A Treatise on Love and War
Yesterday, I chatted with a friend I haven't talked to in a long time. We asked each other how we have been, and gave each other updates on life in general. I mentioned that I've moved in with Balaa, and the question I immediately received from my friend was "Is marriage down the road?" and when I said no, the follow up question was "Are you guys in a casual/open relationship?"
I had to explain how I viewed romantic relationships, and it stirred up a lot of old thoughts.
I for one do not follow social conventions, and I do not believe in marriage - at least, not in the sense as it's popularly defined. To many, marriage is a holy religious bond - a sacred promise witnessed by some divine being(s). To others, marriage may serve a more practical purpose - providing legal benefits and, possibly, protection. To others still, marriage is simply a promise of love made between two people.
I belong to that last group - and I personally don't see the need to hold a huge public ceremony with a priest and witnesses and having all my friends and families be there. I do not question the love I share with my Lady, and she doesn't question mine - for us, that is enough. We may love one another, but it is our mutual wish that we remain free and independent - that does not mean we are in an "open" relationship; it simply means I do not wish to restrict her freedom in life. If she chooses to be emotionally or physically intimate with someone other than me, that is within her rights - I neither encourage nor discourage the behavior; and if something like that happens, I won't view it as a sign of "disloyalty". At present, we have chosen to be exclusive to one another - the key point is, it has to be by our own choice, not by external pressure. What I can't stand is the way people regard marriage... as if it a magical word, that somehow "getting married" changes everything. The evidence is pretty clear in our culture - that's why guys have bachelor parties before getting married, or why women push for marriage while guys prefer to put it off. That whole mentality that before you are married you are allowed to horse around and somehow "getting married" changes that just comes off entirely superficial and phony to me. I simply don't see the point for someone to [i]demand[/i] loyalty/sexual exclusiveness if the other person doesn't wish for it.
First off, humans are animals. Unlike the small minority of animals who are genetically coded to be monogamous, humans are not coded for it. If we were, emotions like jealousy and sexual aggression would be completely redundant. Human males have the tendency to "cheat" on their partners precisely because we are genetically coded to mate with as many females as possible; even though our society and culture has evolved, we still carry that evolutionary baggage.
Unfortunately, we are also not like dolphins and bonobos: These animals have recreational sex with many different partners, but unlike us, they do not exhibit emotions such as jealousy - they are not genetically coded to compete aggressively for females like humans are. As far as our social behaviors go, we are probably more akin to lions and canines than some of our closer primate relatives.
In a primitive environment such as a tribal, hunter-gatherer society, emotions like jealousy and aggression might have helped stronger males win over females and hence reproduce more fit offspring. But here comes the problem: As society became larger and more complex, emotions such as jealousy and aggression become destructive rather than constructive to the overall survival of the group, because such emotions are disruptive to the order of the society. I believe this is the reason the concept of "marriage" came into being - by forcing a male and female into a social contract that binds them, they will no longer have excuses to resort to emotions such jealousy and aggression - if they do, the society looks down upon them and punishes them.
This solution works for most people, but it is not perfect; and I think people need to start re-examining the whole concept and define what "love" truly means to them. For one, the concept of marriage, and the religious associations that followed - have corrupted our mentality regarding sex. For a very long time, sex has been regarded as a taboo subject, something you simply don't talk about because it is "dirty" and "sinful". Young people who had sexual urges were looked down upon as if they did something wrong. Couples who engaged in sexual activity before marriage are made a scandal of - and even now, we still get worked up over "Who cheated on who" all the time.
On the other end of the extreme, there are people who rebelled against the religious oppression of sexuality and became... too wild; using "we are animals and sex is in our nature" as an excuse to hump everything that moves. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these people lack the maturity and rationality to control the emotional repercussions of sleeping around. They often become extremely selfish, self-entitled people who end up falling back to that very basic male instinct - wanting to have sex with every female (or male, for homosexuals) possible, while not willing to allow these females the same privilege. If any of these females sleep with another male, a jealousy rage storm ensues. These males therefore end up being extremely destructive to society in general as well as to their sexual partners.
