Do you believe in monogomy?

[Nikki Sahagin]

Perhaps putting this in the Marriage and Life Partnerships section is a clear indicator of what sort of responses I shall receive but I cannot post a variant of these question in each of the forums!

 

Do you believe in monogamy? Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime? Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

It seems to me a lot of people who enter into long-term relationships end up cheating and being unfaithful because they constantly wonder what else is out there and what opportunities they may be missing out on. I think the media has also capitalised on this need. For instance, people on tv and generally in the media are quite predominantly young, beautiful, sexually active, readily available and perhaps most appealingly - disposable. They represent an outlet for human lust and desire. But does this intensify the natural urge to go out there and do it in your real life? I personally think it does. As in many people who I feel wouldn't otherwise behave promiscuously or casually with regard to sex, feel that they NEED to, because the media says thats how people behave i.e. I know a lot of teenagers who LIE about their sexual encounters or have admitted they have had sexual encounters purely because they thought that's what they SHOULD be doing - teenagers are meant to sleep around, sow their wild outs and if you don't, you'll regret it!

 

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

[lovestruck818]

Perhaps putting this in the Marriage and Life Partnerships section is a clear indicator of what sort of responses I shall receive but I cannot post a variant of these question in each of the forums!

 

Do you believe in monogamy? Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime? Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

It seems to me a lot of people who enter into long-term relationships end up cheating and being unfaithful because they constantly wonder what else is out there and what opportunities they may be missing out on. I think the media has also capitalised on this need. For instance, people on tv and generally in the media are quite predominantly young, beautiful, sexually active, readily available and perhaps most appealingly - disposable. They represent an outlet for human lust and desire. But does this intensify the natural urge to go out there and do it in your real life? I personally think it does. As in many people who I feel wouldn't otherwise behave promiscuously or casually with regard to sex, feel that they NEED to, because the media says thats how people behave i.e. I know a lot of teenagers who LIE about their sexual encounters or have admitted they have had sexual encounters purely because they thought that's what they SHOULD be doing - teenagers are meant to sleep around, sow their wild outs and if you don't, you'll regret it!

 

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

I think monogamy is only possible with the person who is ultimately right for you. I have been in relationships where I have thought about other people, or I have dumped him for someone else, where i should have been only thinking about my boyfriend at the time. I didn't cheat on him, but I believe 100% monogamy is only faithful with the one who is right. The underlying reason why people cheat is b/c they are relationships that are unfitting.

[michelangelo]

I think it is possible, but rarely achieved because of character issues/low impulse control, etc.

 

One thing I don't agree with what you wrote is the idea that media is why people have multiple sexual relationships inside/outside their supposed monogamous relationships.

 

Lusting after someone is a feeling that predates our technological society.

[sxyNYCcpl]

Do you believe in monogamy? Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime? Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

No, I do not.

 

If you've ever read any of my posts, you may know that my wife and I routinely invite other people to participate with us sexually. It works for us, but it requires a certain mindset and is not something that I would recommend that most people try. However, we do believe in faithfulness, honesty, and respecting each others boundaries whatever those may be.

 

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

One thing I am curious about but have not yet come to any concrete opinions about is whether or not sexually exclusivity is a learned behavior, or if it's something that is an inherent trait to the human condition. Given the propensity of humans to cheat on relationships, that would imply that it's learned as our natural instinct is to not be exclusive,. Then again, except people for who choose consensual non-monogamy (which I would guess is 10-15% at most), and the few who practice outright polygamy, all human societies have monogamy and sexual exclusivity as the "standard". That, along with the natural jealousy many people feel when dealing with a lover's lover, would tend to imply that it's nature rather than nurture.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I think it is possible, but rarely achieved because of character issues/low impulse control, etc.

 

One thing I don't agree with what you wrote is the idea that media is why people have multiple sexual relationships inside/outside their supposed monogamous relationships.

 

Lusting after someone is a feeling that predates our technological society.

