Monogamy Through the Lens of the Natural Laws

The previous chapter presented the science that shows monogamy is an unnatural mating arrangement for our species. Human physiology is geared towards maximising reproductive potential, and monogamy inhibits the achievement of this intrinsic aim. If we choose monogamy, then we need to understand that both our bodies and brains may be working against us to maintain it and that it will be natural for confusion and conflict to arise. However, beyond testing monogamy against our tangible anatomy and neurology, there is another examination we can make of a more subtle yet pervasive nature. We can investigate monogamy not only within the context of our biology but also against the inescapable rhythms of the world we live in. We can test its alignment with the immutable principles that work within and around us. Let’s look at monogamy through the lens of the natural laws.

The Universal Laws

The Seven Hermetic Laws were named after their creator Hermes Trismegistus, who was revered as a god of wisdom in the first century AD. They are said to govern the operation of every living being, our planet, and the universe. While they were considered both blasphemous and heretical at the time, centuries later, they became vital inputs to the transformational philosophies of the Renaissance. Nowadays, these laws are entrenched in the plethora of self-development teachings covering attraction, manifestation, and self-mastery. If you were to look closely at the celebrated teachings of Tony Robinson, Zig Ziglar, Eckhardt Tolle, Deepak Chopra and even the Dalai Lama, you would see how they are built upon these universal laws. Even our modern-day psychological systems draw from aspects of these inescapable truths.

1. Mentalism — The All is mind; The universe is mental.
2. Correspondence — As above, so below; As below, so above. As within, so without; As without, so within.
3. Vibration — Nothing rests; Everything moves; Everything vibrates.
4. Polarity — Everything has poles; Everything has its pair of opposites; Opposites are identical in nature but different in degree.
5. Rhythm — The pendulum swing manifests in everything; The measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left.
6. Cause and effect — Every cause has its effect; Every effect has its cause.
7. Gender — Gender is in everything; Everything has its masculine and feminine principles; Gender manifests on all planes.

The theory is that to function in alliance with these laws brings peace, wisdom and prosperity. Operating in ignorance and opposition to these principles brings tension and turmoil. So how well does our modern view of monogamy foster the former and prevent the latter?

Monogamy is mental — The universe is mental

“There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so.”~ William Shakespeare

The principle of mentalism tells us that our experiences of this world are shaped by our own conscious and subconscious thoughts. Our truths are merely mental constructs. Mentalism tells us that because our minds create our reality, we can change our view of things and, in doing so, change our circumstances and outcomes. It also behoves us to care for our lives invisible and spiritual aspects, as these are the precursors to our physical wellbeing and prosperity.

“ It is the always soul that dies first. Even if its departure goes unnoticed, and it always carries the body along with it. Humans are nourished by the invisible. We are nourished by that which is beyond the personal. We die by preferring its opposite.” ~ Lucien Jacque (French poet)

As we have seen, monogamy is not a physical imperative but a social construct. It is only a thought that monogamy is the ideal relationship structure — that monogamy is good and non-monogamy is bad. It is only a thought that those who maintain monogamy are moral and righteous, and those who do not are corrupt and flawed. While many communities across the globe share this thought, it does not make it anything but a mental construct. Many communities and individuals think differently and, as a result, have a different reality from our own.

It is also only a thought that if someone cheats on you, they don’t love you. Despite the scientific evidence of independent neurological mating systems, we cling to this belief. We think that love and sex are connected, but the reality is that they are mutually exclusive.

The law of mentalism also makes it clear that our worlds are shaped by processes within our innermost recesses. We cannot always be cognisant of these or even begin to comprehend their complex influence on our life. If we cannot fully know ourselves, it is simply impossible to know anyone else. It is ludicrous to think we can understand everything going on in another person’s mind or heart. What you are told or what you see is only a mere fraction of the content of their intricate inner world.

It has been shown that 95 per cent of our thoughts occur under the radar of our consciousness [3]. So, the vast majority of our thoughts and behaviours are driven by the swamp of subconscious impulses, ideas, urges and habits shown in the following diagram. Moreover, as we have seen in the previous chapter, monogamy is not just a discrete thought but a continual sequence of choices, with each one potentially playing out in a unique context.

What challenges does this principle hold for monogamy and our relationships more broadly? Well, it shows that you can never fully know a person; realistically, they may never fully know themselves or their motivations for action. Certainly, in any relationship, you will never know if there is mental or emotional infidelity or if there is a deep-seated and burning desire to break the promises made at the altar.

