Are any Animals Truly Monogamous?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 фев 2014
- Monogamy isn’t that popular in the animal kingdom, and it turns out that even "love birds" are often cheaters.
CREDITS
*********
Created by Henry Reich
Illustration and Animation: Ever Salazar
Production and Writing Team: Alex Reich, Peter Reich, Emily Elert
Music: Nathaniel Schroeder: / drschroeder
Thanks to our Subbable supporter ALFREDO STAGG for making MinuteEarth possible!
SUPPORT MINUTEEARTH
**************************
If you like what we do, you can help us!:
- Become our patron: / minuteearth
- Our merch: dftba.com/minuteearth
- Our book: minuteearth.com/books
- Share this video with your friends and family
- Leave us a comment (we read them!)
OUR LINKS
************
RUclips | / minuteearth
TikTok | / minuteearth
Twitter | / minuteearth
Instagram | / minute_earth
Facebook | / minuteearth
Website | minuteearth.com
Apple Podcasts| podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
REFERENCES
**************
Barash, D. P., & Lipton, J. E. (2002). The myth of monogamy: Fidelity and infidelity in animals and people. Macmillan.
Brooked, M. G., Rowley, I., Adams, M., & Baverstock, P. R. (1990). Promiscuity: an inbreeding avoidance mechanism in a socially monogamous species?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 26(3), 191-199.
Chapais, B. (2013). Monogamy, strongly bonded groups, and the evolution of human social structure. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 22(2), 52-65.
de Waal, F. B., & Gavrilets, S. (2013). Monogamy with a purpose. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(38), 15167-15168.
Double, M., & Cockburn, A. (2000). Pre--dawn infidelity: females control extra-pair mating in superb fairy--wrens. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267(1442), 465-470.
Kraaijeveld, K., Carew, P. J., Billing, T., Adcock, G. J., & Mulder, R. A. (2004). Extra‐pair paternity does not result in differential sexual selection in the mutually ornamented black swan (Cygnus atratus). Molecular Ecology, 13(6), 1625-1633.
Ophir, A. G., Phelps, S. M., Sorin, A. B., & Wolff, J. O. (2008). Social but not genetic monogamy is associated with greater breeding success in prairie voles.Animal Behaviour, 75(3), 1143-1154.
Reichard, U. (2002). Monogamy - a Variable Relationship. MaxPlanckResearch Conference Report.
Thusius, K. J., Peterson, K. A., Dunn, P. O., & Whittingham, L. A. (2001). Male mask size is correlated with mating success in the common yellowthroat.Animal Behaviour, 62(3), 435-446.
Wan, D., Chang, P., & Yin, J. (2013). Causes of extra-pair paternity and its inter-specific variation in socially monogamous birds. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(3), 158-166.
Webster, M. S., Tarvin, K. A., Tuttle, E. M., & Pruett‐Jones, S. (2007). Promiscuity drives sexual selection in a socially monogamous bird. Evolution,61(9), 2205-2211.
Monogamous primates: www-personal.umich.edu/~phyl/a... 
Наука
So I guess instead of calling a couple "lovebirds" it'd be better to call them "loveworms"? Loveparasites? Lovebloodsuckers? hmm..
+Neenjah Rammus
Yeah, that makes a lot more sense to call couples that. :p
Neenjah Rammus wormlovers
Neenjah Rammus lol LOVE BLOOD SUCKERS
Doughboy Devito love birds are a beginnings of being a couple so the term lovebirds is accurate because most couple breakup within the first month
uhhhhhhhh.......
These birds ain't loyal
+samy said LMAO! I got my laugh for today.
+samy said I'm pretty loyal
Ebony Atheist Kudos for being another black atheist.
Colton Byrd Shut up, bird! haha
samy said No problem!
i still love it when people go around "oh see animals do it too! so its ok! its natural, cheating is part of nature!" well yeah there are some animals that literally kill and eat their babies so go ahead and use that line of logic
Ughhhh the amount of common Sense 👌but seriously we're not fucking animals so there's really no excuse unless all individuals agree in said relationship
Technically we are animals.
Everyone says don’t cheat and yet it’s super prevalent. Honestly just accept it happens and it’s likely to happen to you and move on.
@@Al-.-ex cheating is an act of breaking trust. If you know your going to go off with someone else than have a polygamous relationship with everyones consent.
James Rogers sounds logical, doesn’t happen though. Plus that doesn’t make sense years into a marriage - better just to have an affair & keep it quiet. If nobody finds out then that’s the best option.
Valentine's Day Card: "I love you so much I want to fuse with you and spend our lives blissfully sucking blood out of a fish's gills"
#RomanceMovieOfTheYear
I would marry anyone that sent me that 100%
Did it work-
I have an idea for next Valentine's day :D
A match made under water!
🪱💍❤️💍🪱
How Romantic! (sorry fish) 🐟
@@jetwingsdaydreamI would too 😂
Diplozoon paradoxum...still a better love story than twilight :)
+Official Leotique.
XD they should make a movie about them >.> XD
fuck that. donkey mating sway hotter
fr
A Guatemalan donkey show is a better love story than twilight
I've never heard of that love story. but it sounds bad, and I've heard many people say "still a better lover story than twilight" so I'm never going to read that book.
'Will you be my Diplozoon paradoxum'
No, I dont know you, You fuckimg player
The nerdiest romantic words out there
"You may now kiss the Diplozoon paradoxum"
Will you fuse with me and suck the blood of fish?
I wound legitimately say yes to that
I GET IT! This explains the story of The Ugly Duckling.
+Ericson Caranto
owo make sense !
+Ericson Caranto o.o omg!
+Ericson Caranto :O
might be possible, who knows?
well it's a kid's show so whatever.
Male bird: u cheating on me?
Female bird: yes
Male bird: good, we need more variety
Hail consensual swinging!
That's not cheating, that's an open relationship.
Ye animals like birds don’t seem to care about the whole cheating thing so maybe it’s not cheating, I think some apes do but maybes that’s cause each of them wants as many females as possible
Every cuckold porn
The male bird doesn't like that fact that she is cheating on him. But at least he can cheat on her by mating with the other females that arrive to their nest at night.
As a Pokemon professor I can tell you now that at the Pokemon Daycare I run, there is little to NO monogamy. ...Still trying to figure out how the Eggs keep appearing though.
Because Ditto is everybodies bitch.
Then how do fathers pass down moves?
