The Monogamy Method

Make Him a Monogamy Junkie

This series of eBooks teaches you everything about the way that a man's mind works, and how to spark attraction with him that will lead to more than just hot sex; you will unlock a way that shows him that he wants to have a married relationship with you. Once you learn the secrets in this book, your man will be falling all over himself to have a life with your forever. All it takes are a few key pushes in the right direction, and your man will want nothing but to marry you and settle down into a happy, bliss-filled life. You will get bonus packages such as the training CDs to give you further training, an interview with Carlos Cavallo to teach you more about your relationship, and 99 Dirty Talk Scripts that make him want to have a future with you, and only you, as long as you both shall live. Read more...

Make Him a Monogamy Junkie Summary

Rating:

4.7 stars out of 12 votes

Contents: Ebook
Author: Gloria Lee
Official Website: monogamyj.com
Price: $47.00

Access Now

My Make Him a Monogamy Junkie Review

Highly Recommended

I started using this ebook straight away after buying it. This is a guide like no other; it is friendly, direct and full of proven practical tips to develop your skills.

This ebook does what it says, and you can read all the claims at his official website. I highly recommend getting this book.

Monogamous

Monogamous In a long-term sexual relationship with only one partner. See monogamy. monogamy Literally, the practice of being married to one person at a time. In contemporary usage the term also refers to the practice of maintaining unmarried relationships between two people in which the partners have sexual relations only with each other. Monogamous relationships have become more widespread among single adults in the 1980s and 1990s as the AIDS epidemic has spread.

The Space of All Possible Stimulation

The trouble with mutual choice for mutual pleasure is that all the genes for unpleasantness come aboard as stowaways. Mutual choice implies that individuals sort themselves out in a mating market. As a thought experiment, imagine for the moment that mating is perfectly monogamous. The best pleasure-giving female pairs up with the best pleasure-giving male. Both have their sexual preferences fulfilled, and they live in bliss and produce pleasure-giving children. But their competitors do not just give up and die of embarrassment at the inferiority of their foreplay. Moderately pleasant females mate with moderately pleasant males, because neither can do any better in the mating market. And the most unpleasant females mate with the most unpleasant males, because their only alternative would be to remain single. All else being equal, they will all have children too. In fact, assuming monogamy, the genes for pleasure-giving will not have any reproductive advantage whatsoever over...

Courtship in the Pleistocene

Popular culture images of prehistory are divided by market segmentation according to consumer age group, and by sexual content ratings. There is a children's G-rated version of prehistory that eliminates all sex and most violence, where neither sexual selection nor natural selection have much force. Playmobil toy sets include multi-ethnic cave-men happily living alongside dinosaurs, hunting lions, and living in jungles. The Flintstones cartoons depicted a prehistory of capitalist affluence, suburban family values, and chaste monogamy. In these Gardens of Eden there is no hint of reproductive competition, the engine of evolution.

Pleistocene and Holocene

The Holocene changed patterns of human mating and reproduction dramatically It saw the emergence of inherited wealth, arranged marriages, hierarchical societies, patriarchy feminism, money, prostitution, monogamous marriage, harems, personal ads, telephones, contraception, and abortion. These make modern courtship rather different from Pleistocene courtship. But Pleistocene courtship is what drove sexual selection during the relevant period of human evolution, and human behavior in the Holocene still reflects our Pleistocene legacy.

Combining Courtship and Parenting

Before contraception, our female ancestors would have produced their first child by around age 20, within a few years of reaching sexual maturity. (Female puberty probably happened several years later in prehistory than it does now, because the modern fat-rich diet artificially hastens puberty and increases teenage fertility.) Before legally imposed monogamous marriage, individuals probably passed through several sexual relationships during their reproductive years. These two patterns imply that most courtship during most of human evolution occurred between adults who already had children by previous relationships. Without nannies, nurseries, or schools, those children would have been hanging around their mothers almost all the time. (In the wild, no primate female ever grants parental custody

Where Sexual Choice Did Its Work

When we talk about their mating pattern, this is just a generalization across a lot of individual strategic behavior. The individual sexual choices, not the aggregate mating pattern drive sexual selection. To describe our ancestors as following mating patterns like moderate polygamy and serial monogamy is just a useful shorthand for identifying these sexual selection pressures. However, we should not assume that sexual selection requires polygyny. As Darwin appreciated, the sexual choices that lead to monogamous pairs can also be crucial. Is it possible that sexual selection can produce equal mental capacities for courtship in both sexes How can the sexual choices that create monogamous couples possibly have any evolutionary effects Sexual selection depends on differences in reproductive success, and at first glance monogamy looks as if it produces no such differences.