More importantly, though, how you think about this can lead to fear, suspicion and division or empathy, connection, and love. It is your choice whether you see a relationship as a process of risk management in which you must protect yourself from inevitable uncertainty and resist over-investment; or recognise and respect the opaque, knotted and convoluted nature of the human mind and use this to build resilience into the relationship.

The principle of mentalism also holds opportunities for anyone choosing monogamy. By becoming aware of our beliefs about monogamy, we can investigate them and question whether these are helping or hindering the creation of constructive and compassionate relationships. Also, because monogamy is a mental construct, we are free to shape it into a form true to ourselves and in alignment with the rest of the natural laws. Monogamy has the opportunity to become whatever we think it to be.

Coupledom and Correspondence — As above, so below

“The outer conditions of a person’s life will always be found to reflect their inner beliefs.” ~ James Allen

The principle of correspondence builds upon that of mentalism by enlivening the nexus between our mental states and current circumstances. It describes how the quality of our lives depends on the quality of our thoughts and that changing our life trajectory also requires a change in our beliefs. This principle is embedded in and illustrated by the modern Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) model shown in the following diagram.

The CBT model shows the process by which our beliefs become self-fulfilling prophecies. Our beliefs begin a whole chain of thoughts, feelings, and actions, the outcome of which is then used to confirm or contest the beliefs that beget them. Sometimes it is easier to see how this all works through an example. So here is one I prepared earlier!

Say you believe that true love means never desiring anyone else. If the thought arises then that you want to have sex with someone other than your partner, this can set off a whole chain of harmful emotions. You may be afraid that you have fallen out of love with your partner and are bad for even thinking about infidelity. Without having the capacity or capability to discuss this with your loved one, the behaviours resulting from these thoughts could be:

Suppose you overact to reduce the burning guilt inside. In that case, your partner will know something is up, maybe even suspecting or questioning whether an affair is afoot. Hiding away will not necessarily reduce the desires but will create boredom and loneliness, which may work to fuel other fires. Either way, the belief that having desires for someone other than your partner is bad has led to other destructive outcomes, being the birth of suspicion or the association of monogamy with isolation and insipidness.

There is an alternative cycle, though, that goes like this. In contrast to the previous belief, say this time you believe it is natural to be sexually attracted to people other than your partner. When the thought arises that you would love to have sex with that other person, there is no surprise. Instead of the shame that arose previously, you can celebrate the fact that you still feel the vitality of desire and that you can appreciate beauty. Rather than the fear of the first example, there is much less anxiety involved in being around those you find attractive. The lack of fear in these situations means you can continue socialising and enjoying life. There are no feelings of guilt that would lead to aggrandising action. The result of this situation is that monogamy has no effect on your social life and is not a source of tension between the couple. In this circumstance, the belief has created space for the sexual desire of others within the pair. This experience then confirms the belief that it is possible to be sexually attracted to other people and still love your partner.

As these simple and somewhat idealistic examples illustrate, the beliefs we hold around exclusive sexual relationships ignite a string of explosive expectations about our own and our partner’s behaviour. Put simply, your beliefs about monogamy will create your experience of it. These expectations do not have to be grounded in reality, as made clear by Gabriel Marcel:

“In themselves, facts have no authority.”[4]

That beliefs are the driver of our relationship outcomes makes for difficulty, and these hardships are not isolated to monogamy. Because we largely work from subjective and subconscious beliefs, it is incredibly difficult to get on the same page as our partner. It is easy, then, for these relationship expectations to become an incredible source of conflict if they are not made explicit and not met. In the first example, the belief that mental monogamy must exist for there to be love has resulted in a smaller and lonelier life. The second example shows that beliefs attuned to the realities of human physiology have created a greater degree of freedom and enjoyment of life.

Therefore, challenges arise when our beliefs and expectations regarding monogamy are far from the natural state. Where this is the case, we have a much greater risk of experiencing the sharp sting of a reality slap and then finding ourselves teetering on the edge of a vast reality gap.

