A Tentative Defence of Monogamy

I would be the last to deny the promiscuous nature of man.

It is evident that many of the failings of modern-day coupling and marriage is due
to the fact that it is imposed upon an instinctive beast that has little ability to
control self through the intellect and must be coerced, threatened or rewarded
and/or indoctrinated into a moral dogma in order to remain disciplined and
moderate.

Common man, governed by a need that emerges in times of indigence, has

carried this superfluity like a camel carries its hump into a luscious rainforest.
This doctrine of excess, which forces out behaviours of gluttony, is an expression
of undiscriminating tastes and subdued palates that are more interested in
quantity than quality.

The practice of suppressing sexual drives, that sometimes threaten social order
and harmony, has been a deciding factor in the emergence of civilizations and
complex human economic and cultural structures. It enables the full participation
of males/females in the system and the full investment of these males/females in
the system itself that turns them from rebellious vagabonds or indifferent
observers into defenders and guardians of the norm.

This imposition of monogamy on a polygamous species has been successful, or

relatively so, mostly through the utilization of institutional authority and the
restriction of female sexual choices. But I am going to defend and describe a
spontaneously emerging form of monogamy that is not a product of moral and
cultural force or paternalistic social order but more a product of refined tastes and
noble predispositions.
It would be remiss of me to neglect to state that the creation of distinction and
refinement could only happen, ironically, in times of superfluity and in ages of
abundance, for in times of poverty all, by necessity, become ascetics and
minimalists and it is leisure that often results in heightened awareness and
wisdom.

This spiritual refinement that is shaped by hypersensitivity and an

overabundance of inner strength leads to a discriminating palate and a pickiness
that should not be misconstrued for snobbery or pretentiousness; this
discriminating taste that leads to some form of monogamy should not also be
misjudged as another instance of the common form of monogamy that is more a
result of moral imperatives, hypocrisy and socio-economic pressures as well as
cultural conformity than anything else.

Since metaphor and allegory are the best ways to become precise while still
remaining discreet and indirect I begin by encapsulating my perspective of this
more noble form of monogamy with symbolism:
Let us then take wine as a substitute for mating, since it is an unnecessary
aspect of individual survival, as sex is, while still retaining the attraction and
sweetness associated with coupling.

The common man, with his unsophisticated tastes, gluttony-sometimes reaching

the proportions of alcoholism-and insensitive tongue, may find that all wines are
the same or similar enough to not make great differentiations, and all that really
is at stake here, for him, is access and availability. In other words, the average
man wants wine on his table-if it is his preferred beverage- as a sign of affluence
or happiness or conformity and its quality, its distinctive bouquet, the year and
the region it was harvested in, is of no or little importance to him. For him the
experience of wine drinking is merely encompassed in the general sensation of
swallowing and tasting its broad and obvious aroma and in the inevitable high-
spirits it inevitably results in. Any bottle will do, within reason, from any time and
from any place, and large quantities of it are preferred so that his greedy needs
are met, his belly and ego are engorged and his needs momentarily placated.

But for a refined palate, one that can discern nuance and subtlety, not all wines
are created equal. His discriminating tastes are not a consequence of pretentious
snobbery and feigned aristocracy but a result of an oversensitive taste-bud and a
hypersensitive nose. He cannot ignore, no matter how much he may try, the faint
fragrances, the quiet bouquets, the textures, the aftertastes or the colorations of
each Olympian nectar; for him the wines history, its symbolism and art are just as
relevant as its simple drinking. He may drink an inferior fermented grape, from
time to time so as to not insult a host or as to not make an unwarranted fuss, but
given a choice he will prefer abstinence from indulging in pigswill and fire-water.
The refined palate, therefore, will choose asceticism rather than to debase and
degrade one self by settling for inferior products and individuals just to quell an
inner instinctive need or desire. He will see any submission to his hunger and
thirst, which often demand compromises of great proportion, as a defeat, as an
insult to self and a loss of dignity that is often felt in hindsight.

We must keep in mind again that this refined taste is not an act of conceit but a
product of awareness. It stems from this extreme sensual perceptiveness
[hypersensitivity] that is inescapable, as no man can blind himself to what he
sees or ignore for long what he hears, and it also stems from a deeper
appreciation of emotions and of self. It is an appearance of pride we call nobility.