Sexual Selection When Everyone Ends a Partner

To see how sexual selection can work even when everyone pairs up into couples, we need a thought experiment. Like all good thought experiments, it will be simplistic, unrealistic, and cartoon-like. But it will give us a surprising result. In this imaginary scenario, every hominid individual finds a sexual mate, every relationship is totally monogamous and permanent, and every relationship produces an identical number of babies. And yet, as long as sexual choice favors fitness indicators, sexual choice can still drive sexual selection by producing unequal numbers of grandchildren. Here's how it works. Imagine a tribe of hominids, half of them male and half female, all single, all just reaching sexual maturity at the same time. Some males have higher fitness than other males, and they advertise their higher fitness using fitness indicators such as vigorous dancing, intelligent conversing, or realistic cave-painting. Some females have higher fitness than other females, which they...

Sexual Selection Without Sex Differences

The pure fitness matching process would not produce any sex differences. All else being equal, males and females would evolve fitness indicators to precisely the same degree. This is because under strict monogamy they would have equal incentives for displaying their fitness and for selecting mates based on fitness. Fitness matching tends to promote sexual equality in the How many traits have these features predicted by the fitness matching model Many traits in many species look ornamental and costly, show minimal sex differences, and probably influence mate choice. However, biologists since the 1930s have usually called such traits species recognition markers. They assumed, following the tradition of equating sexual selection with a mechanism for producing sex differences, that such traits simply advertise one's species rather than one's fitness. For the last fifty years, whenever a biologist noticed something that exists in both sexes, which would have been called a sexual ornament...

Feminism And Phalaropes

In humans, the asymmetry is clear enough nine months of pregnancy set against five minutes of fun (I exaggerate ) If the balance of such investment determines sex roles in seduction, then it comes as no surprise that men seduce women rather than vice versa. This fact suggests that a highly polygamous human society represents a victory for men, whereas a monogamous one suggests a victory for women. But this is misleading. A polygamous society primarily represents a victory for one or a few men over all other men. Most men in highly polygamous societies are condemned to celibacy.

The Evolution of the Penis

More strongly with testicle size than with penis size. For example, male chimpanzees face much greater sperm competition than humans. When female chimps ovulate, they copulate up to fifty times a day with a dozen different males. In response, male chimps have evolved huge, 4-ounce testicles to produce sperm, but only small, thin penises to deliver it. At the other extreme, male silverback gorillas guard their harems vigilantly and violently, and tolerate no sperm competition, so they have evolved very small testicles. Humans have moderately sized testicles by primate standards, indicating that ancestral females copulated with more than one male in a month fairly often. Sequential fidelity to different men in different months would not produce any sperm competition, because each egg would be exposed only to one man's sperm. The fact that male human testicles are larger than those of gorillas is one of the strongest pieces of evidence that ancestral females were not strictly monogamous.

The Marriage Obsession

No hunter-gatherer society supports more than occasional polygamy, and the institution of marriage is virtually universal. People live in larger bands than they used to, but within those bands the kernel of human life is the nuclear family husband, wife, and children Marriage is a child-rearing institution wherever it occurs, the father takes at least some part in rearing the child even if only by providing food In most societies men strive to be polyg-amists but few succeed Even in the polygamous societies of pas-toralists, the great majority of marriages are monogamous ones.' It is our usual monogamy, not our occasional polygamy, that sets us apart from other mammals, including apes Of the four other apes (gibbons, orangutans, gorillas, and chimpanzees), only the gibbon practices anything like marriage. Gibbons live in faithful pairs in the forests of Southeast Asia, each pair living a solitary life within a territory.

Woman with a Rash and Lower Extremity Pain

The patient developed anorexia and lower extremity pain with weakness, nausea, and vomiting over the next week. On presentation to the emergency room, she also complained of fatigue, suprapubic pain, and fullness. The history was remarkable for frequent urinary tract infections over the prior 6 months, but no prior chronic health issues, surgeries, or pregnancies. Placement of a urinary catheter produced 1 L of clear output she was thus admitted with urinary retention and severe pain of the lower extremities. Further questioning revealed that the patient was involved in a long-term monogamous relationship (which included unprotected intercourse), that she had a cousin with lupus, that she smokes a pack per day, and that she had no known drug allergies.