 

I agree that it predates our technological society but I feel that the media definately capitalises upon that and almost encourages it. Examples I could offer would be porn, mens magazine, soaps centred on beautiful people, teenage magazines for girls, music videos etc. It seems the media only shows 1 view of reality; the young, beautiful, sexy reality. Even in Desperate Housewives, the wife's were all immaculate! So I think this encourages people to see that 'real' people are not good enough and there is always a sexier, more beautiful, more available option. I also think girls buy into this which is why you see girls of even 10 wearing make-up, hair extensions, sexual underwear (thongs with 'eat me' written on it') which seems to from a young age, encourage and normalise being purely a sexual thing and having no perspective of monogamy or faithfulness.

[michelangelo]

I saw this news feature on Iranian women who dress very conservatively, covered from head to toe but for their face.

 

They spend huge sums on makeup, plastic surgery on their noses so that they appear beautiful despite the garment.

 

I do not think they have access to salacious TV programming.

 

I think it is human nature to try to be sexually attractive. Sure, the input now is the media. But I suspect there has always been some kind of advertising of what is interesting.

 

You can look to preindustrial societies and find a lot of makeup, bird feathers, etc.

 

People trying to enhance their attractiveness takes advantage of the tools available. Ours now are only different in the sophistication of technology.

 

There is a certain level of propaganda made easier by TV, sure.

 

I agree that it predates our technological society but I feel that the media definately capitalises upon that and almost encourages it. Examples I could offer would be porn, mens magazine, soaps centred on beautiful people, teenage magazines for girls, music videos etc. It seems the media only shows 1 view of reality; the young, beautiful, sexy reality. Even in Desperate Housewives, the wife's were all immaculate! So I think this encourages people to see that 'real' people are not good enough and there is always a sexier, more beautiful, more available option. I also think girls buy into this which is why you see girls of even 10 wearing make-up, hair extensions, sexual underwear (thongs with 'eat me' written on it') which seems to from a young age, encourage and normalise being purely a sexual thing and having no perspective of monogamy or faithfulness.

[Nikki Sahagin]

No, I do not.

 

If you've ever read any of my posts, you may know that my wife and I routinely invite other people to participate with us sexually. It works for us, but it requires a certain mindset and is not something that I would recommend that most people try. However, we do believe in faithfulness, honesty, and respecting each others boundaries whatever those may be.

 

 

 

One thing I am curious about but have not yet come to any concrete opinions about is whether or not sexually exclusivity is a learned behavior, or if it's something that is an inherent trait to the human condition. Given the propensity of humans to cheat on relationships, that would imply that it's learned as our natural instinct is to not be exclusive,. Then again, except people for who choose consensual non-monogamy (which I would guess is 10-15% at most), and the few who practice outright polygamy, all human societies have monogamy and sexual exclusivity as the "standard". That, along with the natural jealousy many people feel when dealing with a lover's lover, would tend to imply that it's nature rather than nurture.

 

It is interesting what you say about to what extent monogamous behaviour is a learned behaviour. Speaking for myself I was never interested in marriage or kids or even boys. When I did become interested I had what I perceive to be a very unique view (it may not be!) that I only wanted 1 for now and ever! Sometimes I still believe that and other times I don't. But yet I don't know for what reason I would wish to extend beyond just one person as I don't really meet men that appeal or interest me beyond my boyfriend! I do feel a certain pressure that you HAVE to have a lot of experience to feel you aren't missing it but I know that that feeling doesn't come from me as I have never felt that before in my life. So I think somehow there has been an infiltration there for me to feel that I must 'know more...'.

 

May I ask how did you bring up the issue of introducing sexual partners into your marriage?

[jwi71]

Perhaps putting this in the Marriage and Life Partnerships section is a clear indicator of what sort of responses I shall receive but I cannot post a variant of these question in each of the forums!