Bulba Tube Your comment dorsn't even make any sense.
It does if you've played Pokémon. :)
Bulba Tube Lol
These crows ain't loyal.
It was ancient beta male homo sapiens that created monogamy and religion to force w*men to stick with one partner and make sure she doesn't leave because she can't provide for herself and it'd be a sin. It we returned to the way we naturally were, then the human race will go extinct in the next century.
"Monogamy isn't natural!" Said every cheater ever...
And apparently this video. Also studying for class some Japanese history and it's starting to make me feel like those cheaters may be right. There's never been monogamy in the world. Everything is a lie. The cake is a lie.
@@kateajurors8640 True. But it also doesn't mean that there SHOULDN'T be monogamy in the world.
@@jonnjones8263 exactly, there has NEVER been peace in humans, but that does not mean that it shouldn't be
Also monogamy does not require a life long bond, you can have a lot of monogamous relationships in your life
@@Azknowledgethirsty nahh really?
@@haylnanna5575 yes really. Monogamy doesn't really last a life time just look up 'homewrecking penguin' a female left her mate for someone else because he lost a fight.
Humans are known to break up with their mates in favour of new ones when things get tough just look at all the men and women who used to be in relationships with people that cheated on em but are now in happy ones
Why my gf shared this video to me???
+Monty K hahahahhahah
+Monty K youre fucked lol shes cheating on you 10000% guaranteed i will hand you all my money if im wrong.
its been a month, was i wrong?
Jason Evas Yes.. you were wrong. She just wanted to share this so I have something to write for my next project. :)
what he said. she cheated on you and got away with it lol
im kidding man i probably blurt out alot of suspicious shit around my girlfriend and im seriously devoted to her :) just messing around
You're screwed m8, she's cheating on you
Penguins practice monogamy. Male penguins present a female penguin with a rock from the shore. If the female says no, the male tends to wander off on his own and dies from depression.
Ha! Stupid penguins.
Sound like my love stories
Good to know, but it sounds like a better argument to make against monogamy than for it.
Lots of bird species are monogamous for one mating season ~ this includes some species of penguins.
I heard of that penguin species its called Sphenisciformes Drakeicus
. . . although I should note that looking for moral guidance from the animal kingdom probably isn't the wisest idea (murder, theft, and other things we consider crimes are also rampant in the animal kingdom . . .).
Yes
the fact that monogamy is this rare in the animal kingdom makes it all the more beautiful, to be honest
Actually monogamy is deadly for the rest of nature, because a woman normally give birth to up to 15 children in a lifetime, and when those 15 children are born from the same father, there's like a 10% chance of 1 of them being born with birth defect if both parents are healthy, but if you talking about small mamals or little birds, this goes exponentially higher, a bird can lay up to hundreds of eggs in their lifetime, and small mamals are the same which means this birth defect will surely occur and might doom the entire species as a whole.
@@robymaru03 Could you give a source for that because that makes zero goddamn sense. The amount of children any pair has will only increase the number of genetic errors by rolling the dice more often, the same number of offspring produced by a single monogamous pair or a bunch of adulterous pairs should have no significant difference in the number of birth defencts.
@@robymaru03You straight up made that up lol. Wtf. Are you implying that 2 totally healthy genetically dissimilar randomly start imitating eachothers DNA everytime they breed? Because that's the only way your hoockus poockus stuff makes any sense.
You're wrong.
@@robymaru03 maybe used the term "mother" when describing the female non-human animals, because the term "woman" is only for humans, of course, because every term we made are just construct
@@robymaru03what are you taking about? If the parents are not related the chance of having a child with a birth defect is the same as if each child had different parents. What you were refering to is inbreeding. The problem with monogamy is that the children of monogamous parents might breed with each other and the lack of genetic variety can lead to birth defects and general lack of resilience of the whole population to environmental changes
To those who are not monogamous just say so before entering any relationship. Saves everyone a lot of trouble.
Good advice.
But doesn't always work, unfortunately.
@@ibrahimihsan2090Honesty always works. Even if one or the other party ends up disappointed at least they knew what to expect upfront.
@@CheatBuddy If by honesty you mean being completely open to your spouse about whether or not you have a relationship with someone else, I for one, recommend one to be completely open about that, in most cases.
But that's the thing, in most cases.
Some cases don't need said openness.
I am not talking about love affairs mind you.
If you live in a society where one spouse is expected by most, then said honesty is necessary to follow established norms and love affairs are akin to treason but in most societies where polygamy has some level of acceptance, it's the man to decide within the social approved limits whether or not he gets to engage in marriage with another woman or not, not the wife.
Hence, in such situations, full openness is not necessary. Openness is way healthier, and leads to less problems, but isn't advisable for all situations.
@@ibrahimihsan2090 Are you the man in this purely hypothetical scenario
@@blinkyy1088 I'm not married(and I would hate myself if I had anything close to a girlfriend), so I don't think I'll fit.
Also, as a 1st year college student in a country where having more than one spouse is legal, I don't think there is much of a chance I'll ever get to have more than one wife since only around 1%(if not lesser) of marriages in my country are polygamous, not to mention being expensive, so I'll be fine with monogamy if I get a well paying job after university. In fact, I'd personally like that more than polygamy since the latter is not really something I could imagine myself finding fun.
Also, I am not really sure what are the conditions for polygamy in my country. I was simply referring to religious law which sadly my country doesn't follow too well.
My point was simply that full openness to your spouse regarding your marital affairs isn't something one must do regardless of the situation. For some people, that isn't always appropriate.
Don't be mistaken, in almost all situations, it is much better to be open but in some rare situations, some people can't really afford that.
The comments are stranger than usual...
Much more stranger is this video appear on my reccomendation
Are they though
These are some old coments but yeah they are
@@cinnamondreamsold? Look at you now
There’s a disturbance in the force….
quick, Spock, get in the Time Machine we need to go back to the future to defeat the Daleks
I'd rather be a blood sucking leech than have a cheater as a partner
or be a cheater yourself, worked out for me
Are you sure you're not just over-possessive?
Nayru's Love Lol same here!
It was ancient beta male homo sapiens that created monogamy and religion to force w*men to stick with one partner and make sure she doesn't leave because she can't provide for herself and it'd be a sin. It we returned to the way we naturally were, then the human race will go extinct in the next century.
@@warrenbuffet5152 I agree with all but the 'we would disappear' part.
We don't have the continuous struggle of food searching and 'worrying about who the father is' like we used to.
