Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I have a friend/woman/gf/whatever at the moment that I have been seeing and dating for over a year.
We've had some trials and tribulations, but nothing ever too dramatic, nothing ever too crazy.
At our worst, our problems stem from the fact that we are just two VERY different people, like night and day, and while that brings balance between us at times, it also makes it very difficult for us to connect with eachother at others.


So here's the thing... in my short time with her, I have come to the conclussion that she may be one of the best things that's ever happened to me. I enjoy the time I spend with her, I can't wait to see her when we're apart, and I've tried to appease her more than any other girl I've ever been with....

SO WHY... why then do I constantly have my eye open for someone else?
For instance, yesterday I was at the gym and there was a VERY attractive young lady who wouldn't stop looking at me, I kept glancing towards her direction as well and the cogs started turning towards those "what if" thoughts regarding an approach... whether or not I should.
I also befriended someone from my highschool on Facebook who I used to have a crush on. She's in a relationship ATM and I realized that fact actually made me a bit disheartened.
Then there's a friend of mine who bartends; she's very cute, likes to play X-box and has this "one of the guys" but still feminine allure.
Then there are about half a dozen other girls that have suggested some level of interest, waiting to see if I respond.... situations that shouldn't exist, but do because I haven't turned myself into an island dating wise.

So it made me curious... Do all men have the need/desire/etc to go out seeking for someone else in spite of being with one who makes them happy?

Do we all have the instinct to constantly look for an "upgrade"? Is that desire just a sign that my current involvement isn't as pleasing as I initially think? Or is it a notion motivated by fear of commitment?


I haven't got a clue, but I was curious of your thoughts and opinions, or stories involving similar situations. Chime in and let me know.

I think it's less the instinct of "finding something better" and more the instinct of "spreading your seed"

In health class, there would be a lot of talking about "urges." Primal Instinct says "We want to make sure there will be people after me of my own design." When primal instinct was the way to act, this meant sleeping with a lot of cavewomen. Men's attentions are drawn to certain things in a woman because those things indicate things like, more likely to conceive, more likely to live through childbirth, more likely to bear more than one child.

Which is traditionally why men look at breasts and butts - the bigger, the better, fertility-wise.

Just don't ever use this excuse on your girlfriend. From personal experience, it has a 100 percent chance of immediate blown-up fight and probable dumpage.

Originally posted by jinzin
SO WHY... why then do I constantly have my eye open for someone else?

It's a trait that's been passed down for a long time. The men that had sex with more women produced more children. At the same time you want to bond because when those men didn't for connections with their mates/offspring they were out competed by the structure of a family.

Monogamy is a social construct, there's no real reason why that alignment is the one our biology would follow... so in your case its kind of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

Originally posted by King Kandy
its kind of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

Giggety.

I don't pursue women, they pursue me.

I'm weird. I find that when I fall for someone and I mean really fall (as in I stop imagining the girl naked and start imagining her in a wedding dress), I immediately do my best to cut anybody I may be casually dating out of my life without too much damage and stop noticing women altogether. I guess I've been conditioned into the social construct.

Finding women besides the one you are exclusive with attractive is normal. Fantasizing is normal. Having women that you find attractive show that they find you attractive as well is a healthy ego boost if nothing else. I'd say that just like anything else you have to look at the pros and cons of your specific situation. Monogamy is a challenge for anyone but it has its rewards if you're happier with someone than you are without THEM. If they can easily be replaced as far as you're concerned then I don't think that you'd care enough to put much thought into it anyway. If you are really in love, and trust the person that you're with entirely, I'd suggest focusing on those rare qualities and their value to you. If they are precious to you then you should feel free to commit yourself to giving them as much happiness as they've given you. It's not always easy but if something is worth fighting for then fight to the end. IMO

Edit: Also I think we can confuse looking for others with making sure that we're still desirable to others.

So no one else gets tunnel vision? I mean to me it's like don't fix what's not broken. If I'm getting everything I need I have no interest in anyone else or even in the fact that someone else exists outside of a friendship or business relationship or something.

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
I think it's less the instinct of "finding something better" and more the instinct of "spreading your seed"

Yeah, that's sums up what I as going to type out in 4-5 paragraphs, works cited, etc.


So, I'll forgo the dissertation and just say that you beat me to the punch.


Originally posted by siriuswriter
...and probable dumpage.

I don't think he's into scat.


