Yesterday the Huffington Post published a really interesting article on cheating in relationships. The article's author, Vicki Larson, interviewed sociologist, Eric Anderson, on his recently released book, The Monogamy Gap: Men, Love, and the Reality of Cheating. In the book Anderson argues, that cheating (and the desire to cheat) are much more prevalent that most assume, and that cheating shouldn't be seen as the evil act that most of society makes it out to be. He also argues that society's revulsion toward cheating is a socially compelled behaviour that may cause unnecessary suffering for those forced to ignore or suppress their sexual needs in the interest of monogamy.
While researching for the book, Anderson polled 120 undergraduate men and found that 78% of those who were in monogamous relationships had cheated, even though they loved their partners and had no intention of leaving the relationship. This statistic is staggering considering that the 78% doesn't account for those who would like to cheat but haven't had the opportunity. Nor does it include those who were too embarrassed or ashamed to admit that they had cheated.
The overarching theme of the book and the article was that mainstream society has convinced itself that monogamy is the only way to have a healthy, fulfilling relationship, and those who deviate from that path are worthy of scorn. In fact Anderson is just one of many scholars who've argued that infidelity can actually be good for a relationship, as it allows a partner to fulfill his or her sexual needs outside the relationship, while still maintaining a committed emotional connection with their partner. Also, according to Anderson, for those who've been in a monogamous relationship for a long time, they inevitably lose a certain level of passion that can only be achieved by hooking up with a new partner. As a result, men who are otherwise morally impeccable and great boyfriends will often make the perfectly rational decision to engage in a one-off sexual romp with a stranger, knowing that their needs will be met and their partner will suffer no penalty, provided he can be discrete about it. This, argues Anderson, is a more desirable outcome for both parties than the alternative in which both partners become sexually dissatisfied and disillusioned with one another, and decide to break up, throwing away a perfectly healthy emotional relationship simply because they couldn't meet 100% of each other's sexual needs.
On this last point, I can see where the professor is coming from. It's somewhat bizarre that it's seen as perfectly acceptable, even expected, that we draw upon a plurality of friendships, acquaintances, and kinship bonds, to satisfy all of our other social and interpersonal needs. Yet when it comes to sexuality, it's expected that one person will be able to handle everything. And if you can't be satisfied by just one person, something must be wrong with you. When it comes to sexuality, we tend to operate using an "ownership" paradigm in which we feel we must be the owner and sole proprietor of our partner's sexual capital. This might be unfortunate, because ownership, sometimes referred to as slavery, is the least virtuous, least equitable, and least fulfilling form of all interpersonal relationships.
At the same time, I fear that Anderson and I, are both looking at the issue through a male-centric lens. Although women may enjoy and desire sex as much as men do, as I wrote in my last post, most of the data indicates that women tend to be more interested on long-term committed relationships. Although that doesn't translate directly into "monogamy", it's hard to picture a significant portion of women warming up to the idea of "open" sexual relationships becoming the norm. Nor do I think men would be thrilled when they realize that "open" means that they will also have to live with their wives and girlfriends having other partners.
At the end of the day, what Anderson is advocating is a massive social re-engineering project. And I can't ever see it being successful. Monogamy is a part of the social contract. Whether because we are naturally predisposed to it through our evolutionary biology, or because successive civilizations have simply come to the collective decision that it's necessary to maintain societal order, I think monogamy, or at least the pretence of monogamy, is here to stay.
Appreciate your kind evaluation of what I wrote; others have not been, even though I don't necessarily agree with Dr. Anderson.
He says monogamy fails women, too, and his next book will be on why women cheat. Most likely not the same reasons men do. But, an open relationship that is equally wanted and negotiated probably could (and probably does) work; the men in this study didn't have open relationships — they considered themselves monogamous even though they were cheating, and they didn't want their girlfriends to cheat. As I said to him, that seems selfish.
I do suggest you read the book — it is thought-provoking
Both good articles here, enjoyed the read. I think the points raised are interesting and valid, and I think sexual needs should be discussed more openly in relationships and society. It will receive some flack but it's true that sexuality is a part of human nature that largely gets silenced if not shunned.
However on this idea of open relationships I think this shouldn't necessarily become a cultural norm so much as a discussion point in relationships - some will be fine with it, but not everyone, even if the percentage of cheaters is rather high. If it becomes 'just a way of life' that people will have to live with that could lead to a lot of problems for those not willing to share their partner. Should tread delicately down this road, and realize it will work for some but not all.
Good article, as was the Huffington Post piece. I also like that he distinguishes recreational sex from affairs.
Also, I think another reason monogamy is the norm is due to people's own insecurity surrounding sex, and being able to attract a willing partner. It might come easy for some, but not everyone. So jealousy definitely plays a role in my opinion.