So returning to an non-religious system, where gender roles are semi non existent and we just adapt to changes would probably be our best time, not our extinction
OH MY LORDE I'M ROLLING! I read the title and decided to check it out, and the ad that plays before it starts is a wedding ring ad by Kay jewelers XD
Lorde?
😂
Foods before doods
i needa get me a diplozoom paradoxum
Demoturtle
Hopefully you don't end up sucking a fish dry.
Thing is, humans have what we call higher brain function. To me, marriage or monogamy is more than just sex--it's friendship. For me, I've known my husband for 7 years, and he is truly my best friend. We talk about everything together. We can have 4 hour conversations at a time. I love him more and more as time goes by. I couldn't find another person who is just as geeky, or into the same things as me, or will take care of me, or make me laugh the way he does. Plus, having multiple partners would take too much effort to please.The animal kingdom spread their genes around, but don't have "friendship" the way humans do. I don't care that some people have multiple partners, that is totally fine. But I don't want people to scoff at monogamy. Some people like it, some don't. Do what you want. But we have it for specific social reasons, and it kind of needs to be there
Love this comment, I hope you and your just husband are still just as In love 🥰 . I feel the same way. My girlfriend was never expected to become my girlfriend. We were just great friends for 3 years. Turns out we wanted to together so often got together. Been with her for a year now still absolutely my best friend. I love spending hours talking with her. We want to together for a very long time.
Still, under that premise, the most common thing is to have multiple friends, not just one. In fact, nobody would call anyone a cheater for having friends other than their love partner. So, in that aspect, monogamy is related strictly to sex.
In any case, monogamy seems to be more of a social construct than a natural development.
Wait 10 years Well,actually 7,now 3 yrs. on comment. What attracts,and much of what one is drawn to in another will eventually become low key grating. I've seen this in the closest bf couples repeatedly.Tho some of this is the"Familiarity breeds contempt"
@@danielalejandrofernandez5907If you wanna be badass and go full "nature" one sex doesn't get any say in the breeding session if you know what I mean... Human rights is also a social construct you know? How degenerate do you wanna get? How many morals do you wanna pick and choose? Lol
@@monickalynn4365It's only you, sorry.
No mention of penguins? =(
JCarolR penguins
Penguins are prostitutes
isaac martinez really dude
Fuck you Isaac u are a fucking douchebag
Ding Ding Ding Dong Dong Dong its true the females give up their body for special rocks
Albatross seems to be the only one that's actually loyal, they literally can only pick one mate in their entire lives comfortably. If a partner dies, and the living member's fertility drops significantly often never breeding again or if they do, fail to hatch most eggs.
diplozoon paradoxum are goals 😩💦💞
shaina
F*** off. "ugh goals" like really?
zRainman- Don't bully him or her for giving her or his opinion
zRainman- (clearly a joke)
zRainman- Wow, bet you're fun at parties, buzzkill.
Animal infidelity is non-sequitur to human morality. Just because someone/something else does it, that doesn't mean you can do it too. It's the "everyone jumps off a bridge" fallacy.
Most animals do everything from incest to rape to murder for merely trespassing on territory, and yet no one dare attempts to justify these behaviors in humans but actively condemn and attempt to stop them.
While interesting in pointing out how animals behave, this isn't relevant to humans and human morality.
It wouldn't matter if we were purely social beings without any biological mechanisms that trigger our behaviors. Alas, we're biological beings and with that biology comes the genetic memory of our mammalian ancestors. Even monogamy in humans is a somewhat new idea that isn't practiced all over the world today.
With that said, why would you bring up any kind of morality issue when it comes to sex? Unless you see sex as some kind of deviant behavior if not practiced in one specific way that fits your particular bias, I don't see why you would bring it up.
Spock
I don't think you understand my belief system.
The point of life is to acquire a physical body. But with that comes the duty to become the master of the body and not a slave to it's passions.
I also have to question the validity of the idea that humans and all mammals are literal descended from some common rat-like ancestor. We don't see a continuous chain in the fossil record that links man to all other species, in fact, there are great gulfs between the biological systems of life forms of one era and those who come right afterwards. For example, the first complex multi-celluar life forms in the fossil record were trilobites. They leap fully form into the record with compound eyes, antenna, shells, multi-segment bodies, legs, and digestive, nervous, and reproductive systems. Before them were only single-celled organisms. Evolution (the theory that life forms gradually change and gradually become more complex) doesn't explain this sudden jump from a single cell organism to a complex aquatic cousin of the horseshoe crab.
Human sexuality is sacred, since it exist specifically for reproduction, and regardless of your belief system, you have to agree that this is a very important ability and should be taken seriously.
As opposed to you who apparently has his own particular bias regarding human sexuality and is hypocritically calling someone else out for having his own?
GreyWolfLeaderTW
I apologize for wasting your time. I thought you knew something about biology but your statements indicate otherwise. I thought you actually were trying to make a point instead of proselytizing. I see now I judged you correctly. Thank you for reinforcing the stereotype.
Spock
*Laughs
And you're not proselytizing your own belief system, hypocrite?
I certainly do know something about biology, I've studied it through High School and a bit in college. But I doubt you do when you resort to ad hominem and poisoning the well fallacies.
Acting like only you can possibly know about biology science is preposterous. Pasteur and Von Leeuwenhoek among many, many others, were famous biologists and Christians too.
Thank you for reinforcing the stereotype of secularists as anti-religious bigots relying on pseudo-science to justify their bigotry.
GreyWolfLeaderTW
I'm sorry, I thought I made it obvious that I did not want to have a conversation with someone that clearly isn't intelligent to understand the basics of the natural sciences. Again, I apologize. The willfully ignorant are too beneath me to bother with.
Never heard of a more beautiful love story. You go Diplozoon paradoxum! 😭
I think monogamy is so common to us humans because of how strongly our emotions affect us. Jealousy is a good example. You only want the person and no one else can have them.
No...humans are mildly polygamous...
@@alandonsaji6673 Yeah actually im sure if there was no society we'd be largely polygamous, its just that we socially engineer ourselves.
@@Lowseeds Mildly Polygamous Means While Looking At Sexual Dimorphism And Testicles Size - Sexual Bimaturism We're Not Extremely Polygamous Like Gorillas But Also Not Monogamous...Mildly Polygamous With Pair Bonding Tendencies Like Strong Bonds Parental Investment Raising Children Together Etc...But Predominant Was Serial Monogamy Because Most Men Don't Have The Resources To Be Polygamous...