 

Do you believe in monogamy? Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime? Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

It seems to me a lot of people who enter into long-term relationships end up cheating and being unfaithful because they constantly wonder what else is out there and what opportunities they may be missing out on. I think the media has also capitalised on this need. For instance, people on tv and generally in the media are quite predominantly young, beautiful, sexually active, readily available and perhaps most appealingly - disposable. They represent an outlet for human lust and desire. But does this intensify the natural urge to go out there and do it in your real life? I personally think it does. As in many people who I feel wouldn't otherwise behave promiscuously or casually with regard to sex, feel that they NEED to, because the media says thats how people behave i.e. I know a lot of teenagers who LIE about their sexual encounters or have admitted they have had sexual encounters purely because they thought that's what they SHOULD be doing - teenagers are meant to sleep around, sow their wild outs and if you don't, you'll regret it!

 

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

I am perfectly happy in a committed and exclusive relationship per your definition.

 

However, there are some, including some of the above, who would say that monogamy is emotional. That faithfulness is NOT derived from physical actions but the emotional connection. As such, having other partners for sexual variety is not being unfaithful. Yet they would be upset should an emotional bond be formed between the spouse and a lover - that would be betrayal.

 

So the definition of monogamy is going to affect the response. I would be surprised to hear of anyone post saying that it is ok to be both physically and emotionally attached to another other than the spouse. MY first question to them would be - why get married?

[PandorasBox]

I am perfectly happy in a committed and exclusive relationship per your definition.

 

However, there are some, including some of the above, who would say that monogamy is emotional. That faithfulness is NOT derived from physical actions but the emotional connection. As such, having other partners for sexual variety is not being unfaithful. Yet they would be upset should an emotional bond be formed between the spouse and a lover - that would be betrayal.

 

So the definition of monogamy is going to affect the response. I would be surprised to hear of anyone post saying that it is ok to be both physically and emotionally attached to another other than the spouse. MY first question to them would be - why get married?

 

 

I agree. There is no point in even being married if you going to have more than one partner. You can do that without being married.

 

Anyhoo, I do believe in it, weather its something that is natural or not, that I'm not sure of. I think it depends on how much work a person is willing to put into the marriage with only one person. A marriage is two involved that are married, not three and four and so on. I think if people do not want to be monogamous for whatever reason, do not get married and the same goes for putting work into it, if you wdon't want to work on things because its just to hard for you, once again do not get married.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I am perfectly happy in a committed and exclusive relationship per your definition.

 

However, there are some, including some of the above, who would say that monogamy is emotional. That faithfulness is NOT derived from physical actions but the emotional connection. As such, having other partners for sexual variety is not being unfaithful. Yet they would be upset should an emotional bond be formed between the spouse and a lover - that would be betrayal.

 

So the definition of monogamy is going to affect the response. I would be surprised to hear of anyone post saying that it is ok to be both physically and emotionally attached to another other than the spouse. MY first question to them would be - why get married?

 

I agree. I was going to bring this up in the first post...

 

I think it is natural and very realistic to be physically and sexually attracted to others but to form true and lasting connections is much rarer and unlikely. As such is it the faithfulness to the EMOTIONAL connection or is it the faithfulness to the PHYSICAL aspect? You might have an amazing, intense, all-consuming bond...but the sex doesn't quite match. Or vice versa. It's hard to find someone that will encompass EVERYTHING for you.

 

Then again by physically cheating are you not to an extent, dishonouring that emotional and mental connection? Naturally the other person will be emotionally and mentally affected, they will feel jealous, hurt, betrayed etc and the connection will most likely erode away.

 

Part of me thinks, to keep that connection whilst achknowledging a more sexually wayward life, is the purest love of all. But another part of me thinks, at least idealistically, that it is the whole relationship, physical, emotional and mental that should be honoured. As you can see I am very indesicive on the matter.

 

For instance if you are emotionally faithful, but sexually unfaithful...where are the boundaries? If you kiss that person? If you stroke their hair? If you have a chat afterwards? If you are tender to them? When does it seep over into becoming partly emotional?

[Nikki Sahagin]

I agree. There is no point in even being married if you going to have more than one partner. You can do that without being married.

