# Monogamy

> Mediated Wiki article. Canonical URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/Monogamy
> Markdown URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/Monogamy.md
> Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy
> Source revision: 1351909316
> License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)

Form of dyadic relationship

For other uses, see [Monogamy (disambiguation)](/source/Monogamy_(disambiguation)).

Relationships (Outline) Types Genetic or adoptive Kinship Family Stepfamily Parent Father Mother Son Daughter Grandparent Sibling Brother Sister Cousin Aunt Uncle Niece and nephew By marriage Spouse Husband Wife Open marriage Polygamy Polyandry Polygyny Group marriage Mixed-orientation Partner(s) Significant other Boyfriend Girlfriend Cohabitation Long-distance Online Same-sex Queerplatonic Intimate and sexual Casual Committed Monogamy Non-monogamy Mutual monogamy Polyamory Polyfidelity Affair Cicisbeo Concubinage Courtesan Mistress Activities Bonding Courtship Dating Engagement Bachelor's Day Mating Meet market Romance Singles event Wedding Endings Breakup Ghosting Legal/marital separation Annulment Divorce Widowhood Emotions and feelings Affinity Attachment Intimacy Jealousy Love Friend zone Passionate and companionate Platonic Romance Romantic friendship Unconditional Passion Sexuality Non-romantic friendship Alliance Cross-sex Female Male Practices Bride price dower dowry service Homogamy Hypergamy Infidelity Sexual activity Transgression Repression Abuse Child Dating Domestic Elderly Narcissistic parent Controlling behavior Stalking v t e

Part of a series on the Anthropology of kinship Basic concepts Family Lineage Affinity Consanguinity Marriage Incest taboo Endogamy Exogamy Minor Moiety Monogamy Polygyny Polygamy Concubinage Polyandry Bride price Bride service Dowry Parallel / cross cousins Cousin marriage Levirate Sororate Posthumous marriage Joking relationship Clan Cohabitation Fictive / Milk / Nurture kinship Descent Cognatic / Bilateral Matrilateral Lineal Collateral House society Avunculate Linealities Ambilineality Unilineality Matrilineality Patrilineality Household forms and residence Extended Matrifocal Matrilocal Neolocal Nuclear Patrilocal Terminology Kinship terminology Classificatory terminologies By group Iroquois Crow Omaha Inuit (Eskimo) Hawaiian Sudanese Dravidian (debated) Case studies Australian Aboriginal Burmese Chinese Philippine Polyandry in Tibet / in India Feminist Chambri Mosuo Sexuality Coming of Age in Samoa Major theorists Diane Bell Tom Boellstorff Jack Goody W. D. Hamilton Joseph Henrich Gilbert Herdt Don Kulick Roger Lancaster Louise Lamphere Eleanor Leacock Claude Lévi-Strauss Bronisław Malinowski Margaret Mead Henrietta Moore Lewis H. Morgan Stephen O. Murray Michelle Rosaldo Gayle Rubin David M. Schneider Heinrich Schurtz Marilyn Strathern Related articles Alliance theory Matrilineal / matrilocal societies Feminist anthropology Sex and Repression in Savage Society Social Bonding and Nurture Kinship "The Traffic in Women" Social anthropology Cultural anthropology v t e

**Monogamy** ([/məˈnɒɡəmi/](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English) [*mə-NOG-ə-mee*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Pronunciation_respelling_key)) is a [relationship](/source/Social_relation) of [two individuals](/source/Dyad_(sociology)) in which they form a mutual and exclusive intimate [partnership](/source/Significant_other). Having only one partner at any one time, whether for life or [serial monogamy](#Serial_monogamy), contrasts with various forms of [non-monogamy](/source/Non-monogamy) (e.g., [polygamy](/source/Polygamy) or [polyamory](/source/Polyamory)).[1]

The term monogamy, derived from [Greek](/source/Greek_language) for "one marriage", has multiple context-dependent meanings—genetic, sexual, social, and marital—each varying in interpretation across cultures and disciplines, making its definition complex and often debated. The term is typically used to describe the [behavioral ecology](/source/Behavioral_ecology) and [sexual selection](/source/Sexual_selection) of animal mating systems, referring to the state of having only one [mate](/source/Mating) at any one given time. In a human cultural context, monogamy typically refers to the custom of two individuals, regardless of orientation, committing to a sexually exclusive relationship.

Monogamy in humans varies widely across cultures and definitions. While only a minority of societies are strictly monogamous, many practice serial monogamy or tolerate [extramarital sex](/source/Extramarital_sex). Genetic monogamy is relatively unstudied and often contradicted by evidence of [extrapair paternity](/source/Extra-pair_copulation). Monogamy in humans likely evolved through a combination of biological factors such as the need for [paternal care](/source/Paternal_care) and ecological pressures, alongside cultural developments like [agriculture](/source/Agriculture), property inheritance, and religious or societal norms promoting social stability.

Biologists distinguish between social, sexual, and genetic monogamy to reflect how animal pairings may involve [cohabitation](/source/Cohabitation), sexual exclusivity, and reproductive fidelity in varying combinations, while serial monogamy describes successive exclusive relationships over time.

## Terminology

The word *monogamy* derives from the [Greek](/source/Ancient_Greek) μονός, *monos* ("one"), and γάμος, *gamos* ("marriage"), referring to the functional social behaviour of pair-bonding.[1] The term can then be subsequently subclassified by context-dependent relational types. Generally, there are four intersecting definitions.

- *genetic monogamy* refers to sexually monogamous relationships with genetic evidence of [paternity](/source/Paternity_(law)).[2]

- *sexual monogamy* refers to two partners remaining sexually exclusive with each other and having no outside sex partners.[2]

- *[social monogamy](/source/Social_monogamy_in_mammalian_species)* refers to two individuals co-habitating, maintaining a sexual relationship, and sharing basic resources such as shelter, food, and parenting responsibilities.

- *marital monogamy* refers to [marriages](/source/Marriage) of only two people, within the context of the institution of marriage.

