Promiscuity Is Like Never Reading Past The First Page. Monogamy Is Like Reading The Same Book Over And Over.
– Mason Cooley
The headline says, Healthwise,
Regular Sexual Activity Is Good For Your Health
The numerous practical physical and emotional health benefits of regular roll in the hay is not in doubt.
Just go online, and discover.
There are several medical reports warning men to have regular sexual intercourse to reduce their likelihood of prostate cancer in later years (many doctors recommend up to three times a week).
Have a look…..
How are monks and Reverend Fathers supposed to keep up with this, for example? It can only mean these admonitions should be taken with grains of salt, or perhaps the Reverend Fathers masturbate regularly or have clandestine sexual liaisons.
If none of the above is the case, then how come they are not mostly dying of prostate cancer?
Most religionists would tell you masturbation is a sin against the temple of God (your body) and fornication is not allowed.
Apparently being chaste could be dangerous to your future prostate health, no? What if someone marries late, has a frigid wife who only capitulates to your sexual advances once a month? Or those Reverend Fathers earlier mentioned? If you decide to go help yourself to some, outside, that would be adultery, frowned upon deeply by most societies.
Which way out?
The physical health issue apart, how about the emotional aspect of men’s sex life? If sex promotes bonding between couples, supposedly not enough or lack of it would have the opposite effect?
It is widely known that women lose their appetite for sex as they get older while men hardly lose their exuberance (willingness) as they age . Hence women are wont to develop all sorts of imaginative excuses to deny the randy husband their conjugal right…
The internet is replete with married men complaining about their wife’s lack of (enough) interest in sex.
If you are a married man with a frigid wife who never ever makes the first move, and sees sexual intimacy as a chore, your religion doesn’t permit maturation, and adultery is a mortal sin, how do you ensure you have good prostate health (given the physical need for regular frequent sexual detoxification)?
This leads us to the next logical question:
Is monogamy in the human race hypocritical, or unsustainable for most men?
Could the above explain (partially) why a lot of men have the tendency to engage in extramarital affairs – along with the diminishing female interest – as the marriage advances (along with their own age)?
Is monogamy natural to man?
Does marriage feel like a cage where you are expected to be faithful to a spouse (or spouses), while the natural urge is saying, go after that hot woman giving you the green light? Denying, suppressing hunger is not quite the same as the absence of hunger.
This question has long been the subject of discussions where conflicting opinions clash. Some evolutionists believe that living as a couple is an adaptive advantage for humans. They oppose those who see monogamy as a cultural contrapment condemning us to perpetual conflict with our biological / natural predispositions. In the wild, polygyny (the association of a single male with several females) is common.
Since only spermatozoïdes from one male is needed to fertilize an egg, each male has the ability to fertilize a large number of females. Thus, they are freer to roam!
Conversely, a female gains nothing to have the sexual partners since a single male is enough to fertilize the eggs that it produces with each episode of reproduction.
How can we explain, however, that monogamy is present, albeit to a lesser degree, in a wide range of species, from invertebrates to vertebrates – while humans seek to struggle with this ? In termites, for example, colonies are founded by a single breeding pair. Why is polygyny not the only model of association? In fact, in several species, males are monogamous for economic reasons, since the resources essential for survival are not distributed in such a way as to allow the grouping of females. When resources are scarce in the environment, females are forced to disperse in order to exploit them. It then becomes impossible for a male to control, in front of his rivals, a space sufficiently rich in resources to accommodate all females and offspring to come.
Males can therefore only be polygynous if the environmental conditions permit. On the other hand, certain anatomical constraints can enforce monogamy during evolution.
This explains why most birds are socially monogamous, compared to very very few mammals. This difference is easily explained: in mammals… gestation in the mother’s womb and breastfeeding alleviates / excuses males’ contribution to parental care. For birds, it is quite different: if the male does not participate in the incubation of the eggs, there is every chance that the brood will fail, for example when the female will have to abandon it to feed. The success of reproduction is then at stake.
Clearly, in humans, to provide an auspicious environment for offspring to thrive, commitment to the relationship is very important. With the polygamous tendency inherent in men, and most women taking offense at a straying spouse, the number of marriages that hit the rocks have been skyrocketing at an alarming rate, in recent times.
How then do men tame their high libidinous nature, thereby ensuring a stable home for well behaved offsprings to thrive,? Perhaps the women need to bend over more (pun intended) since sex never killed anyone?
How do we appease the raging hormones in men, keep their prostate healthy while not stepping on any religious or societal corns?