Originally posted by King Kandy
Monogamy is a social construct, there's no real reason why that alignment is the one our biology would follow... so in your case its kind of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

Almost true.

Life-long monogamy is a partly a social construct.

However, monogamy for 2-3 years is almost purely a biological contruct.


Originally posted by Darth Jello
I'm weird. I find that when I fall for someone and I mean really fall (as in I stop imagining the girl naked and start imagining her in a wedding dress), I immediately do my best to cut anybody I may be casually dating out of my life without too much damage and stop noticing women altogether. I guess I've been conditioned into the social construct.

That's pretty much what I did out of respect. I've only been officially engaged once. Once we were engaged, I deleted all of my female contacts from my cell (non-family members, of course). Long term monogamy was a difficult thing for me, at first.

Women notice that men do this. I've always felt it's biological. Dogs. You're all really weird/different. lol

Me and my boyfriend have this thing that's called "The daily dick talk" It's when he starts talking about this or that, I'm sure you know what I mean. Odd, but entertaining. I just laugh. Daily Dick Talk again?

A lot of people feel they need to sleep with as many people as possible. Its partially natural but at the same time its because society encourages it. Its natural but at the same time I feel alot of people do it simply because they feel thats what they have to do, its like its some sort of game "I'm better than you because I've slept with more people"

In society we haven't really got our priorities right and we are stll quite selifish. If you have a gf that is good looking and has a nice personality why do you need to look anywhere else? Obvoulsy to an extent is natural but to an extent you could argue that a whole lot of things are natural but that doesn't mean we should do certain things ie killer instinct.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the media makes you think that certain things are the be and all of everything. If you don't sleep with lots of people you are less of a person, if you're not famous you're less of a person etc. There is nothing wrong with any of these things but I think we get tricked into thinking we HAVE to do these things and if we don't we are less of a person and this is partially because society is still quite a selfish place.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
So no one else gets tunnel vision? I mean to me it's like don't fix what's not broken. If I'm getting everything I need I have no interest in anyone else or even in the fact that someone else exists outside of a friendship or business relationship or something. You gotta relax, dude. If you meet a girl, if it happens, great. If not, fine.

Having been married and divorced twice and also having "might as well been" married in the past to a lady for 10 years I am happily single and no longer care about having a primary relationship. I was one of those who had a real hard time with manogamy. I'm still attracted to women in the 19-25 age range though they no longer are attracted to me (which i would say is normal) for the most part

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
I think it's less the instinct of "finding something better" and more the instinct of "spreading your seed" Doesn't this suggest that we're looking to have as many children as possible, not to have as much sex as possible? How does this "seed spreading instinct" play a part in a mans decision to get a vasectomy? I'm a total sex addict who could go at it with my wife for days straight if she could handle it. If some other woman got aggressive trying to get some of me, she'd end up with her feelings hurt. I'm not a dog who can blame ****ing some random female on "the instinct to spread my seeddroolio" acting as if it's an accident caused by nature itself. It's an excuse unless it's used by a person who lives naked in the woods surviving on instinct.

Originally posted by The MISTER
Doesn't this suggest that we're looking to have as many children as possible, not to have as much sex as possible? How does this "seed spreading instinct" play a part in a mans decision to get a vasectomy? I'm a total sex addict who could go at it with my wife for days straight if she could handle it. If some other woman got aggressive trying to get some of me, she'd end up with her feelings hurt. I'm not a dog who can blame ****ing some random female on "the instinct to spread my seeddroolio" acting as if it's an accident caused by nature itself. It's an excuse unless it's used by a person who lives naked in the woods surviving on instinct.

Just because it may be an instinct or strong urge does not mean that you are absolved of your action.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Monogamy is a social construct, there's no real reason why that alignment is the one our biology would follow... so in your case its kind of like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

Yeah what advantage is there in having multiple large intelligent creatures around protect a small stupid creature?

I think the girl you are with you may like but not inlove with.When you fall inlove there is no one else but that girl.So if I were you I would just be friends with this girl.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You gotta relax, dude. If you meet a girl, if it happens, great. If not, fine. Well no, it's not about relaxing or stressing or anything like that. It's like I just involuntarily stop caring about anyone else sexually.

I would actually think male jealousy is a much stronger impulse than the male wandering eye or female jealousy. Hell it's so imprinted in our genes that even the mammalian penis is designed to scoop competing semen out of the vagina.

i've honestly found that when i like someone enough, i lose interest in other women. i barely even look at other women. so either we're different, or you just don't like your current woman enough...