 

Anyhoo, I do believe in it, weather its something that is natural or not, that I'm not sure of. I think it depends on how much work a person is willing to put into the marriage with only one person. A marriage is two involved that are married, not three and four and so on. I think if people do not want to be monogamous for whatever reason, do not get married and the same goes for putting work into it, if you wdon't want to work on things because its just to hard for you, once again do not get married.

 

Yes there is no point being married if you won't be faithful because you are making a promise to break it. I never get the point of married couples you cheat because WHY did you make the vows in the first place? Why make a vow you can't uphold? A promise you are going to break? A persons word is so valuable. Why say what you don't mean?

 

But how about just long term relationships? Where no such vow is made but you of course still INDEED to be faithful and committed. I mean relationships and marriages are just the same in my mind just without the piece of paper.

[LucreziaBorgia]

 

1. Do you believe in monogamy?

2. Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime?

3. Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

4. So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships?

5. Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

1. Yes, I do.

2. No. I see it as a conscious choice and decision - one that can never be assumed or taken for granted.

3. I'd have to say that is true of myself now.

4. Yes - I think they can happen, but it has to recognized as a choice to be monogamous, and the couple must revisit that choice every day and recommit themselves to that choice. The second that monogamy is assumed or taken for granted, then its all downhill from there.

5. Yes, but it has to be something that you put effort into daily to continue making the choice to remain monogamous.

[JackJack]

Yes there is no point being married if you won't be faithful because you are making a promise to break it. I never get the point of married couples you cheat because WHY did you make the vows in the first place? Why make a vow you can't uphold? A promise you are going to break? A persons word is so valuable. Why say what you don't mean?

 

But how about just long term relationships? Where no such vow is made but you of course still INDEED to be faithful and committed. I mean relationships and marriages are just the same in my mind just without the piece of paper.

 

I never understood it either....... I wonder if these people who do not want to be monogamous either did at one point, or thought they did, met another that was doing something for them so they decided to "intoduce" having an open relationship...... Or maybe they knew how they felt along about not being with one person but married anyway in hopes they could at some point change that persons mind....... Which still doesn't make sense, because you wouldn't need to be married to do that.

[sxyNYCcpl]

But yet I don't know for what reason I would wish to extend beyond just one person as I don't really meet men that appeal or interest me beyond my boyfriend!

 

I think you are mixing the ideas of emotional exclusivity (e.g. he's my boyfriend and I'm not interested in pursuing a new one) with sexual exclusivity. They are not the same.

 

May I ask how did you bring up the issue of introducing sexual partners into your marriage?

 

Before we even started dating, I told her that I do not believe in sexual exclusivity, that way if she had an issue with that we could avoid wasting each other's time. She felt the same, and the rest, as they say, is history.

[JackJack]

I think you are mixing the ideas of emotional exclusivity (e.g. he's my boyfriend and I'm not interested in pursuing a new one) with sexual exclusivity. They are not the same.

 

 

 

Before we even started dating, I told her that I do not believe in sexual exclusivity, that way if she had an issue with that we could avoid wasting each other's time. She felt the same, and the rest, as they say, is history.

 

So if by chance one day she were to say, "I don't care for this lifestyle anymore and don't want to do this any longer." Are you ok with that? Is it something you could just up and stop doing? Or would that bring the marriage to end for you?

 

This is based on IF she were to say that. Since you both seem to be on the same page about it, then it more than likely wouldn't happen anyway, but lets just say she did.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I never understood it either....... I wonder if these people who do not want to be monogamous either did at one point, or thought they did, met another that was doing something for them so they decided to "intoduce" having an open relationship...... Or maybe they knew how they felt along about not being with one person but married anyway in hopes they could at some point change that persons mind....... Which still doesn't make sense, because you wouldn't need to be married to do that.

 

It's very confusing. My guess is they still want something safe and secure and feeling that someone is devoted and committed to THEM gives THEM an ego boost. So whilst they get the security and the feeling that they are wanted and needed from the marriage, they get all that the 'grass is greener on the other side' stuff from elsewhere.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I think you are mixing the ideas of emotional exclusivity (e.g. he's my boyfriend and I'm not interested in pursuing a new one) with sexual exclusivity. They are not the same.