Female eavesdropping in blackcapped chickadees

Who received aggressive playback, compared to the broods of females paired to high-ranking males who received submissive playback or to males who received no playback (Fig. 14.4c, Mennill et al. 2002). In other words, after hearing their high-ranking partner lose a song contest to an opponent, females paired to high-ranking males changed from a monogamous mating strategy to a promiscuous mating strategy. Surprisingly, the behavioral assay (stage 3) yielded no evidence that female black-capped chickadees eavesdrop on male-male song contests neither female behavior nor male behavior showed any difference on the morning following aggressive or submissive playback manipulations (Mennill et al. 2002, 2003). Although no extraterritorial forays were observed during the observation period, one extrapair copulation was observed outside the observation period. A female paired to a high-ranking male who had received aggressive playback had an extrapair copulation with a low-ranking male who had...

From Fitness Matching to Fitness Indicators

Consider the mating market from female number two's perspective. She is the second-highest-fitness female hominid in the tribe. She would love to get together with male number one and have his higher-fitness babies, who will survive better and attract better mates. But female number one stands in the way, seducing male number one with her high-fitness charms. (For the moment, we are still assuming strict monogamy and no adultery, so female number two cannot just have an affair with male number one.) What can female number two do She cannot raise her true heritable fitness, because on the African savanna she has no access to retroviral germ-line genetic engineering. But she could produce an appearance of higher fitness by allocating more energy to her fitness indicators. If she had a mutation that increased the quality of one of her fitness indicators, even at the expense of her other adaptations, she might look better than female number one. In fact, she would become female number...

Indicators for Qualities Other than Fitness

In principle, sexual choice could sometimes put non-heritable qualities ahead of heritable fitness. If the environment is so demanding that a female simply cannot raise a child by herself, then she might favor an attentive, experienced father, even if he has a lower general fitness than a charming athletic genius who is hopelessly incompetent with babies. However, she might still prefer to have an affair with the genius and let the experienced father raise the resulting child. New DNA methods for establishing paternity have shown that this sort of eugenic cuckoldry is surprisingly common in birds previously thought to be monogamous, and in humans.

The Clitoris and the Orgasm

This tension explains why women and men are not well adapted to giving each other easy, simultaneous, repeated orgasms. If the function of orgasm were simply to reinforce monogamous pair-bonds, why should evolution make female orgasm so difficult and male orgasm so easy during vaginal intercourse If female orgasm is a side-effect of male orgasm, why does it just happen to work when an attractive man provides a lot of foreplay and deep, slow copulatory thrusting, but not so well when sex is hurried or the partner is undesirable Surely, sexual selection theory offers insight into this ancient human mystery. Female orgasm seems poorly designed as a pair-bonding mechanism, but it is perfectly designed as a discriminatory system that separates the men from the boys.

Assessing the Runaway Brain Theory

If one acknowledges that sexual selection has played a role in the human mind's evolution, it is crucial to understand the runaway process, even if the runaway brain theory itself does not work. The reason is that runaway sexual selection is ubiquitous. Take any population with mate choice that is not totally monogamous, and runaway will occur sooner or later, going off in some direction. Runaway is endemic in sexual selection. Like convection beneath the Sun's surface, it is always bubbling away, mixing up sexual ornaments and sexual preferences, sometimes shooting off in a random direction like a solar flare. Any species that reproduces sexually using mate choice has probably been caught up in the runaway process repeatedly.

The Rewards Of Violence

Consider the case of the Pitcairn Islanders. In 1790 nine mutineers from HMS Bounty landed on Pitcairn along with six male and thirteen female Polynesians. Thousands of miles from the nearest habitation, unknown to the world, they set about building a life on the little island. Notice the imbalance fifteen men and thirteen women. When the colony was discovered eighteen years later, ten of the women had survived and only one of the men. Of the other men, one had committed suicide, one had died, and twelve had been murdered The survivor was simply the last man left standing in an orgy of violence motivated entirely by sexual competition. He promptly underwent a conversion to Christianity and prescribed monogamy for Pitcairn society. Until the 1930s the colony prospered and good genealogical records were kept. Studies of these show that the prescription worked. Apart from rare and occasional adultery, the Pitcairners were and remain monogamous. 4 Monogamy, enforced by law, religion, or...

Sexual Selection in Primates

In most primate species, the distribution of food in the environment determines the distribution of females, and the distribution of females determines the distribution of males. When food is so dispersed that females do best by foraging on their own, males disperse to pair up with the lone females. This gives rise to monogamous couples. It is a fairly rare pattern among primates, Most primates follow the general animal pattern of male sexual competition and female choosiness. But when the costs of male sexual competition and courtship are high, males also have incentives to be choosy When male mate choice becomes important, sexual selection affects females as well as males. In monogamous marmosets and tamarins, females compete to form pairs with quality males and drive off competing females. In single-male harem systems, the dominant male's sperm can become a limiting resource for female reproduction, and high-ranking females prevent low-ranking females from mating through aggression...