“I call it ‘the reality gap’ because on one side is the reality we have, and on the other is the reality we want. And the bigger the gap between those two realities, the more painful the feelings that will arise: envy, jealousy, fear, disappointment, shock, grief, sadness, anger, anxiety, outrage, dread, guilt, resentment; perhaps even hatred, despair or disgust. And, whereas the slap is usually over quickly, the gap can persist for days, weeks, months, years and even decades.”[5]

The principle of correspondence also explains the theory that we cannot give love to others unless we first have it for ourselves and that the quality of our relationships is a direct reflection of what we have with ourselves. In this way, the challenges of monogamy could easily become scapegoats for the lack of self-awareness or dedication to self-development required by each individual. Issues of trust, faith and freedom in relationships begin within the heart of each individual. And so, while the concept of monogamy is drenched in moral tension, this is largely driven by the conflict it creates within each individual.

However, being aware of this law can create significant opportunities for the sexually exclusive couple. By understanding the realities around monogamy, we can establish more sensible and sustainable expectations and make more informed choices about how this arrangement aligns with our values and goals. We can also be more compassionate when ‘surprise’ behaviours occur, knowing that we are complex and cloudy creatures. The law of correspondence also empowers us to resolve relationship conflicts by looking first at the struggles occurring within ourselves. When love wanes, we can look within before blaming others or the chosen relationship model.

The Vibrating Twosome — Nothing rests

“Change is inevitable. Growth is optional.” ~ John C. Maxwell

The law of vibration corresponds to the Buddhist law of impermanence and is an inconvenient truth for those who have a desperate need for stability. This principle reminds us that change is natural and that nothing stays constant. At a physical level, we change each day dramatically, with 330 billion cells being replaced daily. And this state of flux is no different in our intangible mental and emotional worlds and also apparent in our connections with others.

As stated by James Hillman, the quest for constancy in commitment is a delusion:

“Such an arrangement can’t hold because life wants to break in on that deathly demand for absolute stability.”[6]

Not only do external forces want to shake things up continually, but our bodies are also made to modify our relationships. Evolutionary anthropologist Helen Fisher [7] reports that the heady hormones that drive romance (dopamine, norepinephrine and PEA) only endure in our systems for a few years. This period corresponds nicely to the timeframe required to achieve reproduction and care for an infant. It may be the biological support that keeps the couple together long enough to procreate and ensure the survival of their offspring. However, George Bernard Shaw did not need science to tell him that the passion felt at the beginning of a romance is only temporal. His lived experience and observation of others led him to this conclusion well before hormone research was rife :

“When two people are under the influence of the most violent, most insane, most delusive, and most transient of passions, they are required to swear that they will remain in that excited, abnormal, and exhausting condition continuously until death do them part.”

After these heady hormones of romance decline, the prime chemical driver of behaviour is oxytocin, known best for feelings of compassion, contentment, and connection. The intoxicating effects of new love dwindle physically, to be replaced by the less exciting, although integral components of a deep and meaningful relationship.

Interestingly, oxytocin is also a hormone that facilitates increased self-awareness and openness to new experiences. This suggests that after the waning of the original romance, it may be a prime opportunity to use the pair bond as a foundation for a new wave of personal growth. Of course, it depends on whether your partner is up for the adjustment adventure.

This story’s moral is that how you feel about an intimate partner is bound to change over time, and your partner will inevitably experience changed feelings for you. In addition, what you seek from a relationship can shift. Some may remain wedded to the thrill of novelty and naughty. In contrast, others may move on to be comforted by routine and predictability. This is the fundamental recognition in the introduction of no-fault divorce. There is no longer the expectation that a couple will live up to the promise that “till death do we part.” It is well known that even if the couple stays together physically, they can detach emotionally and spiritually. While all started bright and rosy, over time, beliefs, thoughts and emotions can alter to a point where there become “irreconcilable differences”.

The question then is not one of whether the nature of the relationship will change but if there is enough space in the monogamous arrangement to cater for the movement of each individual. Any relationship that “is too rigid or static ceases to grow and eventually dies.” [9]

It is fair to say that, in some ways, your relationship is changing daily. Still, it is usually only the big shifts in behaviour that we notice. And yet, following this principle, we should not be surprised when changes occur, including in our or our partners’ desires or feelings. As suggested by John C. Maxwell, it is the reactions to the changes that occur which are important. In clinging to false beliefs, unrealistic expectations or a desire to get back to how things used to be, we can miss the opportunity for personal learning and growth that is embedded in every change.

This law then presents the couple with a significant opportunity; the continuous ability to develop themselves as individuals and to expand their relationship. They have the power if they choose to use it, to create a relationship model with enough space to cater for the movement of each individual and embed the flexibility that will allow each partner to flourish.

