Is Monogamy the Key?

Even though the article “Our Cheating Hearts,” by Wright, presents several scientific and well-developed theories that support the abolition of monogamous marriage, a strong argument can also be made for the continuation of this institution. Monogamy is long-standing state that was created, and should remain, for a variety of reasons. Two of the most prominent arguments for the continuation of monogamy are the better success rates of their offspring from such relationships as well as the human capacity for morality.

As Wright asserts, the primary reason for such monogamous, committed relationships is to provide the offspring with the greatest likelihood for success. In today’s world, there are several single parent families as well as numerous that are combined families, in other words a step-parent is involved. Many of these families are wonderful, strongholds of support and encouragement. However, according to the research that Wright sites in his article, “…an American child living with one or more substitute parents was about 100 times as likely to be fatally abused as a child living with biological parents” (Wright 288-289). Wright gives some insight into why this statistic would ring true when he discusses the idea of “male parental investment.” According to him, this phenomenon was created through evolution in order to keep offspring safe, “The advent of male parental investment, for example, required the invention of a compelling emotion: paternal love…The reason, presumably, is that changes in circumstance—an upsurge in predators, say—made it more likely that the offspring of undevoted, unprotective fathers would perish” (Wright 284). Thus, even though this paternal love is an ancient biological addition to the male psyche it still plays a powerful role in parent/step-parent interactions with their children/step-children. More specifically, given the shocking statistics regarding the modern day abuse of step-children a child’s best hope for success in life lies with both of its biological parents.

Furthermore, Wright claims that human morality may be able to derail some of our baser instincts and thus monogamous relationships can survive. In fact, he pulls upon the ideas of several prolific evolutionary thinkers to support the idea that while humans do have the biological drives for more polygamous relationships, they are not uncontrollable or beneficial urges. George Williams, the author of the book Adaptation and Natural Selection, “helped dispel the once popular idea that evolution often works for ‘the good of the group,’ has even taken to calling natural selection ‘evil’ and ‘the enemy.’ The moral life, in his view, consists largely of battling human nature” (Wright 290). Thus, human genetics can be relegated by mankind’s morality and cannot be used as an excuse for the dissolution of marriage. Man cannot place our failures in the marriage realm upon evolution, but rather must recognize that it exists but can be altered. It has often been said that some of life’s most rewarding pursuits are those that are difficult, that one must work and strive for. Therefore, the state of marriage should not be done away simply because it is difficult for this very reason. Monogamous marriage should continue for the benefit of society, in the view of Wright.