I will be quite honest - I see nothing wrong with polyamory: as long as females get the same right to multiple partnership as males, and both sexes have the mental maturity to control their negative emotions (jealousy, aggression), I frankly don't see how a polyamorous relationship can't work out. Rational people with positive outlooks on life should easily be able to keep such a relationship healthy. However, if a couple decides to remain monogamous, it should be done by their choice alone. Monogamy shouldn't be something that's enforced by external pressures and societal forces - and really, if even one of the partners secretly don't agree with the arrangement or wish to make the promise to be exclusive, do you think societal forces will really help? Even if social pressures somehow keeps the guy from cheating, do you think he'll remain happy and satisfied in the relationship? Sooner or later, those instinctive desires will come out, and just end up hurting those around him unnecessarily. Not everyone is meant to settle down; and not everyone is meant to handle a monogamous arrangement.
I do want to make it clear, I am not proposing that guys should all go sleeping around. Personally, I regard sex as something special - it is as much an emotional experience as it is physical; I cannot have sex with someone unless we share a high degree of trust and friendship (if not more). I won't despise someone for having sex only for physical pleasures; however, I do imagine most people have at least some degree of emotional response when they have sex, even if they weren't looking for that to begin with. And like I stated before, I don't think most people are civil-minded enough and will end up hurting themselves emotionally if they just sleep around. They will end up feeling confused, jealous, or worse.
I will say, though... I do wish humans were more like dolphins and bonobos. Yes, they have sex with multiple partners - perhaps that makes you feel like the value of romance is depreciated. But here's the thing: Jealousy and aggression isn't an issue with them - not just in sexual relationships, but in their overall society. They are much more peaceful species than we - because when it comes down to it, isn't our loyalty to family, ethnicity, and nationality pretty much based on our desire for sexual competition? We humans constantly desire to establish superiority over other people: "Our family line is better than yours", "Our race is superior", "Our country is stronger than yours". If you look at this behavior from an evolutionary perspective, it is pretty clear that it is a mechanism to promote competition; and we have come to a stage in our civilization where such behaviors are more destructive than constructive. Humanity at this point needs to become a cohesive entity to solve some serious global problems; we no longer have the luxury to engage in petty squabbles.
This is the reason I am so vehemently against nationalism and warfare. I am anti-military, not in the way that I look down on people who serve in the military - in the present world state, I admit military forces are a necessary evil. But I do wish a day will come when military is no longer required; when we no longer find the need to kill one another over our differences, and can look back to our long history of bloodshed and feel ashamed rather than entitled or justified.
As hippie as this may sound, I do prefer a world that makes love rather than war. It still confounds me as to why popular media (especially conservative channels) always makes such a huge fuss over sexuality and nudity in movies while violence is by and large a-okay. While I do not much care for meaningless, superficial sex, it is infinitely less destructive than pure violence - is it not?
-----
"As long as there have been humans, we have searched for our place in the Cosmos. Where are we? Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star, lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions, and by the depth of our answers. We embarked on our journey to the stars with a question first framed in the childhood of our species, and in each generation asked anew with undiminished wonder: What are the stars? Exploration is in our nature. We began as wanderers - and we are wanderers, still. We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean. We are ready at last to set sail to the stars." - Carl Sagan, on Space Exploration.
-----
"There would be no more big questions, and no more answers. Never again a love for a child. No descendents to remember us and be proud. No more voyages to the stars. No more songs from the Earth. I saw East Africa, and thought, a few million years ago, we humans took our first steps there. Our brains grew and changed, the old parts began to be guided by the new parts. And this made us human; with compassion, foresight, and reason. But instead we listened to the reptilian voice within us, counseling fear, territoriality, aggression. We accepted the product of science. We rejected its methods. May be the reptiles will evolve intelligence once more. Perhaps one day, there will be civilizations again on Earth. There will be life, there will be intelligence. But there will be no more humans. Not here, not on a billion worlds." - Carl Sagan, on the scenario of Nuclear War.