Polarity and the Pair- Everything has its pair of opposites

Everything in existence has an opposite and dwells within this dichotomy. It is impossible for anything to exist in the absence of its antithesis. You cannot know what joy is until you have known sadness. You cannot know hard until you know soft, hot without cold, and you cannot know what war is unless you know peace. In the same way, as stated by Adam Phillips:

“Monogamy comes with infidelity built in, if only as a possibility.”[10]

The challenge polarity holds then for monogamy is that wherever it exists, its opposite is right beside it. Wherever humans promise sexual exclusivity, the possibility of infidelity is embedded. The fact that the opposite exists is why the promise to remain faithful needs to exist at all. We can either say that we will remain faithful to our partner (phrased in the positive) or not have sex with others (phrased in the negative). Both have the same intended outcome; each focuses on a different side of the coin.

This law of polarity means that wherever a pledge to monogamy is made, you are also accepting the tension that comes with the existence of potential infidelity. With the deep desire for devotion comes the inherent fear of disloyalty. You cannot separate the two; they are continually connected. The outcome, then, is that monogamy requires continual management of the paradox between freedom and commitment [11].

There is another element of this principle that is also important for monogamous relationships, and that is how we may seek to have our opposing needs satisfied by one chosen partner. Humans are complex creatures, and while we may crave spontaneous stimulation and sensual surprise, we also have an innate need for safety and security and to feel comfortable and confident in the arms of our companions. In monogamy, we expect our partner to deliver both. We seek absolute intimacy, wanting to know and be known by another completely. Still, we also need uncertainty and novelty to drive attraction. We expect the other to be our partner in dirty domestic chores as well as the satisfier of our sexual desires. We yearn for connection but also desire autonomy. We seek the excitement of lust but also the contentment of love. Humans are one big conundrum of contradictions.

And while in the past, we would have been in a tribe or community that would have delivered a range of people and a variety of these experiences, our modern, insular lives mean that “today, we turn to one person to provide what an entire village once did.” [12] While modern romance promises that you can get all these conflicting needs met in one place, Esther Perel, an expert in relationship counselling, responds by stating, “I’m not convinced.” [13] Other experts go further, declaring this expectation is nothing short of an outrage that only leads to sorrow.

“Declaring that a man and a woman must meet each other’s needs in all respects, at once, for their whole life, is a monstrosity that necessarily gives rise to hypocrisy, hostility and unhappiness.”[14]

The irony is that when we place such great dependence on one person, it does not create more stability, but in fact, the opposite; it makes us more vulnerable. The entirety of our self-image and our physical and emotional wellbeing is vested in a person who, we have seen, is also an inherently complex web of illogicality and inconsistency.

One could also assert that it is completely selfish and downright disrespectful to expect one person to satisfy the entire scope of our divergent needs. It places enormous pressure on someone else to be your “everything”. While we tend to expect that our partner will meet all these opposing expectations, we are quick to exclaim that they are unrealistic if they propose we should do the same for them. Such is the “hypocrisy of the conjugal life.” [15]

Moreover, many view the success of a relationship by the extent to which the individuals become one integrated unit; by how well they have merged their lives, livelihoods and their opposing gender energies. The couple is seen as “tight” if they share the same holidays, friends, hobbies, food, tv viewing preferences and political leanings. Divergence then becomes akin to division. Somehow, somewhere, the notion of love has become enmeshed with the idea of merging [16], and the parties abdicate their sovereignty in return for the promise of love.

What is not often considered in the pursuit of unification is the energy created by the attraction of opposites. Instead of a dance of individual energies and the excitement of the unknown, the monogamous couple often drifts towards the centre, where there is no movement — only stagnation. With fusion, there is no longer the possibility of desire for or connection with another, for no “other” exists. Only separate things can unite [17]. This situation is highlighted by Simone de Beauvoir, who argues that attraction comes from there being a separate, distinct and different “other” [18]. She suggests that in the pursuit of monogamy, the couple becomes the same; thus, curiosity and desire are lost. Monogamy then seems to want to ignore the dynamic principle of polarity in favour of solidity and settling. The result, as suggested by Thomas Moore, is the squashing of our unique individual spirit:

“Whenever I hear someone insisting on unity, in whatever context, I worry about the suppression of the soul, which is many-sided and full of the richness and the tension of multiple urges.”[19]

The law of polarity has huge challenges for those deciding to embark on sexually exclusive relationships. However, it also presents significant opportunities. Being aware that fidelity and infidelity exist together allows the couple to be open with each other about this tension and how they will choose to manage it. It also lessens anxiety and increases compassion if thoughts about cheating arise. Recognising that we have opposing needs also allows us to find multiple sources to fulfil them, reducing the pressure on one person to be your everything. Understanding how the power of attraction comes from opposites allows the couple to be proactive in preventing stagnating synthesis and creating an arrangement that caters to each individual’s independence.