For instance, [biologists](/source/Biologist), [biological anthropologists](/source/Biological_anthropologist), and [behavioral ecologists](/source/Behavioral_ecologist) often use *monogamy* in the sense of sexual, if not genetic (reproductive), exclusivity.[3] When cultural or social [anthropologists](/source/Anthropologist) and other [social scientists](/source/Social_scientists) use the term monogamy, the meaning is social or marital monogamy.[3][2]

Marital monogamy may be further distinguished between:

1. *classical monogamy*, "a single relationship between people who marry as [virgins](/source/Virginity), remain sexually exclusive their entire lives, and become [celibate](/source/Celibacy) upon the death of the partner"[4]

1. [*serial monogamy*](#Serial_monogamy), marriage with only one other person at a time, in contrast to [bigamy](/source/Bigamy) or [polygamy](/source/Polygamy)[1]

Defining monogamy across cultures can be difficult because of different cultural assumptions. Some societies believe that monogamy requires limiting sexual activity to a single partner for life.[5] Others accept or endorse pre-marital sex prior to marriage.[6] Some societies consider sex outside of marriage[7] or "spouse swapping"[8] to be socially acceptable. Some consider a relationship monogamous even if partners separate and move to a new monogamous relationship through death, divorce, or simple dissolution of the relationship, regardless of the length of the relationship (serial monogamy).[9] The need to accurately define monogamy was highlighted in a 2012 work, which defined practices as either formal or informal polyandry. The researchers found 53 communities studied between 1912 and 2010 that practiced polyandry (in which women have multiple male partners). This broader definition indicated that polyandry was more common worldwide than previously believed.[10]

Terminology may also affect how data on polygamy is interpreted. While the genetic record indicates that genetic monogamy increased within the last 5,000–10,000 years,[11] the form of prehistoric non-monogamy is less clear. A lack of genetic monogamy could be interpreted as polygamy despite other [plausible explanations](#Prehistoric_societies). Anthropological observations indicate that even when polygyny is accepted in the community, the majority of relationships in the society are monogamous in practice – while couples remain in the relationship, which may not be lifelong.[9] Thus, in prehistoric communities and communities categorized as polygamous, short- or long-term serial monogamy may be the most common practice rather than a lifelong monogamous bond.[9]

## Frequency in humans

Bronze sculpture of an elderly [Kashubian](/source/Kashubians) married couple located in Kaszubski square, [Gdynia](/source/Gdynia), Poland, which commemorates their monogamous fidelity, through the time of their separation, while he temporarily worked in the [United States](/source/United_States)[12]

### Distribution of social monogamy

According to the *[Ethnographic Atlas](/source/Ethnographic_Atlas)* by [George P. Murdock](/source/George_P._Murdock), of 1,231 societies from around the world noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional [polygyny](/source/Polygyny); 588 had more frequent [polygyny](/source/Polygyny); and 4 had [polyandry](/source/Polyandry).[13] (This does not take into account the relative population of each of the societies studied; the actual practice of [polygamy](/source/Polygamy) in a tolerant society may actually be low, with the majority of aspirant polygamists practicing *de facto* monogamous marriage.)[14]

Divorce and remarriage can thus result in "serial monogamy", i.e. multiple marriages but only one legal spouse at a time. This can be interpreted as a form of plural mating, as are those societies dominated by female-headed families in the [Caribbean](/source/Caribbean), [Mauritius](/source/Mauritius) and [Brazil](/source/Brazil) where there is frequent rotation of unmarried partners. In all, these account for 16 to 24% of the "monogamous" category.[15]

### Prevalence of sexual monogamy

The prevalence of sexual monogamy can be roughly estimated as the percentage of married people who do not engage in [extramarital sex](/source/Extramarital_sex). The [Standard Cross-Cultural Sample](/source/Standard_Cross-Cultural_Sample) describes the amount of extramarital sex by men and women in over 50 pre-industrial cultures.[16][17] The amount of [extramarital sex](/source/Extramarital_sex) by men is described as "universal" in 6 cultures, "moderate" in 29 cultures, "occasional" in 6 cultures, and "uncommon" in 10 cultures. The amount of extramarital sex by women is described as "universal" in 6 cultures, "moderate" in 23 cultures, "occasional" in 9 cultures, and "uncommon" in 15 cultures.

Surveys conducted in non-Western nations (2001) also found cultural and gender differences in extramarital sex. A study of sexual behavior in [Thailand](/source/Thailand), [Tanzania](/source/Tanzania) and [Côte d'Ivoire](/source/C%C3%B4te-d'Ivoire) suggests about 16–34% of men engage in extramarital sex while a much smaller (unreported) percentage of women engage in extramarital sex.[18] Studies in [Nigeria](/source/Nigeria) have found around 47–53% of men and to 18–36% of women engage in extramarital sex.[19][20] A 1999 survey of married and cohabiting couples in [Zimbabwe](/source/Zimbabwe) reports that 38% of men and 13% of women engaged in extra-couple sexual relationships within the last 12 months.[21]

Many surveys asking about extramarital sex in the [United States](/source/United_States) have relied on convenience samples: surveys given to whoever happens to be easily available (e.g., volunteer college students or volunteer magazine readers).[22] Convenience samples may not accurately reflect the population of the United States as a whole, which can cause serious biases in survey results.[23] Sampling bias may, therefore, be why early surveys of extramarital sex in the United States have produced widely differing results:[22] such early studies using convenience samples (1974, 1983, 1993) reported the wide ranges of 12–26% of married women and 15–43% of married men engaged in extramarital sex.[24][25][26] Three studies have used nationally representative samples. These studies in 1994 and 1997 found that about 10–15% of women and 20–25% of men engage in extramarital sex.[27][28][29]

Research by Colleen Hoffon of 566 [homosexual](/source/Homosexual) male couples from the [San Francisco Bay Area](/source/San_Francisco_Bay_Area) (2010) found that 45% had monogamous relationships.[30] However, the [Human Rights Campaign](/source/Human_Rights_Campaign) has stated, based on a [Rockway Institute](/source/Rockway_Institute) report, that "LGBT" young people ... want to spend their adult life in a long-term relationship raising children." Specifically, over 80% of the homosexuals surveyed expected to be in a monogamous relationship after age 30.[31]

### Prevalence of genetic monogamy

The incidence of genetic monogamy may be estimated from rates of [extrapair paternity](/source/Extra-pair_paternity). Extrapair paternity is when offspring raised by a monogamous pair come from the female mating with another male. Rates of extrapair paternity have not been extensively studied in people. Many reports of extrapair paternity are little more than quotes based on hearsay, anecdotes, and unpublished findings.[32] Simmons, Firman, Rhodes, and Peters reviewed 11 published studies of extra-pair paternity from various locations in the [United States](/source/United_States), [France](/source/France), [Switzerland](/source/Switzerland), the [United Kingdom](/source/United_Kingdom), [Mexico](/source/Mexico), and among the native [Yanomami Indians](/source/Yanomami) of [Amazon forest](/source/Amazon_forest) in [South America](/source/South_America).[33] The rates of extrapair paternity ranged from 0.03% to 11.8% although most of the locations had low percentages of extrapair paternity. The median rate of extrapair paternity was 1.8%. A separate review of 17 studies by Bellis, Hughes, Hughes, and Ashton found slightly higher rates of extrapair paternity.[34] The rates varied from 0.8% to 30% in these studies, with a median rate of 3.7% extrapair paternity. A range of 1.8% to 3.7% extrapair paternity implies a range of 96% to 98% genetic monogamy. Although the incidence of genetic monogamy may vary from 70% to 99% in different cultures or social environments, a large percentage of couples remain genetically monogamous during their relationships. A review paper, surveying 67 other studies, reported rates of extrapair paternity, in different societies, ranging from 0.4% to over 50%.[35]