I had to explain how I viewed romantic relationships, and it stirred up a lot of old thoughts.
I for one do not follow social conventions, and I do not believe in marriage - at least, not in the sense as it's popularly defined. To many, marriage is a holy religious bond - a sacred promise witnessed by some divine being(s). To others, marriage may serve a more practical purpose - providing legal benefits and, possibly, protection. To others still, marriage is simply a promise of love made between two people.
I belong to that last group - and I personally don't see the need to hold a huge public ceremony with a priest and witnesses and having all my friends and families be there. I do not question the love I share with my Lady, and she doesn't question mine - for us, that is enough. We may love one another, but it is our mutual wish that we remain free and independent - that does not mean we are in an "open" relationship; it simply means I do not wish to restrict her freedom in life. If she chooses to be emotionally or physically intimate with someone other than me, that is within her rights - I neither encourage nor discourage the behavior; and if something like that happens, I won't view it as a sign of "disloyalty". At present, we have chosen to be exclusive to one another - the key point is, it has to be by our own choice, not by external pressure. What I can't stand is the way people regard marriage... as if it a magical word, that somehow "getting married" changes everything. The evidence is pretty clear in our culture - that's why guys have bachelor parties before getting married, or why women push for marriage while guys prefer to put it off. That whole mentality that before you are married you are allowed to horse around and somehow "getting married" changes that just comes off entirely superficial and phony to me. I simply don't see the point for someone to [i]demand[/i] loyalty/sexual exclusiveness if the other person doesn't wish for it.
First off, humans are animals. Unlike the small minority of animals who are genetically coded to be monogamous, humans are not coded for it. If we were, emotions like jealousy and sexual aggression would be completely redundant. Human males have the tendency to "cheat" on their partners precisely because we are genetically coded to mate with as many females as possible; even though our society and culture has evolved, we still carry that evolutionary baggage.
Unfortunately, we are also not like dolphins and bonobos: These animals have recreational sex with many different partners, but unlike us, they do not exhibit emotions such as jealousy - they are not genetically coded to compete aggressively for females like humans are. As far as our social behaviors go, we are probably more akin to lions and canines than some of our closer primate relatives.
In a primitive environment such as a tribal, hunter-gatherer society, emotions like jealousy and aggression might have helped stronger males win over females and hence reproduce more fit offspring. But here comes the problem: As society became larger and more complex, emotions such as jealousy and aggression become destructive rather than constructive to the overall survival of the group, because such emotions are disruptive to the order of the society. I believe this is the reason the concept of "marriage" came into being - by forcing a male and female into a social contract that binds them, they will no longer have excuses to resort to emotions such jealousy and aggression - if they do, the society looks down upon them and punishes them.
This solution works for most people, but it is not perfect; and I think people need to start re-examining the whole concept and define what "love" truly means to them. For one, the concept of marriage, and the religious associations that followed - have corrupted our mentality regarding sex. For a very long time, sex has been regarded as a taboo subject, something you simply don't talk about because it is "dirty" and "sinful". Young people who had sexual urges were looked down upon as if they did something wrong. Couples who engaged in sexual activity before marriage are made a scandal of - and even now, we still get worked up over "Who cheated on who" all the time.
On the other end of the extreme, there are people who rebelled against the religious oppression of sexuality and became... too wild; using "we are animals and sex is in our nature" as an excuse to hump everything that moves. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these people lack the maturity and rationality to control the emotional repercussions of sleeping around. They often become extremely selfish, self-entitled people who end up falling back to that very basic male instinct - wanting to have sex with every female (or male, for homosexuals) possible, while not willing to allow these females the same privilege. If any of these females sleep with another male, a jealousy rage storm ensues. These males therefore end up being extremely destructive to society in general as well as to their sexual partners.