@@Lowseeds Even though we're polygamous most dominant mating strategy was serial Monogamy... Because most men don't have the resources to be polygamous...
"Don't do to others what you don't want done to yourself" type of logic. Seeing your partner with another partner makes you feel inferior...lesser. That's the general sentiment of the public at least. It's why polygamy has been so hated in the world in the first place.
I blame monogamy then on our internal structure. And also how easier it is to maintain a single partner than multiple families with multiple mouths to feed
There's a few reasons monogamy stands out as advantageous for humans (aside from our morals and building relationships):
1) Human females die more frequently in childbirth than other animals (without medical help), due to complications from our upright posture. A woman would want a trusting bond with a man she'd trust to take care of the kid if she passes away. (Versus "welp there's other fish in the sea - sorry kiddo!")
2) Most of the time, humans only birth 1 kid at a time. This is way different from a lot of the animal kingdom where they normally birth multiple babies. The whole idea of "needing" different genetic material doesn't make sense when the amount of kids you can have is limited.
3) Human babies are helpless far longer than most animals, so it's beneficial to have a committed partner that is just as invested in watching over them. Breaking trust is not a good sign of caring for that commitment.
There's also just how we, as humans, really crave long-term stable bonds. We crave other bonds, sure- but having those stable bonds is especially important in childhood when the brain is developing.
Polyamory is different from cheating, as it should be an agreed upon dynamic where trust and communication is involved. But not everyone is into that, and if someone tries to use science to back up the need for different partners, just also point out the science that humans have a lot of unique factors compared to the rest of the animal kingdom that equally lends to monogamy.
To me, polygamy(legally recognized marital union of a man with more than one woman) is something that is okay to exist amongst humans but is probably better off not a common practice.
I mean arguably only 1%(or even less) of humans actually practice polyamory. It's hard to turn that into a common human practice except in maybe small societies.
Plus, humans would usually rather just have one partner in most situations than multiple. Loving multiple partners equally is really quite hard for most people.
However, cheating is by no means a merit-bringing practice.
None of your arguments are in favour of monogamy though? Someone expecting or raising a child will find more support if several partners or paramours are around and commited to help. Before religions and capitalism dictating the constructions of our societies, a new child wasn't just a matter of the parents, it was the whole community who would provide help wherever help is needed.
@caihly2443 That's actually complicated. If you were in a community, yes- and it's still like that for a lot of people. People have families and friends who offer help. As communities, we look after the safety and well-being of kids. This isn't just exclusive to partners.
But if they fell outside a community (like say, fleeing due to war)? It was beneficial to find a partner that wasn't just going to split. People needed more trust.
Really all you have to do to see what's most beneficial to us is look at it from the children's pov. Anyone who grew up under the household of infidelity knows how detrimental it is to that child's mental state.
@@makothetako trust isn't a scarce resource; people have shown that they can be dedicated and earnestly involved in multiple relationships. The idea that there is a limited amount of love and care you have to split between your partners, and that a polyamorous person will be less trustworthy and less caring to their individual partners is simply idiotic stereotypes based on religious and societal taboos that equate polyamoury with promiscuity, and promiscuity with lack of care
Very nice video to upload on Valentine's day lol
Does Maury reveal the paternity results to the birds?
hahahahahaha made my day!
Awwww the only creatures that aren't a complete failure are carnivorous worms. Awwwww
*parasitic
Rose Vampire it's not really failure. Animals have survival brains and monogamy doesn't really help them to insure the survival of their bloodline
The parasitic worms are the only Species that are monogamous and do not cheat. That does not mean that there are not INDIVIDUALS in other species that are monogamous and don't cheat.
"No babe, I didn't cheat on you. I just wanted to ensure my DNA gets passed on"
Great horror movie scenario.
-What did you do to me? You sown our bodies together?
-Till death do us part!
-Noooooo!
Now we shall drink the blood of fish gills for all eternity!
Eugene Conniff Mondays through Fridays with two weeks of vacation per year.
Are we really looking to other animals as an example of how we should live our lives? Monogamy is a choice, we ultimately make the decision to cheat or be faithful. the animal kingdom doesnt have to be an example as to why we do certain things in our personal life nor should it be an excuse.
Right, chickens eat their own feces, and dogs eat vomit (anyone's vomit), spiders and praying mantis cannibalize one another, orangutans steal from one another... imagine the "well the animals do it so it must be okay" excuse... I've heard people, time and time again use animals as an example to show how 'normal' something is (like homosexuality). Well, by that standard, we should be able to cannibalize one another without being thrown in jail.
Brian Clark
Just because you possibly think that homosexuality is morally wrong, which i think most people would agree that it isn't (depending on one's personal believes, most likely religious if opposed to homosexuality), doesn't mean you can group it in the same basket. Also, I'm sure you are capable of seeing the tiny difference between eating someone, or part of someone, and being attracted to a person of the same sex.
define "should"
codediporpal I think I was trying to say that we are all individuals and we do things for different reasons our basic animal instincts do not have to dictate our choices in life we are thinkers and we have the ability to choose what is right for us we are not limited to our basic instincts just because some animals are not monogamous does that mean we as humans cant be? maybe I am just naive :(
Ultimately "To cheat or not to cheat" is down to our own decision. Studying the animal kingdom however allows us to conceptualise why we have this need in the first place. However clever, animals do not have enough brain power to override the stronger instinctual signals they receive. We humans have the potential to override instinctual signals due to our large frontal cortex. However this is just potential and doesn't guarantee we will.
Cheating is a human concept based on not respecting a set of agreed rules within a specific relationship structure (monogamous or not). Saying birds cheat doesn't make sense at all... it's like saying birds commit money laundering like what?
A squirrel tresspassed into my yard yesterday and stole an acorn! I gotta take him to court.
He uses the word 'cheating' but somehow I don't think animals would see it that way...
i dont think most cheaters see it that way either lol you ever see someone getting caught cheating. its never a big deal untill its someone else and not you haha
It doesnt matter what way they see. Its about us understand what action they do from listening to the word. And tf u mean most cheater see it that way? They do, they just dont feel the same pain or understand how painful it is. But they do know what they are doing. And they know it is wrong.
True + not everyone in multiple relationships is a cheater... most probably are but still
Making excuses I see
If you consent to “cheating” then it is called polyamory
Happy single awareness day!