Why Play Sexual Monopoly

A female deer has little need of a monopolized male. He cannot produce milk or bring grass to the young. So the mating system of a deer is determined by the battle among males, which in turn is determined by how females decide to distribute themselves. Where females live in herds (for example, elk), males can be harem masters. Where females live alone (white-tailed deer), males are territorial and mostly monogamous Each species has its own pattern, depending on the behavior of the females In the 1970s zoologists began to investigate these patterns to try to find out what determined a species mating system. They coined a new term, socioecology, in the process. Its most successful forays were into antelope and monkey society Two studies concluded that the mating system of an antelope or a primate could be safely predicted from its ecology. Small forest antelopes are selective feeders and, as a consequence, are solitary and monogamous Middle-sized, open-woodland ones live in small groups...

Pleistocene Flirting Versus Modern Dating

Perhaps even more importantly for long-term relationships, there was no television to keep your sexual partner amused after the first blush of romance faded. If they were bored in the relationship, there was no vicarious entertainment to be had. They either had to put up with your boring old self, or find a new lover. During the Holocene, when long-term monogamy thrived, people worked much harder and longer hours doing their planting, herding, trading, and career-climbing. There were fewer hours of leisure to fill, and more ways to fill them without talking to one another. Historically, humans did not begin to put up with lifelong marriage until they could no longer live off the land, property inheritance became the key to children's survival, and couples had economic incentives to continue cooperating long after they were no longer on speaking terms. During prehistory, there were fewer economic incentives to stay together, fewer distracting entertainments to replace lost romance, and...

The Point Of Marriage

One is to study modern people directly and describe what they do as the human mating system The answer is usually monogamous marriage. A second way is to look at human history and divine from our past what sexual arrangements are typical of our species But history teaches a dismal lesson A common arrangement from our past was that rich and powerful men enslaved concubines in large harems A third way is to look at people living in simple societies with Stone Age technologies and conjecture that they live much as our ancestors lived ten millennia ago. They tend to fall between the extremes less polygamous than early civilizations, less monogamous than modern society The fourth technique is to look at our closest relatives, the apes, and compare our behavior and anatomy with theirs The answer that emerges is that men ' s testicles are not large enough for a system of promiscuity like the chimpanzee s, men s bodies are not big enough for a system of harem...

Role Expectations

Gender-based roles are strongly emphasized in traditional Latino culture. A Latino woman is considered largely in her role as mother and care-giver. These beliefs will exert their influence on reproductive health practices. Abortion often is not an option for Latino women, and the use of contraceptive methods may be unacceptable because of religious beliefs, especially in those less acculturated. Female sterilization may be considered a way to facilitate promiscuity by traditional Latino men and thus may lead to objections in treating family members. Latino men are expected to be good family providers, tend to be less communicative than Latina women, and generally are not to display emotion based on a cultural script usually referred to as machismo. Sexual behavior is viewed in largely moralistic terms, and double standards are commonly held regarding appropriate sexual behavior. In many Latin American countries, it is acceptable for men to have several sexual partners, including...

Fitness Spreading

One effect of fitness matching is to increase the variation in fitness in the next generation. In fact, it creates the widest possible fitness differences between babies. Fitness matching by parents leads to fitness spreading among offspring. Consider the extremes of the fitness spread. The only way to produce a baby of the highest possible fitness given the parents available, would have been for the highest-fitness male to mate with the highest-fitness female. That is exactly what happened, through the mating market. And the only way to produce a baby of the lowest possible fitness would have been for the lowest-fitness male to mate with the lowest-fitness female. Again, that is exactly what happened. Fitness matching does notjust increase the variation in fitness a little bit. It increases that variation as much as any mate choice process could, with or without monogamy.

Sparrow Fights

There is a small owl called Tengmalm s owl that lives in Finnish forests. In years when mice are abundant, some of the male owls have two mates, one in each of two territories, while other males go without a mate at all The females that are married to polygamous males rear noticeably fewer young than the females married to monogamous males, so why do they put up with it mist, Jose Veiga studied house sparrows breeding in a colony in Madrid Only about 10 percent of the males in the colony were polygamous By selectively removing certain males and females he tested various theories about why more males did not have multiple wives First, he rejected the notion that males were indispensable to the rearing of young. Females in bigamous marriages reared as many young as those in monogamous ones, though they had to work harder. Second, by removing some males and observing which males the widows chose to remarry, he rejected the idea that females preferred to mate with unmated males they were...