I will be quite honest - I see nothing wrong with polyamory: as long as females get the same right to multiple partnership as males, and both sexes have the mental maturity to control their negative emotions (jealousy, aggression), I frankly don't see how a polyamorous relationship can't work out. Rational people with positive outlooks on life should easily be able to keep such a relationship healthy. However, if a couple decides to remain monogamous, it should be done by their choice alone. Monogamy shouldn't be something that's enforced by external pressures and societal forces - and really, if even one of the partners secretly don't agree with the arrangement or wish to make the promise to be exclusive, do you think societal forces will really help? Even if social pressures somehow keeps the guy from cheating, do you think he'll remain happy and satisfied in the relationship? Sooner or later, those instinctive desires will come out, and just end up hurting those around him unnecessarily. Not everyone is meant to settle down; and not everyone is meant to handle a monogamous arrangement.
I do want to make it clear, I am not proposing that guys should all go sleeping around. Personally, I regard sex as something special - it is as much an emotional experience as it is physical; I cannot have sex with someone unless we share a high degree of trust and friendship (if not more). I won't despise someone for having sex only for physical pleasures; however, I do imagine most people have at least some degree of emotional response when they have sex, even if they weren't looking for that to begin with. And like I stated before, I don't think most people are civil-minded enough and will end up hurting themselves emotionally if they just sleep around. They will end up feeling confused, jealous, or worse.
I will say, though... I do wish humans were more like dolphins and bonobos. Yes, they have sex with multiple partners - perhaps that makes you feel like the value of romance is depreciated. But here's the thing: Jealousy and aggression isn't an issue with them - not just in sexual relationships, but in their overall society. They are much more peaceful species than we - because when it comes down to it, isn't our loyalty to family, ethnicity, and nationality pretty much based on our desire for sexual competition? We humans constantly desire to establish superiority over other people: "Our family line is better than yours", "Our race is superior", "Our country is stronger than yours". If you look at this behavior from an evolutionary perspective, it is pretty clear that it is a mechanism to promote competition; and we have come to a stage in our civilization where such behaviors are more destructive than constructive. Humanity at this point needs to become a cohesive entity to solve some serious global problems; we no longer have the luxury to engage in petty squabbles.
This is the reason I am so vehemently against nationalism and warfare. I am anti-military, not in the way that I look down on people who serve in the military - in the present world state, I admit military forces are a necessary evil. But I do wish a day will come when military is no longer required; when we no longer find the need to kill one another over our differences, and can look back to our long history of bloodshed and feel ashamed rather than entitled or justified.
As hippie as this may sound, I do prefer a world that makes love rather than war. It still confounds me as to why popular media (especially conservative channels) always makes such a huge fuss over sexuality and nudity in movies while violence is by and large a-okay. While I do not much care for meaningless, superficial sex, it is infinitely less destructive than pure violence - is it not?
-----
"As long as there have been humans, we have searched for our place in the Cosmos. Where are we? Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star, lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions, and by the depth of our answers. We embarked on our journey to the stars with a question first framed in the childhood of our species, and in each generation asked anew with undiminished wonder: What are the stars? Exploration is in our nature. We began as wanderers - and we are wanderers, still. We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean. We are ready at last to set sail to the stars." - Carl Sagan, on Space Exploration.
-----
"There would be no more big questions, and no more answers. Never again a love for a child. No descendents to remember us and be proud. No more voyages to the stars. No more songs from the Earth. I saw East Africa, and thought, a few million years ago, we humans took our first steps there. Our brains grew and changed, the old parts began to be guided by the new parts. And this made us human; with compassion, foresight, and reason. But instead we listened to the reptilian voice within us, counseling fear, territoriality, aggression. We accepted the product of science. We rejected its methods. May be the reptiles will evolve intelligence once more. Perhaps one day, there will be civilizations again on Earth. There will be life, there will be intelligence. But there will be no more humans. Not here, not on a billion worlds." - Carl Sagan, on the scenario of Nuclear War.