Arminius hi
Anish Kispotta
Creepy. This comment is 3 years old O_o
hi
I feel saying animals 'cheat' on each other is a form of anthropomorphism and therefore carries negative connotation. But it did help get the point across
Better get myself a diplozoon paradoxum least I know they'll be loyal 😒
Hi i know it's been 3 years before you wrote this comment may you be good
good luck with your full-body fusion surgeries :P
One of the truly monogamous animals are wolves 🐺 it's till death do us part for those guys once a wolf finds that special someone they will stay together till the bitter end and the thing about wolves is they don't judge whether the partner is a widow or widower or a single parent or a loner that wolf won't care because the other is the whole world to him/her plus they make great step parents cuz one way to win the heart of a mother/father is through their children
its pretty hard to write romantic poetry about bloodsucking flatworms....
I lay amused
Our bodies fused
Sharing drinks with Wife
Crimson bliss of life
how's that verse? would like feedback
@@driftingdruid It was great. Good work.
Isn't there a species of deep sea fish where the males attach to the females and essential become an extra, sperm producing organ?
Good point! I don't know if a female anglerfish can mate more than once in her life, I'd be interested to find out though.
Tyler Lofgren There have been female anglerfish found with more than one male attached.
That's the Angler fish. The female is gargantuan in comparison to the male and yes, the male attaches to the female and he basically dissolves into a pair of testicles.
+notbobby125 That's probably the angler fish.
+notbobby125 yes but they are not monogamus (at least not the female)
Keep in mind polygamy and cheating are two different things. If you and your partner both agree to be polygamous, neither of you are cheating.
Logic
Also gives you the badge of ANIMAL IN TERMS OF MORALITY
Animals are amoral, not immoral. Any moral judgement on polyamory is inherently human - a social construct.
I mean morals are a human construct. morals dont realistically exist, and to be morally superior is to just have everyone or mostly everyone to agree with you and your views@@ANerdsWords
But it means that you are not loyal to your one partner only
If our love isn't like two combined flatworms sucking blood out fishgills, I don't want it
Every reason for adultery or cheating an animal kingdom seems to be linked to some sort of survival reasoning. What reason did humans have for this and we live comfortable lives away from the dangers the animals have to face
Because humans didn't live comfortably until 5000 years ago or so. And because many of us still do not live comfortably. Besides, what sort of evolutionary pressure could make us less adulterous in the first place?
Jeffrey Li Well, you could look to the overpopulation of the Earth with human life and use that as an argument for monogamous relationships--though this assumes that the individuals in the monogamous union would together have less children than if they procreated with many other humans over the span of their lives. That assumption may sound reasonable but also isn't necessarily true.
@@Legomyegoorj
When you have too many relationships in your social life, you have less precious resources like time, attention and energy to spend with each and to your relationship with yourself.
@@lmao_zedong7723 ah so thats why that bitch left me she was just living 5000 years ago
It's not only about natural selection, also about sexual selection, as in if a female breeds with an attractive man her children have more probability of having these traits and thus breeding too, think if height, good face etc
Does anyone else miss actually watching Henry draw the pictures?
Henry draws stuff on MinutePhysics iirc.
tfw flatworms are more faithful than most humans
Humans are primates. Flatworms are protostomes. Only humans have practiced any form of monogamy in the primate family whereas there are numerous protostomes that practice lifelong monogamy. Why do you think religion was created? It was invented to stop people from acting like apes.
@@warrenbuffet5152 5 months ago, but I don't think that those with high status of power within this concept of religion you speak of would say the same thing. They would probably laugh at you for beliving in this bs at the time. In fact, it was invented to stop people from critical thinking, so they wouldn't challenge their secured position... you see it everyday today and actually experience it on your own skin, but it's too much details for me to write in YT comment section.
Bird 1: Are you cheating on me?
Bird 2: You know I do
Bird 1: Good, you have lovely genes
Homo erectus was monogamous and faithful back then
That's why H erectus isn't around anymore :P
All this talking is getting me erectus. Sorry.
Michael Swanton lmao
what an amazing conclusion. Romantic gillworms
The biggest perk of sexual loyalty is cutting out the risk of STDs by a large margin
This brings us to the argument of whether humans are naturally monogamous or if it was a choice the human species made as a majority as a way of expressing loyalty (which is commonly seen as an important trait in human society) and as a way of providing an outlet for natural human selfishness, jealousy, and greed
Most animals don't write novels or explore space, either.
Just because other animals behave a certain way doesn't mean we should.
Right but your argument is completely flawed in that your comparisons aren't equal. Animals do not choose not to write novels or explore space, they simply can't do so. We on the other hand, may choose to have sex in any way we like, with how ever many individuals we choose.
You are comparing an impossibility (can't), to a personal view (shouldn't) and those things, simply aren't equal for comparison.
Aleria Argentum"Can't" versus "shouldn't"? So what, we should mimic animals out of pity because it's not their fault that they aren't smart? Just because they "can't", doesn't make his point any less valid. The animals don't have to choose a horrible life for us to be able to analyze why we shouldn't try to live like them.
MrBigEnchilada Humans actually have very good eyesight.
craigape No but rather we should stop pretending we are way above them in some sort of philosophical manner and accept that as animals, we ourselves still succumb to animalistic desires and that these are perfectly natural.
I'm not saying that we should act like every other animal (which is a stupid point in and of itself as animals themselves have different behaviours and little is shared universally), but that we should accept that if we do act in such a manner, there was a reason (or rather lack of reason) for it.
I think the Philosopher David Hume best described it when he said, "Reason is and ought only to be, the slave of the passions."
Aleria Argentum So if I have the urge to rape somebody, I should be allowed to do that because it's 'natural'?
So the most faithful creatures in the world are bloodsucking worms?
I love how a lot of you felt attacked and insulted by an otherwise very interesting video exploring various animals' take on "relationships".
making my depression worse challenge succeeded
Happy Valentine's Day everyone!
People are confusing Monogamous marriage with Monogamous sex. This video isn't trying to justify cheating but explain why human beings can have more that one sexual partners through the course of their lives.
For instance you can stay faithful break up and find someone else stay faithful and break up again and so on. Many people get sexually involved with 2 or more partners before the settle down and get married. As an example Warren Beaty was notorious for his promiscuous dating life however he has had only one married partner and never divorced.
How many adults can truly say they've had only one sexual partner in their entire lives?
