Michael JacksonIn the May 26th edition of the New York magazine, I read what I believe to be a somewhat sad article. It is entitled The Affairs of Men: The Trouble with Sex and Marriage. It discusses the differences between male and female sex drive and men's seeming inability to grasp the notion of a monogamous relationship.
The article provides pieces of information that have been ascertained through research such as the fact that 25% of American men commit adultery and 15% of American women do as well. Even if this is a low and underreported estimate, there are still many more people who honor a monogamous relationship.
The article does entertain both sides of the argument and interviews people with varying opinions, but, in general, it presumes that because of the innate need of men for sex and their desire to mix it up, or be with different women, they are simply unable to, well, keep it in their pants. The author, Philip Weiss, admits his own desire for sexual variety and how that has affected his marriage over the years. He even goes as far as to say that Europeans may be more evolved when it comes to marriage because they understand a man's need for variety and the women just accept this.
The more likely truth, and one that is also mentioned in the article, is that the women accept this because they have little choice and that it is, in fact, a painful reality for them. While I believe that this article does offer some empirical and substantiated facts, such as some of the research done at the Kinsey Institute, I feel that it is incredibly self- serving. Do married people cheat? Yes they do. Is it beyond their ability to control their cheating behavior because of a biological predisposition? No, I do not believe this notion for one minute. This is the difference between a civilized society and one that has no social norms or boundaries. These decisions are conscious choices. There are many different reasons for infidelity and, as I have mentioned in the past, it does not (and should not) be the reason a marriage ends. But despite what this article may state, there is a clear value to a monogamous relationship and, as with anything worthwhile, there are sacrifices that must be made in order to achieve the trust and intimacy that comes from years of being faithful and loyal to one another.
:
What is Panic Disorder?
I was married, I cheated, and eventually divorced. Since then, I don't promise monogamy because I know I may not be able to do it. Believe it or not, a lot of women will accept that and they date me anyway. I feel I can have a close, romantic, honest, and sexual relationship with a woman, even if I know she is sexual with another man. I think one can have more than one partner and still be responsible and honest. My criteria is that all parties involved agree to that kind of a relationship before hand, all feel the same way, and no one gets surprised or deliberately hurt.
That number may be significantly high or low. I can't use my own personal experience to know. What would be more interesting would be if certain groups had a higher response rate. For example, the hollywood genre of people who worship whatever hollywood spews out, would they have a higher rate of adultery?
Is there any geographical or socio-economic bias?
Given your professional role, i would appreciate your comments as to the study you quote. I know that the point's made in the article are dubious at best, and I agree with your view that we can't hide behind a supposed biological pre-disposition.
I'm glad that I ended it. I hope others who are in the same situation find the strength as well....
As well, the statistics may be off a stretch by a few decades, this might be given by people who actually "kiss and tell". I'd stretch and say 60% of men, and 40% of women sounds more realistic. But where's the proof in that? Depends on who's written or performed the study.
In any social circle (America speaking), adultery is more common than we think simply based on the Hollywood role models that we see, who are committing adultery on their spouses and/or you read or hear of breakups constantly making it appear avant garde or almost chic to be a divorcee'?
It's clearly more common than what's ever discussed, for both genders.
Unfortunately, I have no factual data to back up my claim/statements...
Oh well.
At first, I just put sex out of my mind. I told myself I didn't need it. But our relationship has changed. It's as if we're really close roommates. He has no desire to please me sexually, and has never even tried.I think it's because of the shots, because he cries about it.
We rent a cottage right next to our home, and our renter is in love with me. We've kissed, but nothing else. Frankly, my husband kisses better. But I am so tempted. My neighbor is scared to death, because he knows my husband would kick him out as a renter. I'm not even sure I could do something like that to my husband. He's already had one failed marriage, because his wife cheated on him.
How do I get rid of these temtations?
Male infidelity has been studied rather exhaustively by anthropologists and others. It is a universal phenomenon, cross-cultural, and found with robust references through all of recorded history. The behavior has survived elaborate, creative, and violent attempts to suppress it. It has alternately been tolerated, accepted, and demonized. Let us begin…
Rather than characterizing societies that are tolerant or neutral on male infidelity as being on the wrong side of "civilized", perhaps they are simply being less histrionic and more thoughtful "choosing their battles". Does the U.S. posture on monogamy really strike you as more civilized than our peers in Europe?
While it may be true that European women have simply surrendered to the male predilection for sleeping around, would you assert that U.S. women are suffering less by refusing to do so? I don't see much evidence of that.
Many cry foul over the erosion of Judeo-Christian sexual mores in 21st Century society, but I'm simply going to state the obvious: that ship has sailed. People have voted with their feet, so to speak. If one insists that 2,000 year old patchwork texts from uneducated illiterates define the best possible social and ethical models for human beings, then of course we have long since been doomed.