Covert [illegitimacy](/source/Legitimacy_(family_law)) is a situation which arises when someone who is presumed to be a child's father (or mother) is in fact not the biological father (or mother). Frequencies as high as 30% are sometimes assumed in the media, but research[36][37] by [sociologist](/source/Sociologist) Michael Gilding traced these overestimates back to an informal remark at a 1972 conference.[38]

The detection of unsuspected illegitimacy can occur in the context of medical genetic screening,[39] in genetic family name research,[40][41] and in immigration testing.[42] Such studies show that covert illegitimacy is in fact less than 10% among the sampled African populations, less than 5% among the sampled Native American and [Polynesian](/source/Polynesians) populations, less than 2% of the sampled Middle Eastern population, and generally 1–2% among European samples.[39]

Pedigree errors are a well-known source of error in medical studies. When attempts are made to try to study medical afflictions and their genetic components, it becomes very important to understand non-paternity rates and pedigree errors. There are numerous software packages and procedures that exist for correcting research data for pedigree errors.[43][44][45]

## Evolutionary and historical development in humans

A pair of [kākā](/source/K%C4%81k%C4%81) parrots at [Auckland Zoo](/source/Auckland_Zoo)

### Biological arguments

Monogamy exists in many societies around the world,[46] resulting in extensive scientific research which tries to understand how these marriage systems might have evolved. In any species, there are three main aspects that combine to promote a monogamous mating system: paternal care, resource access, and [mate choice](/source/Mate_choice);[2] however, in humans, the main theoretical sources of monogamy are paternal care and extreme ecological stresses.[3] Paternal care should be particularly important in humans due to the extra nutritional requirement of having larger brains and the lengthier developmental period.[47][48][49] Therefore, the evolution of monogamy could be a reflection of this increased need for bi-parental care.[47][48][49] Similarly, monogamy should evolve in areas of ecological stress because male [reproductive success](/source/Reproductive_success) should be higher if their resources are focused on ensuring offspring survival rather than searching for other mates.[3] Due to the extreme sociality and increased intelligence of humans, *[Homo sapiens](/source/Homo_sapiens)* have solved many problems that generally lead to monogamy, such as those mentioned above.[3] For example, monogamy is certainly correlated with paternal care, as shown by Marlowe,[48] but not caused by it because humans diminish the need for bi-parental care through the aid of siblings and other family members in rearing the offspring.[3] Furthermore, human intelligence and material culture allows for better adaptation to different and rougher ecological areas, thus reducing the causation and even correlation of monogamous marriage and extreme climates.[3] However, some scientists argue that monogamy evolved by reducing within-group conflict, thus giving certain groups a competitive advantage against less monogamous groups.[50]

[Paleoanthropology](/source/Paleoanthropology) and genetic studies offer two perspectives on when monogamy evolved in the human species: paleoanthropologists offer tentative evidence that monogamy may have started very early in human history[51] whereas genetic studies suggest that monogamy might have increased much more recently, less than 10,000 to 20,000 years ago.[52][11]

Orangutan males are not monogamous and compete for access to females.

Paleoanthropological estimates of the time frame for the evolution of monogamy are primarily based on the level of [sexual dimorphism](/source/Sexual_dimorphism) seen in the fossil record because, in general, the reduced male-male competition seen in monogamous mating results in reduced sexual dimorphism.[53] According to Reno *et al.*, the sexual dimorphism of *[Australopithecus afarensis](/source/Australopithecus_afarensis)*, a human ancestor from approximately 3.9–3.0 million years ago,[54] was within the modern human range, based on dental and postcranial morphology.[51] Although careful not to say that this indicates monogamous mating in early [hominids](/source/Hominid), the authors do say that reduced levels of sexual dimorphism in *A. afarensis* "do not imply that monogamy is any less probable than polygyny".[51] However, Gordon, Green and Richmond claim that in examining postcranial remains, *A. afarensis* is more sexually dimorphic than modern [humans](/source/Human) and [chimpanzees](/source/Chimpanzee) with levels closer to those of [orangutans](/source/Orangutan) and [gorillas](/source/Gorilla).[52] Furthermore, *Homo habilis*, living approximately 2.3 mya,[54] is the most sexually dimorphic early hominid.[55] Plavcan and van Schaik conclude their examination of this controversy by stating that, overall, sexual dimorphism in australopithecines is not indicative of any behavioral implications or mating systems.[56]

Currently the oldest ethnic group in Africa, the continent where *Homo sapiens* species emerged, is the [San people](/source/San_people) of Southern Africa.[57] Most San are monogamous, but if a hunter is able to obtain enough food, he can afford to have a second wife as well. The monogamy practiced by this ethnic group is the serial monogamy.[58]

### Cultural arguments

Plough agriculture. The castle in the background is Lusignan. Detail from the calendar *Les très riches heures* from the 15th century. This is a detail from the painting for March.

Despite the human ability to avoid sexual and genetic monogamy, social monogamy still forms under many different conditions, but most of those conditions are consequences of cultural processes.[3] These cultural processes may have nothing to do with relative reproductive success. For example, anthropologist [Jack Goody](/source/Jack_Goody)'s comparative study utilizing the *[Ethnographic Atlas](/source/Ethnographic_Atlas)* demonstrated that monogamy is part of a cultural complex found in the broad swath of [Eurasian](/source/Eurasia) societies from [Japan](/source/Japan) to [Ireland](/source/Ireland) that practice social monogamy, sexual monogamy and dowry (i.e. "diverging devolution", that allow property to be inherited by children of both sexes).[59] Goody demonstrates a statistical correlation between this cultural complex and the development of intensive plough agriculture in those areas.[60] Drawing on the work of [Ester Boserup](/source/Ester_Boserup), Goody notes that the sexual division of labour varies in intensive plough agriculture and extensive shifting horticulture. In plough agriculture [farming](/source/Agriculture) is largely men's work and is associated with private property; marriage tends to be monogamous to keep the property within the [nuclear family](/source/Nuclear_family). Close family ([endogamy](/source/Endogamy)) are the preferred marriage partners to keep property within the group.[61] A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[11] A further study drawing on the Ethnographic Atlas showed a statistical correlation between increasing size of the society, the belief in "high gods" to support human morality, and monogamy.[62] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact.[63]

Woman farming, using a [digging stick](/source/Digging_stick) in the [Nuba Mountains](/source/Nuba_Mountains), southern Sudan

Betzig postulated that culture/society can also be a source of social monogamy by enforcing it through rules and laws set by third-party actors, usually in order to protect the wealth or power of the elite.[3][64][65] For example, [Augustus Caesar](/source/Augustus_Caesar) encouraged marriage and reproduction to force the aristocracy to divide their wealth and power among multiple heirs, but the aristocrats kept their socially monogamous, legitimate children to a minimum to ensure their legacy while having many [extra-pair copulations](/source/Extra-pair_copulation).[64] Similarly—according to Betzig—the [Christian Church](/source/Christian_Church) enforced monogamy because wealth passed to the closest living, legitimate male relative, often resulting in the wealthy oldest brother being without a male heir.[65] Thus, the wealth and power of the family would pass to the "celibate" younger brother of the church.[65] In both of these instances, the rule-making elite used cultural processes to ensure greater reproductive fitness for themselves and their offspring, leading to a larger genetic influence in future generations.[64][65] According to B. S. Low, culture would appear to have a much larger impact on monogamy in humans than the biological forces that are important for non-human animals.[3]