Nah man, you missed the point by a tad bit. If it was comparable to human relationships, it would be saying that the animals have ONE lifelong partner but they still "cheat" while in the relationship. The video isn't either justifying monogamous relationships/sex or polygamous relationships/sex. What you are referencing is dating (a.k.a. testing a relationship with another human being). The animals find a life long (emotional) partner but have multiple one night (sexual) stands. Basically it's comparable to an adulterous marriage.
...and if anything the video did justify cheating by making it clear that it is a successful reproductive strategy. I doubt it aould exist if it weren't...
Fish be like "make it end... Make it all end!!!"
Brings the phrase "would you still love me if i were a worm" to a whole new level
While this video shows that polygamy is natural, it does not justify cheating, because cheating is not bad because someone is having multiple partners, it's about the fact that they lied to someone that they said they would love and trust. However what I think this does justify is polygamous relationships. If a groups of sane and like minded adults decide to engage in polygamy, I think this is excellent proof that they should be able to. There is nothing naturally or morally wrong with consensual polygamy.
another poor soul lost to Idiocracy.
TheWatchdogChannel and why is that?
A fair deal of countries actual allow it and absolute nothing prevents you from having 10 girl friends.
You just cant marry them all in every country, which kinda solves a bunch of problems connected to stuff that a mariage brings ; like if someone marries, they are allowed to stay at a country, so if everyone could marry a limitless amount of others, you would have a clear problem with this.
As marriage also means sharing your financial income (at least normally) , it would also become a little bit strange if someone has 20+ girlfriends working for them and the like.
So while the idea is totally fine and everyone that truly wants to have more than 1 girlfriend married, just do so, but it has a bunch of problems connected to it, if you think a little bit further what that actual means.
And even in countries that allow multiple marriage, only a small amount actual do it, as having multiples wifes is a very expensive thing (having 1 is allready).
So for humans its quite confident to have only 1 men + wife , if both accept to have a "open marriage" they are free to do so.
Gearfire Read my response to this video.
Again, this society is getting far, far too stupid for its own good. And I'm not talking "religions" here or anything. This is purely from a reason standpoint.
TheWatchdogChannel again you make a claim without any reason to back it up. Why am I lost to idiocracy? Why is society getting far too stupid? You're claims carry no weight when you don't explain your reasoning.
Did you dare forget the Anglerfish? Sure, the male lives in the side of the much larger female, but there is no potential for cheating!
yeah, partly because the male basically dies during the process
Uhmm.. actually there are instances where there are more than one male attached to a female anglerfish... so...
This just got even weirder...
Michael Tariga
But the male fish doesn't cheat. So I guess it's a one-way monogamy?
IN MY NEXT LIFE IM BEING AN ANGLER FISH.
my sister and I love your videos because we learn things in your videos and thank you for teaching us
As a person with a "disorder" that makes it very hard to distinguish between close friendship and love, monogamy confuses me, honestly
Human mating seems very complicated. Did a specific group of people decide that humans should only be allowed one mate and that cheating is wrong? And if we were like lions or deer and had one male for every group of females then why do we get so jealous and hateful when our chosen mate has sex with another?
Cheating is being frowned upon because it's hurtful. No one decided that, it's just a thing.
I just taking a wild stab at the dark, but my guess is to reduce the spread of disease. A monogamous relationship is more likely to survive during an epidemic or at the very least contain the disease within it's own bloodline so they wouldn't be a burden on others.
Novumic
That would only be true if there was no cheating, of which there was alot.
MarcoManiac
Yeah... I'm talking about monogamy. If there's cheating involved, it wouldn't be true monogamy.
Novumic
Exactly, humans aren't monogamous then. It is a good idea, but ultimately failed.
*ends video with cheesy pun*
2:54 "If you're still here..." lmao
What about cranes?Indian cranes are a symbol of fidelity.If one of the partner dies the other one will not eat until it starves to death.
+GlyGlue cheetahs
+GlyGlue that doesn't mean the other crane was monogamous, it just means it will starve its self to death if its partner dies.
Just because you ain eatin don mean you ain fuckin
+GlyGlue It starves and dies 'cuz the one who it liked to cheat is dead.
before i fuck i eat something
Human society is way more complex than any animal one. Imagine monarchies, inheritance laws and state family subsidies without monogamy.
You need to have a very strong idea of animal societies for these statements to be 100% accurate.
No need as there is no truly monogamous culture out there. Absolutely every single society out there has a mechanism for at least the male members to be promiscuous to certain degrees. Add the most have certain allowances for female promiscuity. There is no society that force pairs, people from childhood and then kills the survivor when one becomes widowed or kills them both if they want to break up. The closest is Hindu society where they brutally murdered a woman for the crime of outliving, her husband, and if she somehow escapes being brutally, murdered with fire for this hideous unpardonable offense against God’s nature, she’s 42 live in squalor in the wild, barely surviving on scraps of food, and usually ends up dead from exposure or rape. Anyhow, in accordance with the wonderful sublime, great heroic, supreme, superb excellent peerless amazing Dharma. What the Hindu man can have multiple wives, and even is told he must take new wives if he outlives them. Fucking pagans.
Cheating: breaking rules for benefit.
What rules?
The rules of a relationship.
Who makes the rules of a relationship?
The people in the relationship.
Seems pretty simple to me. Ethics don't really seem to come into the picture in an equal relationship. If the power is distributed unequally or if the people involved can't agree on what the rules are then they don't have any business in a serious relationship.
The rules of the relationship for these examples are the rules of monogamy. We're not saying that these animals shouldn't be doing what they're doing. We're only saying for creatures that seem to have monogamous relationships, they don't actually follow the rules that come with monogamy. They're breaking the rules that the otherwise appear to follow. In other words, they're cheating.
sk8rdman Cheating at a game that someone else decided they were playing.
Abraxian Absolution Yes, for the sake of the question, "Are any animals truly monogamous?"
We could not answer this question without examining their behavior within the parameters of monogamy.
sk8rdman The answer to whether or not they do meet the parameters of monogamy is a simple yes or no.
Explaining the "no" as "cheating" and the "yes" as "loyal" and "faithful" makes the implicit value judgement that they Should be monogamous.
You might want to say that we're just anthropomorphizing the behaviors of animals and we don't really mean anything by it, but that's even worse because it means we impose those values on people by default.
No, it is not a simple yes or no, as the video explains. The answer is not an obvious one. You can not draw a conclusion without examining their behavior within the parameters of monogamy, and finding that they do not follow those rules.
