Sep 9, 2010
commented on So What You're Saying Is That No One Should Be Monogamous?
This is FAR from a pop-sci book. and regarding 19, you REALLY need to read the book. Your entire argument is uneducated and irrelevant.
Okay, I think the people posting the most offended and retaliatory words here should understand this: This book is not trying to change your mind about weather or not YOU should be monogamous. The book and it's authors are NOT condemning monogamy as wrong. They are NOT stating unequivocally that humans WERE not and therefore CANNOT be successfully monogamous. This book simply is NOT trying to subvert, or destroy your way of life, so you can all just relax a little.
For you Polyamorists: I really don't think the point of this book is to justify a lifestyle choice. It is to further explore and discover both truths and falsehoods within what we've all been taught to believe about ourselves.
For anyone who's used the term Polygamy in any of their posts, that really doesn't enter into it. It is addressed in the book as an innately non-human behavior, but you'll have to actually read the book to understand that.
Sex At Dawn is a truly brave and brilliant book, daring to challenge the most ingrained preconceptions that we have about ourselves and our socio-sexual behaviors throughout our history and prehistory, exposing an astounding amount of ignorance and misinformation that we have all been raised with as "Truth," while approaching the subject of sexuality and human interaction from a uniquely enlightened and unburdened anthropological perspective. If knowledge is power, than this book is an enormous powerhouse, full of tools we can benefit immeasurably from in attempting to understanding ourselves and each other.
That being said, this book did not change my mind, or even raise new questions about how I feel about relationship dynamics, or monogamy. It merely provided extremely compelling evidence that there might actually be reasons that monogamy is difficult for some people. And through the very eloquent presentation of meticulously collected and impeccably well documented data, shed further, much needed light on what has always seemed to me to be a dubiously clouded, remarkably suspect and largely under-discussed school of thought.