Other theorists use cultural factors influencing reproductive success to explain monogamy. During times of major economic/demographic transitions, investing more in fewer offspring (social monogamy not polygyny) increases reproductive success by ensuring the offspring themselves have enough initial wealth to be successful.[3] This is seen in both [England](/source/England) and [Sweden](/source/Sweden) during the [industrial revolution](/source/Industrial_Revolution)[3] and is currently being seen in the modernization of rural [Ethiopia](/source/Ethiopia).[66] Similarly, in modern industrialized societies, fewer yet better-invested offspring, i.e. social monogamy, can provide a reproductive advantage over social polygyny, but this still allows for serial monogamy and extra-pair copulations.[3]

### Arguments from outside the scientific community

[Karol Wojtyła](/source/Karol_Wojtyla) (later, Pope John Paul II) in his book *[Love and Responsibility](/source/Love_and_Responsibility)* postulated that monogamy, as an institutional union of two people being in [love](/source/Love) with one another, was an embodiment of an [ethical](/source/Ethics) *personalistic norm*, and thus the only means of making true human love possible.[67] Some writers have suggested that monogamy may solve the problems they view as associated with non-monogamy and [hypergamy](/source/Hypergamy) such as [inceldom](/source/Inceldom).[68][69]

[Alexandra Kollontai](/source/Alexandra_Kollontai) in *Make Way for the Winged Eros*[70] argues that monogamy is an artifact of capitalist concepts of property and inheritance and wrote, "The social aims of the working class are not affected one bit by whether love takes the form of a long and official union or is expressed in a temporary relationship. The ideology of the working class does not place any formal limits on love." Later, "Modern love always sins, because it absorbs the thoughts and feelings of 'loving hearts' and isolates the loving pair from the collective. In the future society, such a separation will not only become superfluous but also psychologically inconceivable." One of the tenets of the new proletarian morality is "mutual recognition of the rights of the other, of the fact that one does not own the heart and soul of the other (the sense of property, encouraged by bourgeois culture)".

Havelock Ellis advocates for monogamy in sexual relationships and considers it an expression closest to nature with a sufficient amount of mutuality.

Monogamy is the most natural expression of an impulse which cannot, as a rule, be so adequately realized in full fruition under conditions involving a less prolonged period of mutual communion and intimacy.

— Havelock Ellis (1921), Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume VI, Sex in Relation to Society, p. 426

This belief is said to be the case because "the sexes are always approximately equal" and that living organisms were designed around a sole partner, "while the needs of the emotional life, even apart from the needs of offspring, demand that such unions based on mutual attraction should be so far as possible permanent". The connection between a sexual partner, independent of the purpose of offspring, is prominently and stated to be akin to a necessity for the fulfillment of the "emotional life", and that this fulfillment can be reached in a monogamous relationship. Ellis acknowledges the existence of "variations" and considers it "inevitable oscillations around the norm", but excludes polygamy and discourages the practice of it. Monogamy as a whole being widely accepted in society is not seen as a notable accomplishment, and Ellis states that "the mere acceptance of a monogamic rule carries us but a little way".[71]

### Prehistoric societies

Recent anthropological data suggest that the modern concept of life-long monogamy has been in place for only the last 10,000 years.[72] Genetic evidence has demonstrated that a greater proportion of men began contributing to the genetic pool between 5,000–10,000 years ago (i.e., there was an increase in women reproducing with different men rather than multiple women reproducing with the same man), which suggests that reproductive monogamy became more common at that time.[11] This would correspond to the Neolithic agricultural revolution. During this time, formerly nomadic societies began to claim and settle land for farming, leading to the advent of property ownership and therefore inheritance. Men would therefore seek to ensure that their land would go to direct descendants and had a vested interest in limiting the sexual activities of their reproductive partners. It is possible that the concept of marriage and permanent monogamy evolved at this time.[73] See also [Cultural arguments](#Cultural_arguments) above.

More recent genetic data has clarified that, in most regions throughout history, a smaller proportion of men contributed to human genetic history compared to women.[11][74] This could occur if male mortality outpaced female mortality. This cannot be assumed with the available evidence. If an equal number of men and women are born and survive to reproduce, however, this would indicate that historically, only a subset of men fathered children and did so with multiple women (and may suggest that many men either did not procreate or did not have children that survived to create modern ancestors). This circumstance could occur for several reasons, but there are three common interpretations:

1. The first interpretation is a harem model, where one man will out-compete other men (presumably through acts of violence or power) for exclusive sexual access to a group of women. Groups of women could be related or unrelated. This does not seem to reflect real-world observations in more modern polygyny societies, where the majority of individuals seldom have more than one partner at a time.[9]

1. Second, it may suggest that some men had either more sex or more reproductive success with multiple women simultaneously; this could be caused by sexual liaisons outside of a lifelong "monogamous" relationship (which may or may not be acceptable in their society), having multiple committed partners at once (polygyny), or simply sexual reproduction with multiple partners entirely outside of committed relationships (i.e., casual sex without relationships or pair-bonding).

1. Third, it may suggest that some men were more likely than other men to have a series of monogamous relationships that led to children with different women throughout the man's life (serial monogamy).[9] There are a variety of explanations for this that range from the woman's influence (more woman choosing a specific man based on his perceived attractiveness or ability to produce food) to the man's (social or coercive power or increased mortality/absence in men compared to women).

The serial monogamy interpretation of genetic history would be congruent with other findings, such as the fact that humans form pair bonds (although not necessarily for life) and that human fathers invest in at least the early upbringing of their children.[9] Serial monogamy would also be consistent with the existence of a "honeymoon period", a period of intense interest in a single sexual partner (with less interest in other women) which may help to keep men invested in staying with the mother of their child for this period.[75] When reciprocated, this "honeymoon period" lasts 18 months to three years in most cases.[76][77] This would correspond to the period necessary to bring a child to relative independence in the traditionally small, interdependent, communal societies of pre-Neolithic humans, before they settled into more separate agricultural communities.[11]

While genetic evidence typically displays a bias towards a smaller number of men reproducing with more women, some regions or time periods have shown the opposite. In a 2019 investigation, Musharoff et al. applied modern techniques to the 1000 Genomes Project Phase 3 high-coverage Complete Genomics whole-genome dataset.[78] They found that the Southern Han Chinese had a male bias (45% female, indicating that women were likely to reproduce with multiple men). This region is known for its lack of a concept of paternity and for a sense of female equality or superiority.[79] The Musharoff study also found a male bias in Europeans (20% female) during an out-of-Africa migration event that may have increased the number of men successfully reproducing with women, perhaps by replenishing the genetic pool in Europe. The study did confirm a more typical female bias in Yorubans (63% female), Europeans (84%), Punjabis (82%), and Peruvians (56%).[80]