Polygamy = Multi wives/husbands where this fact is known.
Bigamy = Multi wives/husbands where the spouses don't know about each other.
Only one of these is actually "cheating".
If you want the opposite of Monogamy, you pretty much have to say Non-monogamy, Any other word narrows the scope of the relationship too much to be truly accurate.
Actually, polygamy is the overarching practice of single a person having multiple spouses, but polygyny is when a single man has multiple wives and polyandry is when a woman has multiple husbands.
Marina Santos Right, I was just posting this because of all the people using Polygamy to mean anything that wasn't monogamous.
Wrong, Marinia. Polygamy means multiple mates but not necessarily a male with several "wives". You are confusing the word with "polygyny" with means multiple women. A woman with two husbands would still be practicing polygamy, although the more specific term would be polyandry. And yes, this has been practiced in some parts of the world.
Where did you hear this? Doesn't bigamy just mean any situation where one person has two spouses since the "bi-" denotes twoness? Like how bisexuality is the attraction to two sexes and a biplane has two wings.
TheMagicRat933 Technically, bigamy and polygamy are essentially the same things. However most practicing polygamists include all the spouses in the same family unit while a true bigamist often hides the other relationships from the respective spouses.
This can often mean that the bigamist maintains more than one household, sometimes even in different cities so that each spouse is unaware of the others.
you've forgotten Eagles, they mate for life and never separate, when one of the partners die the other never mates again for the rest of their life.
So, basically no reason to freak out about multiple partners. :P
It isn't cheating if you are honest with your partner about it and you have an agreement of terms. It's the lack of honesty that causes the problems.
***** Sorry for your loss.
***** I know sarcasm is hard for people with autism to understand. You are forgiven.
+
No.
Even jealousy occurs in the animal kingdom.
Animals feel threatened when their mate treats them as inferior.
In short, just don't do it.
That Part of Your Brain You Don't Listen To Yes, I know. People are different, and some are more jealous than others. My point is only that "cheating" implies deceit. There is also a difference between being treated as inferior and having an arrangement of some sort - that in an of is self implies that you are respected enough to be asked for your opinion.
Maybe if we didn't glorify sex and weren't so clingy and desperate then monogamy wouldn't be a big deal.
But to us sex is the most important thing in the universe, we hate being alone and want our partner to be our property and to praise us forever.
Monogamy is wanted for our partners but not for ourselves. Problem is that the only way you're going to get monogamy from a partner is that you are monogamous yourself. Guess it's worth it because we pick it.
the fish end though. XD
LOVE the profile XD
SAOME BODY TOUCHA MA SPAGET
The end was so beautiful
Great way of explaining
I need to show this to my girlfriend.
Yes please.
What if she already knows?
what if she has already been practicing cheating monogamy?
Oh, she was planning to show this video to you.
You're so openmided
LUL
Great video! Now tell us the story why you had to make it ;)
This is my favorite video ever
So my boyfriend has the genetics of a bird?
*Nah just kidding, I don't have one*
Love is a lie. YES! I was right for choosing to be lonely. :/
I feel ya.
i disagree on the love is a lie part, BUT i am good with choosing lonely too :p
K. Khehra thanks ^^
but i think, as an asexual, the amount of ppl whom would want me, is very small x3
@@idik111 are you still alone? :)
yooo assigning human notions of "loyalty" and "cheating" to animals that have no concept of those things whatsoever is dumb as hell tho
no it isnt its interisting to see the analogy no matter how vague and abstract it is.
You are right, the difference between humans and animals is the level awareness of ones existence and conscious, as well as stronger mental faculties for intellect in humans.
but we are mammals
Well, no. Recall here that the cheating still happens in the night, for a reason. The female bird must hide the disloyalty from the male. Gorillas will similarly be very aggressive to any thought of cheating, and will kill baby gorillas that they think aren't theirs. If a male lion defeats the reigning alpha, they will kill of the children. Clearly, they don't like children that aren't theirs, and understand the concepts of loyalty and cheating very well, even if it only has to do with reproductive success and not love.
I just recently saw some video of dog couples and when the female realised the male dog had mated with another female she attacked him and was clearly not happy about it so yes they have concept you don't know anything about animals. none of us truly do. I bet they are really intelligent, they just don't let on that they are because then they'd have to be like us and have to go to school and stress over money and jobs and pay bills and all the stressful shit we have to do XD.
This was posted a decade ago and I'll forever hate this video, which has only helped cheaters and people who don't care about hurting others to justify themselves.
This video was never intended to excuse cheating, but rather try and explain why there’s so few species that are monogamous, however it has the wrong implication for some people that since other species are not monogamous then why should they and in turn excuse their cheating.
@@jonasg.bisgaard1086 Oh please, thry knew exactly what they were doing. Even the thumbnail is an implication that it includes humans.
eh, im monogamous and think cheating is terrible, monogamy is also a cultural concept i believe, as many people have diffrent relationship structures outside of monogamy that they are happy in and i respect that. and for the animal kingdom, i think its cool to see the way humans differ from other animals
i dont think the video is justifying cheating, maybe you could make an argument for polyamory but thats a diffrent thing, and i think if anyone shows this video to explain why its okay to not be truthful to their partner(s) i think theyre an asshole
@@raider1297 how do humans not apply in this scenario? Just because someone says something is a natural behavior doesn’t mean they’re excusing it, infanticide was incredibly common in prehistoric times but pointing that out doesn’t mean I’m condoning it
@@raider1297actually pissed over nothing, get over yourself
I think we should all be open minded. If a monogamous relationship works for you great. If it doesn't, then find a relationship that does.
As a nerdfighter i am pretty sertent that deep sea dweling anglerfish never has to find a mate. They are always there together when its time to procreate, see once the male is born he bites the female on here side and the slowly become a sperm produsing parasiiiiiite.
So id say they are very monogomus aswell
It would depend; not all deep-sea angler fish use sexual parasitism. In addition, while I'm far, far too lazy to do proper research so can't say I'm actually correct on this second bit, I'm not confident that the female only uses one parasitic male for the entirety of their lives. Depending on how long they live, it might be that they need additional males for the following breeding cycle, as I can't imagine a parasitic pair of gonads are going to continue supplying an indefinite amount of semen.
i feel like this is that one animal fact everyone has herd somewhere and then they individually think very few others have herd it and therefore are proud to share it
Shishimantaru
Doesn't the male become part of the female's circulatory system as he degenerates which gives him nutrients like any other part of her body; basically saying that the male well be alive so long as she is alive?
incorrect. the female angler fish has many other male anglers fused onto her. Not monogamous at all.
sion8 Does the fish's body accept the male's organs as a part of her body? Can her system repair tissue damage or decay to his body as though it is part of her own? If so, there might be a key to fixing the issue of organ-rejection in human surgeries. If not, then your question is answered.