 

 

 

Before we even started dating, I told her that I do not believe in sexual exclusivity, that way if she had an issue with that we could avoid wasting each other's time. She felt the same, and the rest, as they say, is history.

 

Well of course emotional connections and sex are not the same. Friendships are based on emotional connections and are not sexual. And sex doesn't need to be based on any connection beyond a physical one or for some people, there doesn't need to be a connection at all!

 

But I think in relationships, sex and emotions all kind of blur together. If you love someone, then sex has an emotional element to it. I believe this for men as well as women. And sex without love, does not. So in a relationship I feel that these two DO blur together even if they are fundamentally different.

 

As as I said before even if you have sex with others in your marriage and remain emotionally exclusive....is it not possible to blur emotions into the sexual experience with that other person? i.e. to kiss them, stroke them, chat with them. In that case you aren't just physically cheating.

[sxyNYCcpl]

So if by chance one day she were to say, "I don't care for this lifestyle anymore and don't want to do this any longer." Are you ok with that? Is it something you could just up and stop doing? Or would that bring the marriage to end for you?

 

This is based on IF she were to say that. Since you both seem to be on the same page about it, then it more than likely wouldn't happen anyway, but lets just say she did.

 

We've actually discussed that. We both agreed that it's unlikely either of us would care to stop, at least until age becomes a significant hindrance. We further agreed that if it did happen for whatever reason, we really don't know what that would mean to the health and future of our relationship. To have a marriage with people that far apart on sexual desires is difficult under any circumstances.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I guess it depends how highly people prioritise sex and there is quite a vast spectrum in that sense...

 

from sex addicts to people with extreme sex drives, unusual interests and fetishes to people unable to have sex for health reasons, injuries, accidents, pain, those who believe in sex only when married, those with low sex drives and those who are asexual.

 

The human spectrum of sexual desire is SO vast and complex. Some people find it impossible to be sexually faithful and for others, it's the easiest thing in the world perhaps because for them that drive is just no there for them.

[sxyNYCcpl]

But I think in relationships, sex and emotions all kind of blur together. If you love someone, then sex has an emotional element to it. I believe this for men as well as women. And sex without love, does not. So in a relationship I feel that these two DO blur together even if they are fundamentally different.

 

Within a romantic relationship, sex is (almost) always a part of that. But, as you pointed out, sex does not require a relationship.

 

As as I said before even if you have sex with others in your marriage and remain emotionally exclusive....is it not possible to blur emotions into the sexual experience with that other person? i.e. to kiss them, stroke them, chat with them. In that case you aren't just physically cheating.

 

Yes, that certainly is a possibility. If you are going to allow sexual non-exclusivity within the bounds of an emotionally exclusive relationship it is something to be guarded against. All human relationships require SOME emotional element (e.g. do I even LIKE this person?) so the concept of "emotionally monogamous" really only addresses romantic love. Many people cannot distinguish between sex and love, and for those folks any kind of consensual (or non-consensual for that matter) non-monogamy in a relationship is asking for trouble.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I also wonder....we tend to see sex and cheating as PHYSICAL i.e. we need that release and THAT is the sole reason we cheat. What about more psychological/emotional/mental reasons for cheating? People who cheat because they want to hurt before they are hurt or because they need that ego boost or because they are insecure...I feel there is so much more to say on this subject.

[imagine]

I live in South Africa where multiple partners has actually been encouraged through the "Safe Sex" advertising campaign.

 

The campaign began in approx 1995. Apart from the (counter-intuitively) rampant STD's, there is a social devastation. Consequences of this devastation is the highest crime rate and highest rape incidence in the world.

 

I personally deal with the upheaval of lives as a lecturer in a college catering to black African students. Apathy and self gratification is endemic. I believe this is due to an unstable parental influence or complete lack thereof.

 

Monogamy is clearly not a natural condition. But it is the microcosm that contributes towards building a healthy community.

 

Yes, I believe in monogamy.

