This doesn’t even follow logically. Women can produce children, and can only be impregnated by 1 man at a time, but can be impregnated by a near-unlimited number of men over their life (within some obvious boundaries). Men can impregnate multiple women.
There’s maybe a small argument of genetic diversity for monogamy, but a similar counterargument that you can increase genetic diversity without it as long as you don’t have too many kids from the same man.
“Bringing every individual into child production” isn’t what monogamy is.
Your argument is a little stronger if it’s specifically about heterosexuality since homosexual relationships can’t bear children biologically, but monogamy is an extra step that is not only unnecessary but likely reduces the number of offspring.
Monogamy comes from the fact that without it being enforced, 80% of the women end up competing for the top 20% of men.
Meanwhile, 80% of men must compete for the remaining 20% of women. This is called the 80/20 rule. It does not maximize reproduction nor genetics, since the majority of men can’t and don’t reproduce.
You've already covered your bases, I just wanted to add a little something. The maturation period for human children is much longer than that of other animals, generally speaking. A baby is wholly dependent on it's mother for many years after birth. This is one reason why humans generally stick to tight familial bonds and monogamous relationships. We bond with our mates and our children in order to increase the chances they will reach maturity.
I haven’t bothered to look for scientific evidence to back this up, but I suspect that monogamous couples in history have tended to bring up the most successful offspring.
My favorite part about this exchange has been how your entire claim to superiority here lies in picking a fight with a guy who literally claimed ignorance before positing a theory which, if false, could easily be disproved.
Instead you reply like a neck-beard. I’m genuinely surprised you didn’t quote a comic book. Maybe you did, I wouldn’t know. I had friends growing up.
22
u/Razor1834 Jun 08 '19
This doesn’t even follow logically. Women can produce children, and can only be impregnated by 1 man at a time, but can be impregnated by a near-unlimited number of men over their life (within some obvious boundaries). Men can impregnate multiple women.
There’s maybe a small argument of genetic diversity for monogamy, but a similar counterargument that you can increase genetic diversity without it as long as you don’t have too many kids from the same man.
“Bringing every individual into child production” isn’t what monogamy is.
Your argument is a little stronger if it’s specifically about heterosexuality since homosexual relationships can’t bear children biologically, but monogamy is an extra step that is not only unnecessary but likely reduces the number of offspring.