Is Monogamy Deviant? - Reflections on a Discussion
I was pretty clear that the question Is Monogamy Deviant? had a one word answer. No. Yet if Stewart Laing, a serious director-designer, and Dr Helena Cronin, evolutionary biologist, were ready to discuss, I’d be there with my ill-conceived opinions.
The discussion was being run by The Skinny and the ESRC Genomics Research Network, a body dedicated to discussion of how scientific advances (particularly relating to genetics) translate into the lives of non-scientists. It was tied into Laing’s production of An Argument About Sex, being staged at the Tramway at the time, which had wowed me with its daring design and intellectualism. I was bringing the deviant perspective. My deviance is celibacy.
Steve Sturdy - a medical historian by training - chaired us, kicking off with a few thoughts on the partnership between The Skinny, the ESRC and Tramway. Then Laing took over, and talked about the sex roles represented in Argument, as well as movingly about his own sexuality. He concluded that monogamy is not deviant.
Dr Cronin came next. She pulled evidence from nature and natural selection that humans are designed to be monogamous, with the odd bit on the side to help keep the gene pool fresh. Essentially, by examining clues like testicle size, humans seem to fit between promiscuous monkeys and chaste gorillas. We are designed for a single relationship, with the odd extra-monogamous affair, to keep the gene pool fresh. Monogamy was not deviant to Cronin either.
As Robert Walton of the RSAMD would point out from the audience in the question session, we were getting pretty cosy. I had expected to disagree with an evolutionary biologist. But I flung around my few facts – concluding that the attempts to make homosexuality 'normative' included the legalisation of a monogamous union - and hoped no-one would ask me to talk about science.
They did. A sociologist questioned the idea that there were only two genders: there are at least five gender categories. It seems plausible that gender, as discussed in sociology, is not the same thing as sex in biology. His other point, that a recent book proved that the male and female brain are the same, Dr Cronin denied. She pointed out that the biological differences do fit men and women for different roles, at least in terms of nature. Monogamy in human society has evolved to create a stable relationship, for the benefit of children.
Furthermore, she noted, love itself is a clear example of adaptation in favour of monogamy, with physical symptoms from pheromone release to weight loss.
When a polyandrous member of the audience presented her lifestyle to us, Dr Cronin was disbelieving. It struck me however as a marvellous example of variation, the human potential to explore possibilities. But since evolutionary psychology works on general trends, an individual anecdote - albeit beautifully expressed and brave – does little more than highlight the possibilities consciousness gives us.
What did emerge, most interestingly, was the spectrum of thoughts that exist on monogamy. While monogamous relationships can contain 'deviant' sexuality, society continues to regard monogamy as normative, not deviant. Most convincingly, Dr Cronin's arguments and use of scientific evidence demonstrated how our modern, cultural monogamy has evolved from our instinctive natures.