According to other studies, coupling began or evolved gradually towards monogamy since millions of years ago.[81]

Anthropologists characterize human beings as "mildly polygynous" or "monogamous with polygynous tendencies".[82][83][84][85] This slight inclination towards polygamy is reinforced by the low rate of polygamy even in polygamist societies; less than five percent of men marry more than one woman in approximately half of polygynous societies.[86] This slight inclination towards men reproducing with a small number of women is also seen in genetic evidence. Depending on the period of history, the average man with modern descendents appears to have had children with between 1.5 women (70,000 years ago) to 3.3 women (45,000 years ago), except in East Asia. This rate varied dramatically by era, possibly due to male mortality, environmental conditions, food availability, and other influences on mortality, and migration patterns.[87][88] These rates may be consistent with a society that practices serial monogamy. However, there was a temporary but sharp decrease in the ratio during the start of the Neolithic resolution, where the average man with modern descendants had children with 17 women (circa 8,000 years ago).[89][90] Given the dramatic cultural shifts towards sedentary agriculture at the time, this is speculated to represent a dramatic change from a community-based society towards the hoarding of power and resources more consistent with a harem model; however, the rapid movement back towards 4.5 women per man after this dip, accompanied by evidence for the move towards monogamy as the agricultural revolution progressed, may suggest a dramatic, unknown factor such as catastrophic male mortality.[91] Some researchers have postulated alternative explanations for the reduction in male effective population size, such as the extinction of male lineages through warfare. In patrilineal clan-based societies, entire male bloodlines could be eradicated by a conquering tribe, while women were often absorbed into the victorious group. Women also traditionally joined their husband's family upon marriage, and this gene flow would have increased the likelihood of their lineages surviving.[92] Another study proposed a more peaceful explanation involving variance in reproductive success among patrilineal groups combined with the gradual splitting of groups over time.[93] These mechanisms could have led to a drastic reduction in male genetic diversity over time without requiring equivalently drastic reproductive ratios between the sexes.

### Ancient societies

The historical record offers contradictory evidence on the development and extent of monogamy as a social practice. [Laura Betzig](/source/Laura_Betzig) argues that in the six large, highly stratified early states, commoners were generally monogamous but that elites practiced de facto polygyny. Those states included [Mesopotamia](/source/Mesopotamia), Egypt, [Aztec Mexico](/source/Aztec_Empire), [Inca Peru](/source/Inca_Empire), India and China.[94]

#### Tribal societies

Monogamy has appeared in some traditional tribal societies such as the [Andamanese](/source/Andamanese_peoples), [Karen](/source/Karen_people) in [Burma](/source/Burma), [Sami](/source/Sami_people) and [Ket](/source/Ket_people) in northern [Eurasia](/source/Eurasia), and the [Pueblo Indians](/source/Pueblo_Indians) of the United States, apparently unrelated to the development of the Christian monogamous paradigm.[95]

#### Ancient Mesopotamia and Assyria

Both the [Babylonian](/source/Babylonia) and [Assyrian](/source/Assyrian_people) families were monogamous in principle but not entirely so in practice since polygyny was frequently practiced by the rulers.

In the patriarchal society of Mesopotamia the nuclear family was called a "house". In order "to build a house" a man was supposed to marry one woman and if she did not provide him with offspring, he could take a second wife. The [Code of Hammurabi](/source/Code_of_Hammurabi) states that he loses his right to do so if the wife herself gives him a slave as [concubine](/source/Concubinage).[96] According to [Old Assyrian](/source/Assyria) texts, he could be obliged to wait for two or three years before he was allowed to take another wife. The position of the second wife was that of a "slave girl" in respect to the first wife, as many marriage contracts explicitly state.[97]

#### Ancient Egypt

Although an Egyptian man was free to marry several women at a time, and some wealthy men from [Old](/source/Old_Kingdom_of_Egypt) and [Middle Kingdoms](/source/Middle_Kingdom_of_Egypt) did have more than one wife, monogamy was the norm.[98] There may have been some exceptions, e.g. a [Nineteenth Dynasty](/source/Nineteenth_dynasty_of_Egypt) official stated as proof of his love to his deceased wife that he had stayed married to her since their youth, even after he had become very successful (P. Leiden I 371). This may suggest that some men abandoned first wives of a low social status and married women of higher status in order to further their careers although even then they lived with only one wife. Egyptian women had the right to ask for a divorce if their husband took a second wife. Many tomb reliefs testify to the monogamous character of Egyptian marriages; officials are usually accompanied by a supportive wife. "His wife X, his beloved" is the standard phrase identifying wives in tomb inscriptions. The instruction texts belonging to wisdom literature, e.g., [Instruction of Ptahhotep](/source/The_Maxims_of_Ptahhotep) or [Instruction of Any](/source/Instruction_of_Any), support fidelity to monogamous marriage life, calling the wife a *Lady of the house*. The [Instruction of Ankhsheshonq](/source/Instruction_of_Ankhsheshonq) suggests that it is wrong to abandon a wife because she is not capable of pregnancy.[99]

#### Ancient Israel

As against Betzig's contention that monogamy evolved as a result of Christian socio-economic influence in the West, monogamy appeared widespread in the [ancient Middle East](/source/Ancient_Near_East) much earlier. In Israel's pre-Christian era, an essentially monogamous [ethos](/source/Ethos) underlay the Jewish creation story ([Gn](/source/Book_of_Genesis) 2) and the last chapter of [Proverbs](/source/Book_of_Proverbs).[100][101] During the [Second Temple period](/source/Second_Temple_period) (530 BCE to 70 CE), apart from an economic situation which supported monogamy even more than in earlier period, the concept of "mutual fidelity" between husband and wife was a quite common reason for strictly monogamous marriages.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*] Some marriage documents explicitly expressed a desire for the marriage to remain monogamous. Examples of these documents were found in [Elephantine](/source/Elephantine). They resemble those found in neighbouring [Assyria](/source/Assyria) and [Babylonia](/source/Babylonia).[100] Study shows that ancient Middle East societies, though not strictly monogamous, were practically (at least on commoners' level) monogamous.[97][98] [Halakha](/source/Halakha) of the [Dead Sea Sect](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dead_Sea_Sect&action=edit&redlink=1) saw prohibition of polygamy as coming from the [Pentateuch](/source/Pentateuch) ([Damascus Document](/source/Damascus_Document) 4:20–5:5, one of the [Dead Sea Scrolls](/source/Dead_Sea_Scrolls)). Christianity adopted a similar attitude (cf. [1 Tm](/source/First_Epistle_to_Timothy) 3:2,12; [Tt](/source/Epistle_to_Titus) 1:6), which conformed with [Jesus'](/source/Jesus_Christ) approach.[100] [Michael Coogan](/source/Michael_Coogan), in contrast, states that "Polygyny continued to be practised well into the biblical period, and it is attested among Jews as late as the second century CE."[102]