The Rhythmic Duo — The pendulum swing manifests in everything

“Everything old is new again.”

The principle of polarity tells us that there are opposites in everything. The principle of rhythm then tells us that there is a continual movement between the contrasts. The pendulum is the perfect presentation of this principle, showing that there is movement between opposites and that the extent of swing over to one side determines how far the swing is over to the other.

We see this principle in action from a macro perspective in society. Repression swings to emancipation, spiritual mystery shifts to a reliance on scientific truths, organisational design moves from formal hierarchy to freelance networks, and governments sway from left to right and back again.

What does this mean for monogamy? Well, it depends on how far to the side of exclusivity you wish to pin your partner. Let’s take it to the extreme. Say your version of monogamy is that your partner not only does not have sex with anyone else, but they should also not find another attractive or even think about a physical connection with another. You seek to bind them into the relationships physically, mentally and emotionally. In this case, you have pegged the pendulum at the extreme of one side. If the supports fail, the rhythm principle tells us there will be a radical shift in the opposite direction — towards physical, mental and emotional liberation and self-expression. Esther Perel highlights how this movement may manifest:

“Affairs, online encounters, strip clubs, and sex on business trips are common transgressions that establish psychological distance from an overbearing relationship.”[20]

Pegging the pendulum of a relationship at any extreme will only result in equally extreme behaviour but in the opposite direction to what you had hoped to achieve. The further your expectations are away from the natural equilibrium point of balance between the opposing forces, the more you set yourself up for the potential of an equal and opposite backlash.

The principle of rhythm also tells us that our needs swing between the poles over time. We can move radically and rapidly from feelings of great selflessness to a drive for selfishness and self-satisfaction. Sometimes we can shift in seconds from the intense pull towards security and stability to a burning desire to run wild and free and seek all of life’s adventures. In this fast-moving world of competing perspectives, it is easy to end up feeling dazed and confused and wondering, “what is wrong with me? Everyone else seems to have figured out what they want; why can’t I?” You don’t see the internal fluctuations also occurring within those who seem to have their act together.

Sometimes though, it can take years for the pendulum to swing from feelings of satisfaction to its opposite. Or from comfort in a monogamous relationship to a craving for something revolutionary. When they do occur, this pivot can also cause deep introspection and self-criticism. It can cause a person to question whether they will ever be satisfied or if they are broken or faulty in some way.

Fundamentally, this principle tells us that we will always go through various opposing emotions and thoughts and that we are not single-dimensional beings. Everything is alternating all the time. Just as waves come and go, it is natural for feelings of love and lust to ebb and flow, rise and fall. For this reason, it should not be a surprise when we feel conflicted in our relationships or when we see “unusual” behaviour for our partners. It should not be a shock when our minds move from a strong commitment to sexual exclusivity to thoughts about enjoying sensual pleasures outside the couple. While we cling to our partner and the coupledom as a rock of stability, this attribution of security is delusional.

Perhaps this principle can be best summed up by saying, “we are all naturally swingers”!

The fluctuations predicted by the law of rhythm can put great pressure on monogamous relationships, which are generally chosen for their promise to deliver security and stability. However, with awareness and compassion, the couple can use this principle to their advantage and to strengthen, not shrink, their relationship, for there is no doubt that oscillations will occur. The most important thing is what follows the fluctuations. Do we try and restrain the natural flow of life and attempt to secure it in a position that appears most conducive to coupledom? This may be a sure way to end up with rope burn.

Or is it possible to create a relationship that creates firmness and fluidity? For example, by aligning expectations, boundaries and behaviours close to our natural human states, we can minimise tension and reduce the likelihood of backlash. And by knowing that it is natural for our feelings to fluctuate, we can lessen shock and conflict when they occur and invite greater empathy and compassion for ourselves and our partners. In this way, the rhythm principle empowers the couple’s emotions to dance together and create an exclusive cadence.

