Title:  Is the Pair Bond a Human Universal? An Analytical Essay on the Difficulties of Plural Love and the Quest for Dyadic Intimacy

Abstract:

The impulse to form a dyadic love or pair bond and not the desire for sexual release accounts for the formation of its universality. This impulse is not recent but has been a pervasive force throughout human history. Evolutionary inspired researchers argue that the pair bond is based on a strong, selective and enduring relationship between two individuals, often, but not always, leading to marriage. It involves emotional and psychological attachment, including feelings of trust, commitment, and a preference for inclusive intimacy. 

In opposition are the social constructionists who argue we are more of a hybrid species that easily and readily shifts between a social monogamy, plural partnership and sexual/romantic monogamy. They are correct in noting that many humans live out their lives in a sexually monogamous union, but it is not something that comes easily or naturally. Sexual monogamy requires adopting an ethical stance and personal dedication to maintain it. It also requires cultural norms to sustain it. This raises the question: if humans need to be vigilant in their moral commitment to remain sexually faithful, does this vigilance extend to the domain of love? Is the monogamous love bond and not sexual exclusivity the more essential trait responsible for the pair bond’s universality? Or is it possible to find greater contentment and life-satisfaction in forming simultaneously sexual and emotional unions with a variety of individuals?

This is the central question that lies at the core of the constructionist’s insistence that humans are not a pair bond species and can readily find greater satisfaction in a pluralistic love bond entanglement. The constructionist position is consistent with a human behavioral ecology approach, which prefers a more flexible contextual explanation, not restricted or constrained by preexisting, albeit “evolued,” psychological mondules.   

In this talk, I draw upon previous research and analysis to probe the social and emotional nuances associated with what it means to be in an enduring love bond. My analysis concludes with assessing the relative success of the social and personal experiments with plural love arrangements.