The Fashion Business

This brings us back to the shifting sands of cultural standards of beauty. Beauty cannot be commonplace in a monogamous species like man it must stand out Men are discriminating because they will get the chance to marry only one or perhaps two women, so they are always interested in the best they can get, never in the ordinary. In a crowd of women all wearing black, the single one in red would surely catch the eye of a man, whatever her figure or face

Obsessed With Youth

I believe that Miller s tale deserves a special twist from the neoteny theory (although he is not convinced). The neoteny theory is well established among anthropologists. And the notion of human monogamous child rearing is well established among sociobiolo-gists Nobody has yet put the two together If men began selecting mates that appeared youthful, then any gene that slowed the rate of development of adult characteristics in a woman would make her more attractive at a given age than a rival Consequently, she would leave more descendants, who would inherit the same gene. Any neoteny gene would give the appearance of youthfulness. Neoteny, in other words, could be a consequence of sexual selection, and since neoteny is credited with increasing our intelligence (by enlarging the brain size at adulthood), it is to sexual selection that we should attribute our great intelligence.

Cuckoldry Paranoia

Just like herons and swallows, people live in monogamous pairs within large colonies. Fathers help to rear the young if only by bringing food or money And crucially, because of the sexual division of labor that characterized early human hunter-gathering societies (broadly speaking, men hunt, women gather), the sexes spend much time apart. So women have ample opportunities for adultery, and men have ample incentives to guard their mates or, failing that, to copulate frequently with them. Polygamy is rare in hunter-gatherer societies, but adultery is common wherever it has been looked for. By analogy with monogamous colonial birds, therefore, one would expect to find human beings practicing either mate guarding or frequent copulation Richard Wrangham has speculated that human beings practice mate guarding in absentia Men keep an eye on their wives by proxy. If the husband is away hunting all day in the forest, he can ask his mother or his neighbor whether his wife was up to anything...

Harems And Wealth

In the chess game of sex, each gender must respond to the other s moves The resulting pattern, whether polygamous or monogamous, is a stalemate rather than a draw or a victory In elephant seals and sage grouse, the game reaches the point where males care only about the quantity of mates and females only about the quality. Each pays a heavy price, the males battling and exhausting themselves and dying in the often vain attempt to be the senior bull or master cock, the females entirely forgoing any practical help from the fathers in rearing their children. Imagine a population of ancestral albatrosses in which the males were highly polygamous and spared no time to help rear the young Imagine that you were a junior male with no prospect of becoming a harem master Suppose that instead of striving to be a polygamist, you married one female and helped rear her offspring You would not have hit the jackpot, but at least you would have done better than most of your more ambitious brothers...

Pleistocene Mating

Most children were probably born to couples who stayed together only a few years. Exclusive lifelong monogamy was practically unknown. The more standard pattern would have been serial monogamy a sequence of nearly exclusive sexual partnerships that were socially recognized and jealously defended. Relationships may have sometimes ended amicably, but perhaps more often one partner would reject or abandon the other, or one would happen to die. This is the pattern characteristic of most human hunter-gatherers, because they do not have the religious, legal, and property ties that reinforce ultra-long-term monogamous marriages in civilized societies.

Prostaglandin 401

In practical terms, this means we must scrupulously be careful to practice safer sex in all relationships except those that are long-term and monogamous and be absolutely trustworthy. The importance of trustworthy monogamy, even among loving, lifelong partnerships, cannot be underestimated. Similarly, the risk of being promiscuous cannot be underestimated. Promiscuity does not accommodate new dating rituals, such as a period of healthy skepticism and information gathering, slower moves toward the bedroom, insistence on intimacy before intercourse, a shift toward monogamous, long-term relationships, and increased acceptance of periodic abstinence and celibacy.

The Bastard Birds

Compared to our ape cousins, we, the most common of the great apes, have pulled off a surprising trick. We have somehow reinvented monogamy and paternal care without losing the habit of living in large multimale groups Like gibbons, men marry women singly and help them to rear their young, confident of paternity, but like chimpanzees, those women live in societies where they have continual contact with other men There is no parallel for this among apes. It is my contention, however, that there is a close parallel among birds Many birds live in colonies but mate monogamously within the colony And the bird parallel brings an altogether different explanation for females to be interested in sexual variety. A female human being does not have to share her sexual favors with many males to prevent infanticide, but she may have a good reason to share them with one well-chosen male apart from her husband. This is because her husband is, almost by definition, usually not the best male there is...

Where To Download Make Him a Monogamy Junkie

Free version of Make Him a Monogamy Junkie can not be found on the internet. And you can safely download your risk free copy of Make Him a Monogamy Junkie from the special discount link below.

Download Now