[fral945]

Do you believe in monogamy?

 

Yes and no. I believe it is possible in certain respects, but the modern interpretation is unreasonable and unlikely to ever achieve much success.

 

Do you think it is natural for human beings to be monogamous, faithful, devoted and committed for a lifetime?

 

Completely monogamous? No. Monogamy is a choice and has its advantages, but the natural state (at least for men IMO) is polygamous. In almost all societies men have had prostitutes, lovers, or other outlets for their sexual needs. Women had lovers as well in the past, so I’m not sure how monogamous they are wired, though I believe they aren’t as wired for multiple sexual partners as men are.

 

There is no real advantage to monogamy in a fickle world. Stability and lifespans have increased dramatically in the past 100 years, so monogamy is more possible, but think about if you were alive 200 years ago. Polygamy made more sense.

 

If you love one person and something happens to that person before you have children, then what? Live alone and die without reproducing? It’s unlikely any of our ancestors were monogamous, otherwise we wouldn’t be here today. Survival of the fittest, with the fittest in this case finding new people to bond with and have sex with when partners died or became sick.

 

Or do you believe that yes monogamy is possible but only later in life or after several relationships/sexual experiences first off.

 

Yes, I would agree. Unless you are deeply religious and exhibit great self-control, it’s unlikely most human being would marry one person and have that person be their only intimate partner throughout their whole lives.

 

It's always easier to commit to something when you have explored most of your options. And today we have more options available, so people spend more time exploring those options. Several hundred years ago it was the women or men in your small village or town and that was it.

 

So do you truly believe in monogamous relationships? Or do you think that combinations of natural animal instincts and a society and culture saturated in sex can really sustain true love and commitment?

 

No. True love and commitment is a fairy tale brought about during Midevil times. Commitment in most of history (wrt marriage) was about family ties and children, more of a business arrangement. In other words, keeping (or creating) power and/or alliances in certain families and reproducing. Love was not even a factor in marriage until fairly recently (historically speaking). Nowadays marriages are based more on the individual participants' needs (including love), which makes a modern marriage much more volatile.

[Nikki Sahagin]

You'll have to forgive my response to this. I don't know how to quote SPECIFIC quotes so it will all have to be lumped together.

 

You're right about men always having had lovers. But men have always been in the most powerful social position. Society is patriarchal. I believe many women would like more than 1 man or fantasise about this. But there is a stigma attached to women that act in this way meaning that women would attach shame and guilt to this that men would not making it an altogether more difficult reality for women to pursue this. I am also quite sure that in certain societies (I couldn't name them) possibly the Amazons and a certain African tribe? That here it is the women who have loads of male lovers and the men just one women.

 

Also if you see sex just as for survival and reproduction, you must consider that just as nowadays some people don't want children, so didn't people back then. People don't just have sex for reproduction. Most have it for pleasure. And so to justify being promiscuous as being needed for survival when children wouldn't have been the intention of the act and the fathers and maybe even mothers wouldn't have stuck around...is folly. Also nowadays the world is overpopulated and so definately we could do with LESS sex not more especially as even with contraception, many people choose not to use it, or misuse it altogether.

 

Your last comment is interesting with regard to love and marriage being a new concept. In a way it makes more sense for the marriage partner to be the one with whom you have children and for both partners to have a lover to fulfill the love aspect.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I live in South Africa where multiple partners has actually been encouraged through the "Safe Sex" advertising campaign.

 

The campaign began in approx 1995. Apart from the (counter-intuitively) rampant STD's, there is a social devastation. Consequences of this devastation is the highest crime rate and highest rape incidence in the world.

 

I personally deal with the upheaval of lives as a lecturer in a college catering to black African students. Apathy and self gratification is endemic. I believe this is due to an unstable parental influence or complete lack thereof.

 

Monogamy is clearly not a natural condition. But it is the microcosm that contributes towards building a healthy community.

 

Yes, I believe in monogamy.

 

How odd that a safe sex campaign which encourages more lovers would also rise the statistics of rape:eek: