ARE WE MONOGAMOUS?
_____________________________________

    The 'we' in the title refers to male and female humans. The word monogamous ('mono' means single, 'gamos' means marriage, that is, one marriage).
    Personally, I am using the word monogamous to describe the notion that once paired, human  partners stay married for life; that, (according to Western civilisation, at least), we should. The operative word is 'should' because it implies more than it says: 'should' is an invented term that implies that according to human rules, it must, which implies also a notion that it is a 'natural' law. 'Natural laws' are, of course, inventions of Man which may  or may certainly not apply in our concept of life as we perceive it.    
    The fact is, that partners, most often, do not stay paired for life. Some other animals apparently do. These other animals are not subject to the mores of our society, however.
    I do not personally believe that we must remain with a 'chosen' partner for the rest of our lives because some-one else says so. That 'some-one else' being the person/persons who deem to control our lives). I believe that if a couple decide by virtue of their relationship (and its development) to stay together, that is their choice and that's fine. It does not, however, mean that all couples need to be locked into a partnership that is not working or is clearly not viable in other ways.
    What we need to do, is to rethink what we are involving ourselves in and make other plans (other than marriage) that satisfy the  individuals. The notion that Society is the major player in this game of life, is incorrect. Society is made up of individuals. What those individuals do, affects the society, not the other way round. (Controllers, of course, would not like to see this happen!)
    The rationale behind this, is that for some reasons, others have decided what individuals should do. This gets back to the argument regarding controllers, (a point I keep coming back to in my articles).
    The whole idea of marriage, in my view, is to tie two people together for an extended time (usually life) for the benefit of others, not that of the couple. It is around this, that the  ludicrous nature of the marriage ceremony is perpetrated.
    The partnership of two people should be their decision alone, whatever the polarity of views on 'right' and 'wrong'. A partnership is based on the physical needs and wants of the individuals, according to their biological make-up. There is some, or more physical attraction and the satisfaction of the urge for intercourse. All perfectly natural and how we came to be designed (for want of a better word).
    As yet, the word 'love' does not come into the equation. I have written at length on that subject (see Article: About Love). Love is something which grows between two people (and can conversely grow out again). This, I submit is all quite natural. Love is not a 'thing' to be defined. It is a set of feelings which can fluctuate like any other emotion. It's: I love you NOW, at this moment in time. That moment of time can be extended as long as the emotion is felt. At other moments this may not be true. Love is, therefore, a continuum is mistaken. This continuum between negative and positive with no fixed point in between and infinity at either end is a nonsense.
    It seems that since we are born, we are controlled by others' ideas about how we should behave. This is not all negative. No-one gets a choice as to whether s/he should be born. Also at the same time, we learn to control our environment for ourselves. But as we grow, we find that more and more, we are subjected to the whims and fancies of others, that have nothing to do with our wants and needs as individuals. We seem always to be 'told' what to do (sometimes, 'asked') under some threat or coercion; even, supposedly,  'in our best interests'!
    I firmly reject all these notions. Even as a small boy, I rejected these things. I did not know why then but I know now that controllers have never served me in any shape or form that was positive.
     Controllers are sometimes subtle about the way they draw you into their scheme of things. The idea of love as a reason for marriage came about during the Victorian era. Before that, marriage was some sort of business arrangement for other purposes (even the begetting of children). This, of course, is perfectly all right but it has created a more complex situation with which we must deal.
    What is marriage? As far as I am concerned it is an invention concocted by certain people to meet their own ends (not the ones to be married). Wrapped in a nebulous cloud of mush by the controllers who invented the Church (in any of its forms), and who also invented a Supreme Being onto which all manner of nasty human behaviours could be blamed*, we have the marriage ceremony. This ceremony is nurtured by the political dictators because it suits them. The idea is that people can be controlled better (and a point picked up by manufacturers and so on, who make millions from this fiasco) if they are locked into this idea (perpetrating the monogamy concept) of marriage. A relationship, whatever it is, has nothing to do with a ceremony, it's a purely personal thing.
    Despite what other people say, individuals should be allowed to do what they want. They will do it anyway (despite occasional lapses into being conned into being controlled) and no laws made can redress this situation. Rules OK, Laws KO. Rules are self-regulating. Laws are made for politicians and lawyers. Controllers do not want self-regulation, that is why they bear arms and create the notion of Right of Might, Right of God and so forth. (see Article: Rules and Laws)
    I have made it my life's work (if I like to look back, so far. It was not a conscious effort.) to be what I am. I have never made any pretensions about the way I have behaved. I am well liked. I have a lot of friends. I never had to buy a friend yet. Perfect? No pretensions here, either. Just me as I am. You draw those to you who are like. You can make mistakes about people but that is only because you have faltered and sub-consciously agreed to be controlled by them. Big mistake. I made it.
    Maybe I should write and article on God The Supreme Scapegoat. The notion of God is a question of belief. We cannot, as yet, either prove for or against its existence, so there is no point trying, if that is our sole purpose in life. At the end of our lives, we might find the answer. It is a question of semantics.



Return to CONTENTS page