Under [Judges](/source/Biblical_judges) and the monarchy, old restrictions went into disuse, especially among royalty, though the [Books of Samuel](/source/Books_of_Samuel) and [Kings](/source/Books_of_Kings), which cover entire period of monarchy, record only one instance of commoner polygamy - that of [Samuel](/source/Samuel)'s father. The wisdom e.g. [Book of Wisdom](/source/Book_of_Wisdom), which provides a picture of the society, [Sirach](/source/Sirach), [Proverbs](/source/Book_of_Proverbs), [Qohelet](/source/Ecclesiastes) portray a woman in a strictly monogamous family (cf. Pr 5:15-19; Qo 9:9; Si 26:1-4 and eulogy of perfect wife, Proverbs 31:10-31). The [Book of Tobias](/source/Book_of_Tobit) speaks solely of monogamous marriages. Also prophets have in front of their eyes monogamous marriage as an image of the relationship of God and Israel. (Cf. [Ho](/source/Book_of_Hosea) 2:4f; [Jer](/source/Book_of_Jeremiah) 2:2; [Is](/source/Book_of_Isaiah) 50:1; 54:6-7; 62:4-5; Ez 16). [Roland de Vaux](/source/Roland_de_Vaux) states that "it is clear that the most common form of marriage in Israel was monogamy".[101][103]

The [Mishnah](/source/Mishnah) and the *[baraitot](/source/Baraitot)* clearly reflect a monogamist viewpoint within Judaism ([Yevamot](/source/Nashim) 2:10 etc.). Some sages condemned marriage to two wives even for the purpose of procreation (Ketubot 62b). R. Ammi, an *amora* states:

Whoever takes a second wife in addition to his first one shall divorce the first and pay her *kettubah* (Yevamot 65a)

[Roman](/source/Roman_Empire) customs, which prohibited polygamy, may have enhanced such an attitude[*[original research?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research)*] - especially after 212 AD, when all the Jews became Roman citizens.[100] However, some Jews continued to practice bigamy (e.g. up to medieval times in Egypt and Europe).[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*] Fourth-century Roman law forbade Jews to contract plural marriages.[104]

A synod convened by [Gershom ben Judah](/source/Gershom_ben_Judah) around 1000 CE banned polygamy among [Ashkenazi](/source/Ashkenazi) and [Sephardic](/source/Sephardic) Jews.[105]

#### Ancient Greece and ancient Rome

The ancient Greeks and Romans were monogamous in the sense that men were not allowed to have more than one wife or to cohabit with concubines during marriage.[105][106]

#### Early Christianity

As John Paul II interpreted the dialogue between Jesus and the [Pharisees](/source/Pharisees) ([Gospel of Matthew](/source/Gospel_of_Matthew) 19:3–8), Christ emphasized the primordial beauty of monogamic spousal [love](/source/Love) described in the Book of Genesis 1:26–31, 2:4–25, whereby a man and woman by their nature are each ready to be a beautifying, total and [personal](/source/Person) gift to one another:

Jesus avoids entangling himself in juridical or casuistic controversies; instead, he appeals twice to the "beginning". By doing so, he clearly refers to the relevant words of Genesis, which his interlocutors also know by heart. ... it clearly leads the interlocutors to reflect about the way in which, in the mystery of creation, man was formed precisely as "male and female", in order to understand correctly the normative meaning of the words of Genesis.[107]

[*[dubious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Accuracy_dispute#Disputed_statement) – [discuss](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Monogamy#Dubious)*]

### Contemporary societies

#### International

Western European societies established monogamy as their marital norm.[108] Monogamous marriage is normative and is legally enforced in most developed countries.[109] Laws prohibiting polygyny were adopted in [Japan](/source/Japan) (1880), [China](/source/China) (1953), [India](/source/India) (1955) and [Nepal](/source/Nepal) (1963).[109] [Polyandry](/source/Polyandry) is illegal in most countries.

The [women's rights](/source/Women's_rights) movements seek to make monogamy the only legal form of marriage.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*] The [United Nations General Assembly](/source/United_Nations_General_Assembly) in 1979 adopted the [Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women](/source/Convention_on_the_Elimination_of_All_Forms_of_Discrimination_Against_Women), Article 16 of which requires nations to give women and men equal rights in marriage. Polygamy is viewed as inconsistent with the Article as it gives men the right of multiple wives, but not to women. The United Nations has established the [Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women](/source/Committee_on_the_Elimination_of_Discrimination_against_Women) (CEDAW)[110] to monitor the progress of nations implementing the convention.

#### People's Republic of China

Main article: [Marriage in the People's Republic of China](/source/Marriage_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China)

The founders of [Communism](/source/Communism) determined that monogamous marriage inherently oppressed women and therefore had no place in communist society. [Friedrich Engels](/source/Friedrich_Engels) stated that compulsory monogamy could only lead to increased prostitution and general immorality, with the benefits of restricting capital and solidifying the class structure. As he spelled out in *[The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State](/source/The_Origin_of_the_Family%2C_Private_Property_and_the_State)* (1884),

The first class antagonism which appears in history coincides with the development of the antagonism between man and woman in monogamian marriage, and the first class oppression with that of the female sex by the male. ... [T]he wellbeing and development of the one group are attained by the misery and repression of the other.

The monogamous family is distinguished from the pairing family by the far greater durability of wedlock, which can no longer be dissolved at the pleasure of either party. As a rule, it is only the man who can still dissolve it and cast off his wife.[111]

However, the communist revolutionaries in [China](/source/China) chose to take the Western viewpoint of monogamy as giving women and men equal rights in marriage. The newly formed Communist government established monogamy as the only legal form of marriage.

"The 1950 Marriage Law called for sweeping changes in many areas of family life. It forbade any 'arbitrary and compulsory' form of marriage that would be based on the superiority of men and would ignore women's interests. The new democratic marriage system was based on the free choice of couples, monogamy, equal rights for both sexes, and the protection of the lawful interests of women. It abolished the begetting of male offspring as the principal purpose of marriage and weakened kinship ties which reduced the pressure on women to bear many children, especially sons. With arranged marriages prohibited, young women could choose their own marriage partners, share the financial cost of setting up a new household, and have equal status in household and family decision-making. The Government then initiated an extensive campaign of marriage-law education, working jointly with the Communist Party, women's federations, trade unions, the armed forces, schools and other organizations."[112]

While the protocol does not suggest making polygamous marriage illegal, Article 6 does state that "monogamy is encouraged as the preferred form of marriage and that the rights of women in marriage and family, including in polygamous marital relationships are promoted and protected."[113][114] The protocol entered into force on 25 November 2005.

## Varieties in biology

Recent discoveries have led biologists to talk about the three varieties of monogamy: social monogamy, sexual monogamy, and genetic monogamy. The distinction between these three are important to the modern understanding of monogamy.