Originally posted by The MISTER
Doesn't this suggest that we're looking to have as many children as possible, not to have as much sex as possible? How does this "seed spreading instinct" play a part in a mans decision to get a vasectomy? I'm a total sex addict who could go at it with my wife for days straight if she could handle it. If some other woman got aggressive trying to get some of me, she'd end up with her feelings hurt. I'm not a dog who can blame ****ing some random female on "the instinct to spread my seeddroolio" acting as if it's an accident caused by nature itself. It's an excuse unless it's used by a person who lives naked in the woods surviving on instinct. Yes.
It doesn't; instincts can be resisted.
Cool Story bro.
I'm so proud of you.
I'm sure you're not.
It's not an excuse for promiscuity but rather a valid reason for thinking about other women.

Originally posted by -Pr-
i've honestly found that when i like someone enough, i lose interest in other women. i barely even look at other women. so either we're different, or you just don't like your current woman enough...

I agree but I really think its not just because you are different entirely, I think its partially that people are just greedy ie why men are constantly looking for other women

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yeah what advantage is there in having multiple large intelligent creatures around protect a small stupid creature?
I don't see how this refutes what I said, at all. Just because there isn't monogamy doesn't mean people have to just take off and abandon their kids. There's such a thing as communal child rearing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Almost true.

Life-long monogamy is a partly a social construct.

However, monogamy for 2-3 years is almost purely a biological contruct.
I'd like to see you prove that. It goes against what i've read on the subject (which admittedly doesn't go far beyond Sex at Dawn), and also my common experience.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't see how this refutes what I said, at all. Just because there isn't monogamy doesn't mean people have to just take off and abandon their kids. There's such a thing as communal child rearing.

Why do I want a man/woman with no genetic lineage invested in the child watching it?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why do I want a man/woman with no genetic lineage invested in the child watching it?
Because you can't tell who's kid it is?

Originally posted by King Kandy
Because you can't tell who's kid it is?

Why would I deliberately remove my own ability to identify my offspring? Why would I force my children to accept the attendant risk of inbreeding that comes from not knowing their parentage?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why would I deliberately remove my own ability to identify my offspring? Why would I force my children to accept the attendant risk of inbreeding that comes from not knowing their parentage?
I don't really know what you're even trying to prove at this point other than trolling me. Just because you don't think polygamy is evolutionarily beneficial doesn't mean that it wasn't a part of our society. Evolution doesn't work on this sort of conscious cost/benefit analysis (conveniently derived from our modern knowledge of biology) and before agriculture its unlikely our ancestors even knew that sex=babies.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't really know what you're even trying to prove at this point other than trolling me. Just because you don't think polygamy is evolutionarily beneficial doesn't mean that it wasn't a part of our society. Evolution doesn't work on this sort of conscious cost/benefit analysis (conveniently derived from our modern knowledge of biology) and before agriculture its unlikely our ancestors even knew that sex=babies.

I was of the impression you were arguing that monogamy is purely a result of culture, which seems unrealistic (and certainly unprovable) to me. No conscious cost benefit analysis is required, when I can't identify my kids its hard to protect them so my lineage is more likely to end.

Originally posted by Deadline
I agree but I really think its not just because you are different entirely, I think its partially that people are just greedy ie why men are constantly looking for other women

so he's more greedy than i am?

Maybe you and your current chick isnt meant to be. Also, if your on the diet that doesnt mean you cant look at the menu. So, looking at other chicks is fine imo, as long as it stays that way.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Maybe you and your current chick isnt meant to be.

I think this thinking is more of a problem than monogamy itself could ever be. It seems to imply that a relationship that doesn't meet some kind of ideal vision is hopelessly flawed.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was of the impression you were arguing that monogamy is purely a result of culture, which seems unrealistic (and certainly unprovable) to me. No conscious cost benefit analysis is required, when I can't identify my kids its hard to protect them so my lineage is more likely to end.
At this point you're basically arguing the sky is green. It should be obvious simply from the fact that polygamy still exists that it hasn't been selected against in evolution. Its not hard at all to see an advantage to polygamy; having sex with more women means you get more kids, and get more lineage. I don't think that "monogamy" exists in genetics (as in, having no desire for other partners whatsoever). To varying degrees, different groups have different ideas on how far you can actually take the desire, but denying that people desire multiple women is pretty much denying that cases like the opening even exist.