What a common man calls ‘love’, ‘compassion’, ‘loyalty’, ‘responsibility’,

‘commitment’ and ‘empathy’ pales in comparison to what a noble mind
understands them to be.

If we are to understand hypersensitivity or awareness or refinement we must

here use, once more, some figurative symbolism.
Two men walk into a room in which a party is going on. The first is a common,
average man for whom the scene is a joyful one, full of smiling faces, mirth,
clinking glasses, the din of happy conversation, the smells of food, all engulfed in
a kaleidoscope of pleasant background music and dazzling lights.

The second, “suffering” from hypersensitivity, perceives a totally different scene.

He sees what the first man sees but also so much more. He sees a momentary
frown, a glance, a stolen kiss, a discreet touch, a smirk; he hears a sarcastic
giggle, a stomach churning, a door slam; he smells perfume, cologne and sweat;
he knows who’s had a little too much to drink, who is walking with a limp, who’s
talking with whom, who wore mismatched socks today, who just hit on
someone’s wife and so on.

It is possible for two individuals to experience the same thing but perceive it on
different levels, levels of lucidity if you will.
It is this lucidity that gives reality, life and emotions more substance for the noble
man. His love is more precious to him and not something he gives out lightly, his
compassion is more profound, his loyalty more true, his friendship more deep
and weighted down with meaning and not mere words he flings around to appear
civilized and moral or to ensure another’s respect.

This noble man of refined tastes takes responsibility seriously and that’s why he
enters it so rarely, he takes commitment more austerely and that is why he rarely
commits. For him love/hate, loyalty/betrayal, compassion/cruelty, mean so much
more than for the common man that enters relationships of enmity or cooperation
blindly and full of insincere innocence, delusional confidence and naïve hope
derived from an absence of awareness or an inability to self-discipline.

That’s why Christianity and Democracy, or any ideology that institutionalizes

emotions and behaviours, is an anathema to him. Compassion and love are
precious things to a noble mind; precious things beyond measure that are offered
only to the worthy and to those that have earned his trust and loyalty and that is
why his emotions are so much more weighty and meaningful and not just words
that lead to ephemeral commitments of need.

Common love relationships often begin with an attraction based on superficial

criteria.
A man may just be attracted to a woman’s ass, to her full bosom or wavy hair, a
woman to a tall, dark and handsome man or a rich man or a man of status and
so soon reality will disenchant them from their fantasies about how things could
be or should be.
Sometimes shallow relationships are a product of physical needs and social
imperatives that force two people into each others spaces for better or for worst,
often the second more than the first. Shallow choices lead to shallow lives where
often the sense of something missing is felt and one blames the other or
conditions but rarely ones judgment, original choices and criteria of evaluation.
So errors are repeated, over and over and over again.
In comparison noble love relationships are more difficult to find and so much
more valuable.
It is difficult enough to nourish nobility and remain noble at all in such a world of
superficiality and vulgar narrowness, it is rare that the right genetic and
environmental circumstances will arise in an individual at all and that the right
balance of strength and consciousness will coincide in a single entity, so two
noble spirits finding each other is a rare thing indeed, especially when one
considers their solitary and shy nature.
This is what makes them precious and an exemplification of idealistic romantic
love.

Their rarity and value is due to the fact that they are based on more than just
mere lust but exhibit a spiritual interconnectedness where two people become
united in more than a physical way, although the physical is always the first
connection. Here the mind takes precedence and decides when to suppress or
express desire and need, when to expose or hide vulnerability and strength,
when to love, commit and remain loyal because only it can comprehend the full
breadth and depth of the issues involved.

This nobility of spirit, this refinement of taste forces the individual endowed with
it, into some uncomfortable choices: Either find solace in solitude and asceticism
through the denial of instinct, as many sages have done, so that no compromises
are made and no loss of self worth ensues or search and wait for that single one,
that diamond in the dirt that lives up to heightened standards and meets reality
eye-to-eye, that gives as much as it takes and understands the entirety of what
commitment, loyalty, trust, compassion and finally love entails.

Only nobility can truly love whereas a common man merely lusts and covets.