At the highest level, monogamy works like other social institutions--it maintains order in a community and fosters stable family units. Monogamous couples produce children and perpetuate the human race in an orderly and manageable way. Without monogamy, would the streets teem with illegitimate children and anarchy reign? Probably not. Exclusive relationships between two individuals serve a personal function in addition to a social one. Humans are compelled to a certain degree to hole up with just one mate: it provides security, ensures that the children will survive, and is emotionally much easier to maintain than polygamy.
But what about the people who aren't monogamous? Here comes the hackneyed reference to an age-old double standard, the often-repeated belief that society "allows" men to be promiscuous and sexually exploratory, but frowns upon women with similar sexualities. Men are nearly expected to be sexually uninhibited before entering a permanent monogamous relationship, but women must be virginal and untarnished by sex. On one hand this is appalling (and essentially impossible, considering numbers): if a woman wants to have multiple partners and live outside the norm, she should stock up on rubbers and never look back. By allowing social norms to have any weight in her life she's perpetuating them, even if she doesn't intend to.
On the other hand, the adage is true. Sexuality defines gender. Regardless of orientation, a person's sexual activity and persona delineate gender. The most womanly example of a woman--or at least the most favorable--has saved herself for The One. She is a virgin and her sexuality belongs to her mate. Yet the standard definition of a man hardly sees virginity as a priority: men have the freedom to have libidos within and outside of monogamy. A woman who decides to be sexual outside of monogamy is less of a woman. That is, less of a suitable counterpart to a man.
Monogamy enforces gendered roles and specific sexual roles, because it is an institution that promotes binaristic genders for the sake of creating "stable" pairs.
I completely agree with what you said about how society judges people who don't conform to social standards for normative relationships. Monogamy is an ancient notion designed to protect the ancient lineages of ancient men. Who's to say we, as a new generation, can't challenge the origins of monogamy and question the reasons behind it? I agree that monogamy does enforce binaristic gender roles since monogamy only allows for two people to become involved in a relationship. Who's to say we can't challenge this as well?
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, love your choice of title. And I think the most important part of your post lies in the way you describe men and women within their sexual and gender roles. A woman is not allowed to be sexually promiscuous, yet men can express themselves sexually as much as they want. This is evident in media, music, and movies all the time. It is looked upon as favorable when a guy is "big pimpin'" and not committed to a monogamous marriage, yet if a woman were to do the same thing, she would be frowned upon as "loose," "unchaste," "whorish," etc. which is not okay. And stability is something I talked about as well, which is also really important when it comes to the way society values monogamy.
ReplyDeleteAs tragic as it is, this is totally true! A good friend of mine once told me that "A dude who sleeps with 10 chicks is a stud, but a chick who sleeps with 10 dudes is a slut." Perhaps one of the main reasons is the fact that women can get pregnant and men cannot (one only has to look to Teen Mom). I know birth control and condoms can prevent this, but sometimes it happens and before you know it, the girl has a kid. A bastard child goes against the stability that monogamy provides. It is perhaps due to this "baggage" that society frowns on women being as sexually independent as men.
ReplyDelete