Monogamous pairs of animals are not always sexually exclusive. Many animals that form pairs to mate and raise offspring regularly engage in sexual activities with partners other than their primary mate. This is called [extra-pair copulation](/source/Extra-pair_copulation).[115][116] Sometimes these extra-pair sexual activities lead to offspring. Genetic tests frequently show that some of the [offspring](/source/Offspring) raised by a monogamous pair come from the female mating with an extra-pair male partner.[117] These discoveries have led biologists to adopt new ways of talking about monogamy:

Social monogamy refers to a male and female's social living arrangement (e.g., shared use of a territory, behaviour indicative of a social pair, and/or proximity between a male and female) without inferring any sexual interactions or reproductive patterns. In humans, social monogamy equals [monogamous marriage](/source/Monogamous_marriage). Sexual monogamy is defined as an exclusive sexual relationship between a female and a male based on observations of sexual interactions. Finally, the term genetic monogamy is used when DNA analyses can confirm that a female-male pair reproduce exclusively with each other. A combination of terms indicates examples where levels of relationships coincide, e.g., sociosexual and sociogenetic monogamy describe corresponding social and sexual, and social and genetic monogamous relationships, respectively.

— Reichard, 2003, [118](p. 4)

Whatever makes a pair of animals socially monogamous does not necessarily make them sexually or genetically monogamous. Social monogamy, sexual monogamy, and genetic monogamy can occur in different combinations.

Social monogamy does not always involve marriage in humans. A married couple is almost always a socially monogamous couple. But couples who choose to [cohabit](/source/Cohabitation) without getting married can also be socially monogamous. The popular science author Matt Ridley in his book *The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature*, described the human mating system as "monogamy plagued by adultery".[119]

### Serial monogamy

Serial monogamy is a mating practice in which individuals may engage in sequential monogamous pairings,[120] or in terms of humans, when men or women can marry another partner but only after ceasing to be married to the previous partner.[121]

Serial monogamy may effectively resemble [polygyny](/source/Polygyny) in its reproductive consequences because both men and women are able to utilize both sexes reproductive lifespan through repeated marriages.[122]

Serial monogamy may also refer to sequential sexual relationships, irrespective of marital status. A pair of humans may remain sexually exclusive, or monogamous, until the relationship has ended and then each may go on to form a new exclusive pairing with a different partner. This pattern of serial monogamy is common among people in Western cultures.[123][124]

#### Reproductive success

Evolutionary theory predicts that males would be apt to seek more mating partners than females because they obtain higher reproductive benefits from such a strategy.[122] Men with more serial marriages are likely to have more children than men with only one spouse, whereas the same is not true of women with consecutive spouses.[122] A study done in 1994 found that remarried men often had a larger age difference from their spouses than men who were married for the first time, suggesting that serial monogamy helps some men extract a longer reproductive window from their spouses.[125][126]

#### Breakup

Serial monogamy has always been closely linked to [divorce](/source/Divorce) practices. Whenever procedures for obtaining divorce have been simple and easy, serial monogamy has been found.[127] As divorce has continued to become more accessible, more individuals have availed themselves of it, and many go on to remarry.[128] Barry Schwartz, author of *[The Paradox of Choice](/source/The_Paradox_of_Choice): Why More is Less*, further suggests that Western culture's inundation of choice has devalued relationships based on lifetime commitments and singularity of choice. It has been suggested, however, that high mortality rates in centuries past accomplished much the same result as divorce, enabling remarriage (of one spouse) and thus serial monogamy.[129][130][131]

#### Similarity with polygamy

According to Danish scholar Miriam K. Zeitzen, anthropologists treat serial monogamy, in which divorce and remarriage occur, as a form of [polygamy](/source/Polygamy) as it also can establish a series of households that may continue to be tied by shared paternity and shared income.[132] As such, they are similar to the household formations created through divorce and serial monogamy.[133] [134][135]

### Mating system

Main article: [Monogamous pairing in animals](/source/Monogamous_pairing_in_animals)

Monogamy is one of several [mating systems](/source/Mating_system) observed in animals. However, a pair of animals may be socially monogamous without necessarily being sexually or genetically monogamous. Social monogamy, sexual monogamy, and genetic monogamy can occur in different combinations.[118]

Social monogamy refers to the overtly observed living arrangement whereby a male and female share territory and engage in behaviour indicative of a social pair, but does not imply any particular sexual fidelity or reproductive pattern.[118] The extent to which social monogamy is observed in animals varies across taxa, with over 90 percent of avian species being socially monogamous, compared to only 3 percent of mammalian species and up to 15 percent of primate species.[136][137] Social monogamy has also been observed in reptiles, fish, and insects.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*]

Sexual monogamy is defined as an exclusive sexual relationship between a female and a male based on observations of sexual interactions.[118] However, scientific analyses can test for paternity, for example by [DNA paternity testing](/source/DNA_paternity_testing) or by [fluorescent](/source/Fluorescence) [pigment](/source/Pigment) powder tracing of females to track physical contact. This type of analysis can uncover reproductively successful sexual pairings or physical contact. Genetic monogamy refers to DNA analyses confirming that a female-male pair reproduce exclusively with each other.[118]

The incidence of sexual monogamy appears quite rare in other parts of the animal kingdom. It is becoming clear that even animals that are overtly socially monogamous engage in extra-pair copulations. For example, while over 90% of birds are socially monogamous, "on average, 30% or more of the baby birds in any nest [are] sired by someone other than the resident male."[138] Patricia Adair Gowaty has estimated that, out of 180 different species of socially monogamous songbirds, only 10% are sexually monogamous.[139] Offspring are far more successful when both the male and the female members of the social pair contribute food resources.

The highest known frequency of reproductively successful extra-pair copulations are found among fairywrens *[Malurus splendens](/source/Malurus_splendens)* and *[Malurus cyaneus](/source/Malurus_cyaneus)* where more than 65% of chicks are fathered by males outside the supposed breeding pair.[137] This discordantly low level of genetic monogamy has been a surprise to biologists and zoologists, as social monogamy can no longer be assumed to determine how genes are distributed in a species.

*[Elacatinus](/source/Elacatinus)*, also widely known as neon gobies, also exhibit social monogamy. Hetereosexual pairs of fish belonging to the genus *Elacatinus* remain closely associated during both reproductive and non-reproductive periods, and often reside in same cleaning station to serve client fish.[140] Fish of this genus frequently mate with a new partner after they are widowed.

