That you would still be monogamous if there was no social pressure to be? Would you even marry if there were no such thing as marriage?

Science is always trying to explain away the reason men are more likely to be unfaithful however I do not feel that females are any more likely to be faithful than men. Actually it is more to her advantage to be single and sucker many men into taking care of her. And better yet if he doesn't know which if any of her children are his. After all if he believes the child is his even if it isn't he is more likely to care for it. If one can't give you what you are looking for you just go to the next one. Having another man on hand some where makes up for the incompetence of the first.

Personally for me I would not naturally be monogamous as I loved sex so much I wanted it all the time, every man I had could never keep up with me. Also I loved the attention that I wanted to have many men. I also liked the thrill of juggling them. I felt no emotional attachment because of sex actually. If men weren't such babies I would have had no problem having many of them on hand if for the mere task of satisfying my sexual needs.

Also considering the fact that many men have impotency and other sexual functioning problems while women can fake it even if her heart isn't in it, it seems illogical to me that women would stick with a partner and not find another one.

Science has proven that once the sex stops most relationships end or suffer greatly. Love is just a chemical in the brain and sex just solidifies it. But once the sex stops the bond begins to erode.

I also think there are many women who cheat but never get caught. Even if a survey was taken I think most women will lie about it. There is still a stigma and it's not just from the men but other women will also shun you for "slutty" behavior. I know because I've been shunned from the women in my family. There is just so much more pressure on women to be faithful then men. Where as for men you are in the good old boys club if you cheat. It's a pat on the back to your manliness. In fact it's often their idiotic bragging that gets them caught. Also if the other woman decides she wants him for her self she will rat him out in an attempt to destroy the relationship.

I just don't see that it's really an advantage for men any more than it would be for women to have multiple partners. Especially if you are going on an animalistic level. In cave man days isn't it more likely that women had no control over the sex? They obviously needed men for protection from predators especially while pregnant. So if men had shirked all responsibilities making babies every where and taking care of none of them humanity wouldn't have survived. I know because having a child in tow makes every thing more difficult even in a modern age.

Even more if you have no relatives or man around willing to help you. Just going to the store is a chore with small children. So I can't imagine how a woman could survive the wilderness while caring for an infant or small child. And a man back then would have had a hard time caring for even two women with all the babies. I don't see it as an advantage. Plus there were no paternity tests back then so how else could a man know which children where his other than to pressure the women to stay monogamous. Even then there were really no gaurentees since women could lie about it. There was no proof if she never got caught.

I just don't understand how science finds it logical that men would be unfaithful while women remain faithful. No matter how you look at it the math behind it just doesn't add up. And else where in the animal kingdom females do not remain faithful while the male runs around spreading his seed. Also in social animal the whole group looks out for each other regardless of relationship. And in non social animals the female is often bigger and some times stronger then the male. She doesn't need the male for protection.

Not sure how scientists can be so dumb! I love science but some times logic goes out the window when it comes to explaining things. Humans really should not be compared to animals so much. We are much more complicated then animals so while some basic things may be intrinsically true you can't pin it down on paper like that.

To do a real serious study you would have to start a new society from the ground up with absolutely zero influences from current social pressures and then see how humans turn out. I bet the findings would show that women are no more likely to be monogamous then men are.

But I'd be interested to hear some one else's thoughts and opinions on this.

And women please be honest with your selves. Would you really behave this way if you hadn't been exposed to it every where. If your mother had never told you how wrong wicked and dirty it was for a woman to sleep around would you have still only be with one man at a time?

Also I've heard my grandfather and some of his male pals talking about how they only got married for the free sex. Women don't think this way though, our whole self worth is based on whether or not we are loved by our man. If you would have loved your self and you didn't need that reassurance then would you have the same motivation to stay in a shitty relationship and be abused? I see women take all kinds of shit in the name of love. Physical violence and emotional violence.

I have finally learned to love myself and I now find that live isn't a horrible fate worse than death with no man around. Actually things are much easier and simple now. I don't have an extra full grown child to raise. And I'm much better at satisfying myself any how.