Like I said, back in the day nobody could identify their lineage. Its quite likely that in the hunter-gatherer stage people didn't even understand that fertilization was caused by sex.

Originally posted by -Pr-
so he's more greedy than i am?

Not neccesarily, heres the context of what I'm saying.



Originally posted by Deadline
A lot of people feel they need to sleep with as many people as possible. Its partially natural but at the same time its because society encourages it. Its natural but at the same time I feel alot of people do it simply because they feel thats what they have to do, its like its some sort of game "I'm better than you because I've slept with more people"

In society we haven't really got our priorities right and we are stll quite selifish. If you have a gf that is good looking and has a nice personality why do you need to look anywhere else? Obvoulsy to an extent is natural but to an extent you could argue that a whole lot of things are natural but that doesn't mean we should do certain things ie killer instinct.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the media makes you think that certain things are the be and all of everything. If you don't sleep with lots of people you are less of a person, if you're not famous you're less of a person etc. There is nothing wrong with any of these things but I think we get tricked into thinking we HAVE to do these things and if we don't we are less of a person and this is partially because society is still quite a selfish place.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think this thinking is more of a problem than monogamy itself could ever be. It seems to imply that a relationship that doesn't meet some kind of ideal vision is hopelessly flawed. Some relationships end with one person killing the other. Some relationships are hopelessly flawed.

Originally posted by jinzin
I have a friend/woman/gf/whatever at the moment that I have been seeing and dating for over a year.
We've had some trials and tribulations, but nothing ever too dramatic, nothing ever too crazy.
At our worst, our problems stem from the fact that we are just two VERY different people, like night and day, and while that brings balance between us at times, it also makes it very difficult for us to connect with eachother at others.


So here's the thing... in my short time with her, I have come to the conclussion that she may be one of the best things that's ever happened to me. I enjoy the time I spend with her, I can't wait to see her when we're apart, and I've tried to appease her more than any other girl I've ever been with....

SO WHY... why then do I constantly have my eye open for someone else?
For instance, yesterday I was at the gym and there was a VERY attractive young lady who wouldn't stop looking at me, I kept glancing towards her direction as well and the cogs started turning towards those "what if" thoughts regarding an approach... whether or not I should.
I also befriended someone from my highschool on Facebook who I used to have a crush on. She's in a relationship ATM and I realized that fact actually made me a bit disheartened.
Then there's a friend of mine who bartends; she's very cute, likes to play X-box and has this "one of the guys" but still feminine allure.
Then there are about half a dozen other girls that have suggested some level of interest, waiting to see if I respond.... situations that shouldn't exist, but do because I haven't turned myself into an island dating wise.

So it made me curious... Do all men have the need/desire/etc to go out seeking for someone else in spite of being with one who makes them happy?

Do we all have the instinct to constantly look for an "upgrade"? Is that desire just a sign that my current involvement isn't as pleasing as I initially think? Or is it a notion motivated by fear of commitment?


I haven't got a clue, but I was curious of your thoughts and opinions, or stories involving similar situations. Chime in and let me know.

Wait till your first divorce young un.

Originally posted by The MISTER
Some relationships end with one person killing the other. Some relationships are hopelessly flawed.
That's not what he was saying. The attitude was that there was only ONE kind of relationship, and all others were hopelessly flawed. nobodies saying that all relationships are good relationships.

I just realized I don't really pursue women. hmmm.

Originally posted by King Kandy
At this point you're basically arguing the sky is green. It should be obvious simply from the fact that polygamy still exists that it hasn't been selected against in evolution.

Woah, you're right (just checked wiki and found the Murdock & White comparison). That's odd, I've always heard that pair bonding was a near universal human feature.

Originally posted by Deadline
Not neccesarily, heres the context of what I'm saying.

Ah. Guess i'm one of the exceptions to that, then.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Woah, you're right (just checked wiki and found the Murdock & White comparison). That's odd, I've always heard that pair bonding was a near universal human feature.
Huh. I literally have no idea what comparison you're referring to.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I'd like to see you prove that. It goes against what i've read on the subject (which admittedly doesn't go far beyond Sex at Dawn), and also my common experience.

I made a thread on it and discussed it, thoroughly, and none of the ideas presented were my own.

Edit - Note that my post said 2-3 years, not not life. I know for a fact that pair bonding for life goes against our biology.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't really know what you're even trying to prove at this point other than trolling me.

That's very baseless. He's not even close to trolling you. He is making legit points.