Did you ever stop to consider how peculiar sex is? Despite being a brief activity for many, it consumes a significant portion of our thoughts. Beyond just the act itself, the surrounding elements—dating, nurturing romantic partnerships, and raising families—further highlight how much of our lives revolve around sex.

James Brown famously sang, “This is a man’s world, but it wouldn’t be nuthin’ without a woman,” suggesting that much of what men achieve is driven by the desire to attract women. This notion resonates because it underscores our preoccupation with sexual and romantic pursuits.

However, we often struggle in navigating relationships. Psychologist Erich Fromm noted, “There is hardly any activity, any enterprise, which is started with such tremendous hopes and expectations, which fails so regularly as love.” His words ring true, as love often falters despite our efforts.

We devote extensive time contemplating our sexual and romantic lives, yet rarely reflect on the types of relationships we’re naturally predisposed to form. What if understanding this could shed light on our capacity to love?

Non/Monogamy? In exploring the essence of love, various perspectives have emerged:

• Monogamists advocate for lifelong partnerships, believing that our purpose is to build enduring bonds and raise children, despite the prevalence of infidelity and open relationships that challenge this ideal.
• Conversely, polyamorists reject monogamy, viewing it as restrictive and unnatural. They often identify as realists who, after experiencing traditional relationships, have recognized a void in their emotional lives.
• The lesser-discussed group comprises serial monogamists, who tend to form a series of intense, short-lived relationships characterized by passionate connections that quickly fade, leading them to seek new romantic encounters.

Among those who study this phenomenon is anthropologist Helen Fisher, whose research in the 1980s across 58 societies revealed that humans typically have children every four years, a concept known as the interbirth interval. Fisher proposed that we may have evolved to forge strong romantic attachments for approximately four years before the intensity of love diminishes.

Supporting this idea, evidence shows that the four-year interbirth interval aligns with when children can transition to solid foods and are at a critical survival age. Fisher theorized that our evolution favored temporary unions designed to produce and nurture offspring until they could thrive independently.

While this may seem disheartening for those who favor lifelong partnerships, enduring relationships do exist worldwide. What insights do these couples possess about sustaining love? What are their secrets?

The Genetics of Non/Monogamy As you reflect on the previous section, consider where you might fit within these relationship models. Some individuals readily identify with one perspective or another, while others remain uncertain.

Research indicates that our tendencies toward monogamy or non-monogamy may be influenced by genetics. The RS3 334 gene was the first identified as related to monogamous behavior, and subsequent studies have uncovered 24 additional genes associated with animal mating strategies.

This suggests that our inclinations might not be straightforward. Rather than simply debating monogamy versus non-monogamy, we might need to consider the spectrum of long-term versus short-term relationships.

Long & Short Term Love Do we desire the stability associated with lifelong partnerships, or are we more inclined toward the fleeting connections found in serial monogamy or polyamory?

A 2014 review by Heather Morton and Boris Gorzalka examined vast amounts of research on sexuality and relationships, aiming to understand the significance of new sexual partners. They found that partner novelty significantly impacts sexual arousal, a phenomenon evident across species.

The Coolidge Effect describes how males often lose interest in a single partner over time but become reinvigorated with the introduction of new partners. This pattern is prevalent in many species, including humans, indicating that our capacity for enduring passion may be overstated.

The authors of the study contrasted two theories regarding human mating strategies:

• Sexual Strategies Theory posits that individuals may lean toward short-term or long-term relationships based on personal interests. Generally, men tend to favor short-term engagements while women lean toward long-term commitments.
• Attachment Fertility Theory suggests that long-term relationships evolved to facilitate the demanding process of raising children.

Upon reviewing the evidence, the authors concluded that the Sexual Strategies Theory more accurately reflects human sexual behavior. They observed that short-term relationships are more common, aligning with Fisher's earlier hypotheses.

Overall, this suggests that humans may not be inherently suited for monogamy. Cultural norms significantly shape our relationships, and even then, many individuals still seek connections outside traditional frameworks.

It's rare to find someone who claims to have formed a lifelong romantic bond without ever feeling attraction to others. However, this doesn't negate the existence of those who are more inclined toward monogamous relationships, as genetic predispositions can influence individual preferences.

Ultimately, we are all responsible for charting our paths in love. Understanding that monogamy is not the sole option—and perhaps the least natural—opens the door to exploring various relational forms. Humans have evolved to be adaptable, thriving in diverse environments.

So, why limit ourselves to one approach to love?

Thank you for reading. If you found this insightful, feel free to check out the related story below and subscribe to my Substack, The Science of Sex.