If you don't, then we're left with the science of understanding human behavior. What makes men tick? What makes women tick? It is important, I think, to work with those facts and do our best to put our cultural and gender biases aside.
Here is what we know.......(feel free to disagree).....
There is a perfectly intuitive evolutionary thesis for male sexual behavior, which includes the tendencies toward promiscuity and philandering. Within the past 10 to 20 years in particular, parts of the thesis have become observable with the advances in neurology. We are beginning to understand the neurochemical engine inside men and women that drives sexual behavior. It in no way is aligned with the Judeo-Christian model of what "should" be motivating sexual behavior. In fact, it describes a very different animal altogether.
When you state, "these decision are conscious choices", you are of course correct in the literal sense. What you are ignoring however is the growing amount of data that describes the subconscious neural mechanisms that dominate much of the real-world manifest behavior. People in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere are largely ignorant of the 'root cause' of their romantic and sexual feelings and behaviors. I, for one, think this is not much different than being ignorant of the germ theory of disease. Your suggestion to "just say no", or "please, be civilized" is not likely to produce results. If that is your goal, then a more thorough discussion of the science of human behavior is what we need in our blogs and counseling sessions. We need to aggressively inform men and women what biochemical tricks are being played on their brains in order to motivate them (ultimately) to mate and reproduce. We can always go to church if we want someone to tell us we are wicked for lusting after our neighbor's wife. Leave that to the religious ghouls. They are much better at it than you (be grateful).
How about this?
We are all an advanced form of primates. The sexual reproduction of primates has evolved with an apparent requirement for both a male and a female. The male homosapien and the female homosapien have evolved with different mating and sexual tendencies. These differences do not make one gender 'civilized' and the other 'uncivilized'. They are simply different. It is solipsistic to assert otherwise. In fact, without these differences, it is highly likely the homosapiens you've come to love and hate would not be here at all. Remember, when it comes to evolution and natural selection, nature is in no way interested in our 'moral' objections to its design. 98% of the species that ever existed on this planet are now extinct. Those who are not have exhibited superior reproductive strategies, so shame on you for suggesting otherwise. :)
Contrary to your recommendation, I would say the Europeans probably have it about right: Women will likely need to exhale on the issue of male fidelity and stop destroying their lives and families over it, while men will of course, have to accept that in societies where women are not burned alive for adultery.......women do a pretty good job of catching up with their male counterparts in terms of sexual variety. This does not mean we cannot find common ground, develop important, intimate relationships, or even that monogamous relationships are not possible. It simply means it is unnecessary to esteem them as the only possible ‘civilized’ model. For those who find monogamy fulfilling, bravo. For those who do not…….then not.
Our collective 'best practice' here is to inform people about what we know of the inner workings of human behavior, what we know about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases, what we know about the social consequences of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies, and to endeavor to bring better and universally available technology to mitigate all of these issues. We will get there, and the strenuous arguments for the ‘monogamy only’ model will, one by one, be made moot.
What is not likely is that we will know anytime soon how to trick the male (and yes, female) brain into preferring monogamy over the alternatives. We will likely get there someday, but just not yet. Until then, we need to embrace (or at least understand) our differences, stop the gender slander, and peacefully coexist.
My $ 0.02
Yours in Christ - Mario.
I disagree that infidelity shouldn't be the reason that a marriage ends. If someone cheats on me I am gone. That is the most sacred act of a couple and if that trust is broken it kills the relationship. Sorry, but it is just plain wrong to cheat.
Can you come up with an explanation for this without a standard? What is the protocol? In trying to find the excuse, or explaination that fits are we just making the question more complicated?
People are interesting,that is for sure.
Of course people can choose whether or not to cheat. My ex could of just come to me and said, "I don't love you anymore and I want to be with someone else", rather than cheat with a murse in her class.
I'd still take her back, because what we had only comes along once in a while. It is going to very hard to find the same kind of connection. Hopefully, the next time I get involved, I will meet a woman who can communicate better.
BTW... murse = male nurse...
Now, just because women have these urges (conscious other otherwise) does not mean we actually act on them. We have self control and social boundaries as human beings that result in the majority of women not surrendering to such biological urges. The same is true of men.
We do all share ancient DNA that allows for some of these primitive urges, but we also are evolved creatures with social structures that override them. If we are unfaithful, it is a moral failing, not a biological or genetic one.
I think this author is simply trying to pass the buck and ditch personal responsibility for his actions and the actions of others who have been unfaithful, or toyed with the idea. Personal accountability seems to be incidental to so many people these days. This makes me sad.
Thanks Cyndi for this post.