Nature is a cheater, how fitted topic for this date of the year (feb,14th/2014)... ¬_¬ But totally makes sense.
Monogamy is rare in nature and cheating is not rare among monogamous couples. I suppose there is some moral of a fable but I cannot see it.
#MinuteEarth #monogamy #cheaters
the moral is it ain't a sin until you get caught (whom, you decide)
I want to point out that we are erected walking hairless apes with a big brain. That is no excuse for cheating but we cannot fight nature but we can try all we want.
i guess i know how you feel, it's natural to cheat but it's morally wrong
That is true, it is morally wrong. Which takes me back to: *What is moral?* Hint: is man made/artificial.
_"so what? they are made so it works so you dont have to worry about people stealing all day so that we can move on to something else."_ If the only thing that prevents you from stealing is that "moral" forbids it... well, there is something deeply wrong with you, MrBigEnchilada.
With the above you are basically saying that if stealing wasn't forbid you will steal from everyone coz nothing can stop you from it. I want to think that people won't steal coz that is the reasonable thing to do. I want to think that people doesn't need for something to be forbid to avoid that conduct. But lets not be naive.
I never said moral was wrong but moral can be wrong, they've been wrong many times. Moral changes with time, geography, and from individual to individual. Just look at religions and their different "morals."
*To be moral is immoral from the start.* Anyone whom thinks that moral is needed is no different than a caged animal waiting for its "moral" cage to crumble down.
polygamy has been a common practice amongst humans since the dawn of man, it is natural for a man to have multiplied wives.
That's the reason why I not going to having another boyfriend after what happened last year. Cheating is a no-go relationship.
As always, I'm in awe of the production quality you have on this channel. There are only a few of your videos I've not particularly liked so far.
Which is why I felt I had to comment on this video. That is, unfortunately this one was one of the "not liked" ones.
One tiny point that bothered me in this one is that I felt the terminology was a bit wobbly at points. Using female and guy (bird) in the same sentence - for example -, or even in consecutive sentences sounds strange to me (the part about nest dynamics).
I also think that using terms like cheating - a concept we've come up with to describe our own behavior, that has a lot of baggage in it's meaning - in a context with other species than our own seems a bit superfluous. Sure, I get that you've chosen an angle for this topic and using "cheating" serves as a means to make the presentation more contrasted, but still, just didn't find it fit the subject matter. Anthropomorfism is a tricky thing to deal with :)
Maybe you could've presented this more as a "we humans are - to our knowledge - the only ones who carry such a weight on our shoulders about cheating, lets look at some other species for comparison". Obviously then there's the whole emotions angle...but I hope my point is still apparrent.
Keep up the (otherwise) good work!
Gibbons are not actually monogamous though. They live in polyandrous societies where gibbons are typically one female and multiple unrelated males (though it's a single social group). It's one of the few known examples of polyandrous behavior in primates. That said, they're pretty exclusive to each other.
Also the gibbons in your drawing are both male (males are black colors, females are creamy colored). Which is totally fine, but I think they'll have difficulty biologically producing young that way unless they go find a donor female.
This is all said with a grain of salt since I'm deriving this information from a physical anthrology course I'm recalling from seven years ago, but it stuck out in my mind because gibbons are mad cool.
i actually aww'd at the "sucking blood from fish gills" part what is my life
so birds have side chicks
So being Monogamous is actually unnatural?
yes. for a monogamous relation you need intelligence
lordarthuur So you are ascribing intelligence to gibbons?
No, he said it's uncommon.
So is the moon landing.
lordarthuur
You are right, you need intelligence, and that kind of intelligence is the emotional one.
I feel like the difference between monogamy and serial monogamy is missing here. I hear it mentioned as "paired for life" and "paired for a period of time". On another note, I love to see the Gibbon on here. They are my favorite of all of our cousins and are the very best brachiators I have ever seen! Great video!
This gives a whole revolution to the term "Love Birds".
love your informative videos
but is the stick professor guy at 1:39 a reference to CGPGrey?
..alrighty then.
This video really speaks to me
That harem explanation actually makes a lot of sense considering how common it was for rulers in ancient civilisations to have many wives and concubines. King Solomon was said to have had 300 concubines (even if you don't believe in the Bible, this *does* tell us a lot about what people thought was acceptable at the time), in Japan Emperors Meiji, Koumei and Taishou were all born to concubines, and in feudal China the ruling class had taken so many concubines that there was a legal limit enforced in the 1st century.
The fact that men in the ruling class kept such a wildly disproportionate share of the female population to themselves was probably a big factor in monogamy becoming popular in the first place, for the sake of egalitarianism. It goes without saying, then that any modern straight man who isn't part of the 1% should consider themselves very lucky that they never lived in the pre-Christian world.
Cheating, however seems to be objectively bad from a human perspective because it's done behind a spouse's back and therefore diminishes trust in the relationship, which diminishes the love people could've otherwise had for one another. If you have to hide something that you're doing from your partner, you probably already think it's an awful thing to do deep down, anyway. I can also see STDs becoming an issue if nobody's keeping tabs on who's having sex with who.
Also most people before modern history were farmers which means because the husband and wife live on a farm relatively isolated from other people, it makes it more possible to be monogamous
@@jokerofmorocco I would think farming was a community effort pre-history
Before agriculture allowed a man to guarantee paternity by having the resources to feed a harem of wives and fight off competitors, it’s thought that hunter-gatherer tribes (where most of human history resides) were far more promiscuous to the point where all the men in a village were considered part father and would contribute to raising the community’s kids accordingly.
Hence why it’s thought that a woman’s vocalizations during sex are in invitation for men nearby to join the gang bang, and why the human penis seems to be shaped specifically to scoop out the semen of previous mates.
We see vestiges of this in societies that didn’t settle down with a farm or a personal herd, most notably the Polynesians during Europe’s Age of Sail across the Pacific.
The moment you realize a parasite worm has more chance of finding a soulmate than you 😆