe that this is the case for humans because polygamy is far more common in urban locations where there is more competition over mates than in rural settings where there is substantially less competition over mates.

    So in the end it's not a matter of which is more natural but rather choice and circumstance.

  • Neither monogamy nor polygamy are.

    There are examples of animals in all gradients of pairing behaviors, and animals we believed to be polygamous but turned out to be monogamous depending on circumstances. I believe that most animals exhibit serial monogamy it seems to be the most common pairing method in the animal kingdom. Not only that but wolves were observed to be more polygamous in captivity but more monogamous in the wild. There is no way that is more natural or fulfilling than another, it's simply a preference. While polygamy is not unnatural, it would be incorrect to so that it is more or less unnatural than monogamy. I personally believe that some people have the capacity to find fulfillment in a single lover while others do not and it's simply a matter of finding someone whose preference fits with your own best.

  • Humans are only "naturally" conditioned...

    Humans are only "naturally" conditioned... We are affected every day by our environment, even more so as younglings. Almost every observable human behavior is the result of environmental conditioning. What this means is, people may be "polyamorous" reflecting their culture and/or environment. "Free will" is not real, everyone is affected by their environment, and consequently cannot "choose" something outside of their current cultural values.

    So in short, no, we are not "naturally polyamorous", and someone whom is, should not be criticized as we are all victims of our culture.

  • There is no human nature except that Humans naturally change, we create and recreate our lives

    There is no set human nature. Anything we can communicate about to ourselves and change is within the purview of our nature. Asking "what is natural?" is basically the same as asking "what is old?" But if we stuck with what was old all the time we'd still be living in caves.

    If you want to be polyamorous go for it. If you want to be monogamous go for it. If you want to be celibate go for it. If you want to be a serial monogamist go for it. It's up to you.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.