The Cause and Effect of Connection- Every cause has its effect

“Garbage in, garbage out.”

The law of cause and effect tells us that every situation we encounter has a source, and every action we take has a consequence. This may seem like a simplistic proposition, but its implications are immense. For example, your decision to enter into a monogamous relationship is not just a random occurrence but a result of many internal and external contributors. You may like to think of it as an independent and considered decision, whereas it is more likely to be based on a complex set of preceding conditions.

Within the relationship itself, the quality of inputs each individual brings determines the quality of the connection. Specifically, our relationships’ satisfaction and success depend on the quantity of both fear and love we put into them.

“There are two basic motivating forces: fear and love.” ~ John Lennon

We will dive deeper into the notion of love later in the book, but for now, we can think of it as a deep and honest care for the wellbeing of yourself and others. It means being vulnerable enough to show your true self and being brave enough to commit to something bigger than yourself.

When you bring love into a relationship, you will see a flow of positive emotions. The effects of love are happiness, contentment, peace and joy. Lennon also believed that with love comes an openness to life’s reality and a passion for contributing to and bringing about positive change. Fear is said to be oppositive of love, bringing forth a flow of negative emotions, including pride, anger, desire, apathy, guilt and shame. Spending our days in fear is nothing short of destructive — for the person living in fear and the world around them. Because as Lennon so wisely perceived:

“When we are afraid, we pull back from life.”

Suppose we are bringing fear into our relationships. In that case, the effect is that we become closed to others and our potential. We are not truly and fully ourselves. The result is that we live in a state of conflict in which care and contribution are stifled.

What does this have to do with monogamy? It comes down to the intention with which it is entered into and with which it is maintained. Is the reason you are entering an exclusive relationship (the cause) because you believe it is true to your nature and best for the wellbeing of yourself and your partner? Or is the decision driven by concern about losing the person if you don’t commit, or how the many couples in your social sphere may view you? Do you wish to be monogamous because you believe it will help you and your partner be the best people you can be? Or are you choosing this path or maintaining it because you are afraid of criticism, ostracism, loneliness, or not being seen as “normal”? The challenge comes when fear is the cause of your choice to enter a monogamous relationship.

The drivers of your decision are essential considerations because the inputs’ quality determines the effect’s quality, or as the techies say, garbage in, garbage out. If it is love that you bring into the choice of monogamy, then it is love that you will receive. If it is fear that is your prime motivation, then it is fear that will haunt your relationship. In saying this, remember the principle of rhythm tells us that we may oscillate between the two. Nevertheless, there will be a prime cause for your choice of monogamy, which will inevitably determine the enjoyment and endurance of the arrangement.

However, along with this challenge, the law of cause and effect delivers a real opportunity via the virtues of self-awareness and honesty. Being truthful with ourselves and our partners about our motivations for entering a monogamous relationship will ensure the right energy pervades the coupledom and supports its evolution and growth. Recognising where fear is fuelling our actions is also the first step to accepting our vulnerability and sharing this with our loved ones. Fear can be the doorway to deeper relationships. Still, first, we must allow ourselves to acknowledge it and trust ourselves enough to reveal it.

Gender Balance — Everything has it’s masculine and feminine

The final principle of gender builds upon the principle of polarity. It refers specifically to the gender energy element within the model of sexuality. This law states that there are opposing feminine and masculine energies residing in everything, and the interplay of these is the source of vitality and creativity. This principle does not suggest that people identifying as male are only comprised of masculine energy and that those with a gender identity of female espouse only feminine energy. Instead, it is professed that both masculine and feminine energy resides in all things. The ultimate aim is to have both energies working together to ignite life.

The masculine energy is the assertive, progressive, explorative energy that creates drive and motivation. It is an energy of logic and loves order, solutions and plans. It gives out direction and instruction. The opposing feminine energy gives out care and nurturing. In contrast to the logical progression of the male is fluidity in motion. Instead of prioritising solutions, feminine energy places the greatest importance on relationships.

In balance, the masculine and the feminine dance beautifully together and foster energy that creates life. However, it is easy for these energies to get out of balance. When there is too much masculine energy, everything feels like work. There is always a problem to be solved, and the focus is always on the destination instead of being able to enjoy the journey. The outcome of extreme masculinity is feelings of being overwhelmed and exhausted. Without the proper balance of the feminine, it feels like a lot of action is happening but with very little outcome. People can feel lost and question why they began this adventure in the first place.

However, when there is too much feminine energy, there can be flightiness and a lack of focus. Without the structure and order of the masculine, people can feel like they are being blown around by the wind and at the whim of external circumstances. There is a preoccupation with maintaining relationships but an accompanying lack of focus on an end goal or purpose. This imbalance is akin to flitting around, enjoying all the sights but forgetting about organising a place to spend the night.

There is no doubt our modern lives are masculine-heavy. Our days are filled with making plans, following rules and solving problems. We are driven by science and logic, with little room for spirituality and intuition. We are so busy operating in the world of work that there is very little time for nurturing and investments in our relationships. And even within a couple, it is likely that both partners are working towards the egalitarian model, where there are opportunities for financial and personal growth open to both parties and equal sharing of power. However, instead of true equality, where both the masculine and feminine energies can ebb and flow, and each partner is free to express both, the reality is that we end up with both partners operating from the masculine energy. It is no wonder, then, that our relationships end up feeling draining and devoid of purpose.

Sustained desire requires attraction; as we have seen, attraction is a force of opposites. Monogamy requires a balance of the energies within and between the couple. Still, this balance is not supported in our commercially driven world. I would argue that our modern lives inhibit the true expression of both energies, either through political correctness or through a distorted view of equality. The masculine energies associated with physical power, dominance and competition are watered down to ensure no encouragement or condoning of violence. The feminine energies are rejected because people fear emotions and because the prominent measures of success are material, not relational. The result is that instead of a great mix of colours from across the rainbow, we are left with a dreary and depressing shade of grey (unlike the energising interplay revealed in the books of the same name)!

What does this mean for monogamy? It means that for monogamy to work in our materialistic culture, the couple needs to resist the masculine rule of their relationship by being: cognisant that both energies are required to sustain the relationship and also vulnerable and safe enough to express each energy.

It takes considerable insight and courage to negotiate roles for each partner around the masculine and feminine energies, yet this is required if the couple wants to keep the relationship alive. Egalitarianism and equality are noble pursuits, but if not engaged with the wisdom provided by the principle of gender, it could be a death knell for the satisfaction and survival of the relationship. The opportunity for the couple then becomes creating a relationship model where both energies can flow freely, where there is room for both achievements of ambition and attention to affiliations, and which sustains attraction and desire instead of dampening them.

The Profound Potential of the Principles

This analysis shows that there is nothing in the natural laws that would preclude monogamy from flourishing. What it does illustrate, though, are the conditions necessary for a sexually exclusive arrangement to thrive. For a monogamous relationship to minimise tension and conflict within and among each participant, it will need to:

• Be aligned with the beliefs upon which the monogamous union is based and the natural human state
• Embed compassion for the complex, subconscious and changeable nature of each person’s needs
• Encourage development of each individual to ensure the continual improvement of relationship inputs
• Create space for flux, independence and separateness
• Celebrate and foster the flow of both masculine and feminine energies.

Many of these preconditions counter the traditional view of monogamy, which is based on flawed notions of fidelity, is positioned as a sanctum of stability and is lauded as an act of completion for two imperfect individuals. While our biology may make monogamy incredibly challenging, it appears a great deal of difficulty also arises from the beliefs we bring into it and the choices we make for how it is constructed.

You may choose not to believe these laws and remain convinced that your partner is there to complete you, that they will be your everything and that nothing will ever change between you. You may decide that these principles are not immutable but idiotic.

“The half-wise, recognising the comparative unreality of the universe, imagine that they may defy its laws. Such are vain and presumptuous fools, and they are broken against the rocks and torn asunder by the elements by reason of their folly.” ~ The Kybalion[21]

However, these principles are in play whether you believe in them or not. The real choice becomes whether you will see them as insurmountable challenges and let them tear apart your union or employ them as opportunities to strengthen your connection. While this chapter has concentrated on the challenges and opportunities for monogamy, knowledge of these laws will allow us to ground all of our relationships in reality and have truthful, open and critical conversations about the way things really work. These laws empower each individual to create a relationship that aligns with the natural flow of life rather than one that fights against them. Life and relationships are hard enough in themselves; why would you choose to embed additional conflict?

Originally published at https://moraldilemmaofmonogamy.substack.com on January 21, 2023.