### Evolution in animals

See also: [Social monogamy in mammalian species](/source/Social_monogamy_in_mammalian_species)

Socially monogamous species are scattered throughout the animal kingdom: A few insects, a few fish, about nine-tenths of birds, and a few mammals are socially monogamous.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*] There is even a parasitic worm, *[Schistosoma mansoni](/source/Schistosoma_mansoni)*, that in its female-male pairings in the human body is monogamous.[141] The diversity of species with social monogamy suggests that it is not inherited from a common ancestor but instead evolved independently in many different species.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*]

The low occurrence of social monogamy in [placental mammals](/source/Placental_mammals) has been claimed[*[by whom?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Unsupported_attributions)*] to be related to the presence or absence of estrus—or oestrus—the duration of sexual receptivity of a female.[*[citation needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)*] This, however, does not explain *why* estrus females generally mate with any proximate male nor any correlation between sexual and social monogamy. Birds, which are notable for a high incidence of social monogamy, do not have estrus.

### Genetic and neuroendocrine bases

The [prairie vole](/source/Prairie_vole) is an animal example for its monogamous social behaviour, since the male is usually socially faithful to the female, and shares in the raising of pups. The [woodland vole](/source/Woodland_vole) is also usually monogamous. Another species from the same genus, the [meadow vole](/source/Meadow_vole), has promiscuously mating males, and scientists have changed adult male meadow voles' behaviour to resemble that of prairie voles in experiments in which a single gene was introduced into the brain by a [virus](/source/Virus).[142]

The behaviour is influenced by the number of repetitions of a particular string of [microsatellite](/source/Microsatellite) [DNA](/source/DNA). Male prairie voles with the longest DNA strings spend more time with their mates and pups than male prairie voles with shorter strings.[143] However, other scientists have disputed the gene's relationship to monogamy, and cast doubt on whether the human version plays an analogous role.[144] Physiologically, pair-bonding behavior has been shown to be connected to [vasopressin](/source/Vasopressin), [dopamine](/source/Dopamine), and [oxytocin](/source/Oxytocin) levels, with the genetic influence apparently arising via the number of receptors for these substances in the brain; the pair-bonding behavior has also been shown in experiments to be strongly modifiable by administering some of these substances directly.[145]

The North American microtine rodent's (vole) complex social structure and social behavior has provided unique opportunities to study the underlying neural bases for monogamy and social attachment. Data from studies using the *[Microtus ochrogaster](/source/Microtus_ochrogaster)* or prairie vole indicate that the neuroendocrine hormones, oxytocin (in female prairie voles) and vasopressin (in male prairie voles) play a central role in the development of affiliative connections during mating. The effects of [intracerebroventricular](/source/Intracerebroventricular_injection) administration of oxytocin and vasopressin have been shown to promote affiliative behavior in the prairie vole but not in similar, but non-monogamous montane voles.[146] This difference in neuropeptide effect is attributed to the location, density, and distribution of OT and AVP receptors.[147] Only in the prairie voles are OT and AVP receptors located along the mesolimbic dopamine reward pathway, presumably conditioning the voles to their mates odor while consolidating the social memory of the mating episode.[146] This finding highlights the role of genetic evolution in altering the neuroanatomical distribution of receptors, resulting in certain neural circuits becoming sensitive to changes in [neuropeptides](/source/Neuropeptide).[147]

## See also

- [Affair](/source/Affair)

- [Amatonormativity](/source/Amatonormativity)

- [Human bonding](/source/Human_bonding)

- [Investment model of commitment](/source/Investment_model_of_commitment)

- [Polygamy in Christianity](/source/Polygamy_in_Christianity)

- [Pair bonding](/source/Pair_bonding)

- [Paternal care](/source/Paternal_care)

- [Sexual intercourse](/source/Sexual_intercourse)

- [The seven-year itch](/source/Seven-year_itch_(idiom))

## References

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-BRIT_1-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-BRIT_1-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-BRIT_1-2) Cf. "Monogamy" in *Britannica World Language Dictionary*, R.C. Preble (ed.), Oxford-London 1962, p. 1275:*1. The practice or principle of marrying only once. opp. to digamy now*rare*2. The condition, rule or custom of being married to only one [person](/source/Person) at a time (opp. to polygamy or bigamy) 1708. 3. [Zool.](/source/Zoology) The habit of living in pairs, or having only one mate*; The same text repeats *The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary*, W. Little, H.W. Fowler, J. Coulson (ed.), C.T. Onions (rev. & ed.,) Oxford 1969, 3rd edition, vol.1, p.1275; [OED Online](http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00314586). March 2010. Oxford University Press. 23 Jun. 2010 Cf. [Monogamy](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/monogamy) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20150623232650/http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/monogamy) 2015-06-23 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine) in Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Reichard,_2003_2-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Reichard,_2003_2-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Reichard,_2003_2-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-Reichard,_2003_2-3) Reichard, Ulrich H. (2003). ["Monogamy: past and present"](https://books.google.com/books?id=zIu2K6KFsXEC&pg=PA3). In Reichard, Ulrich H.; Boesch, Christophe (eds.). *Monogamy: Mating Strategies and Partnerships in Birds, Humans and Other Mammals*. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–25. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-521-52577-0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-521-52577-0). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160603161358/https://books.google.com/books?id=zIu2K6KFsXEC&pg=PA3) from the original on 2016-06-03. Retrieved 2016-01-05.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-3) [***e***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-4) [***f***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-5) [***g***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-6) [***h***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-7) [***i***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-8) [***j***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-9) [***k***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-10) [***l***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-11) [***m***](#cite_ref-Low,_2003_3-12) Low B.S. (2003) [Ecological and social complexities in human monogamy](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bobbi_Low/publication/237010580_Ecological_and_social_complexities_in_human_monogamy/links/0deec51ae3e528b821000000.pdf) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20180713201500/https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bobbi_Low/publication/237010580_Ecological_and_social_complexities_in_human_monogamy/links/0deec51ae3e528b821000000.pdf) 2018-07-13 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Monogamy: Mating Strategies and Partnerships in Birds, Humans and Other Mammals:161–176.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-4)** Sheff, Elisabeth (July 22, 2014). ["Seven Forms of Non-Monogamy"](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/201407/seven-forms-non-monogamy). *Psychology Today*.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-5)** Kramer, Karen L.; Russell, Andrew F. (2014). "Kin-selected cooperation without lifetime monogamy: human insights and animal implications". *Trends in Ecology & Evolution*. **29** (11). Elsevier BV: 600–606. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2014TEcoE..29..600K](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014TEcoE..29..600K). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.tree.2014.09.001](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.tree.2014.09.001). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [0169-5347](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0169-5347). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25267298](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25267298).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-6)** Schacht, Ryan N. (2013), *Cassava and the Makushi: A Shared History of Resiliency and Transformation*, Bloomsbury, T&T Clark, pp. 15–30, [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.5040/9781350042162.ch-001](https://doi.org/10.5040%2F9781350042162.ch-001), [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-350-04216-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-350-04216-2)

1. **[^](#cite_ref-7)** Beckerman, Stephen; Valentine, Paul (2002). *Cultures of Multiple Fathers*. University Press of Florida. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-8130-2456-0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-8130-2456-0).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-8)** Hennigh, Lawrence (1970-01-01). ["Functions and Limitations of Alaskan Eskimo Wife Trading"](https://doi.org/10.14430%2Farctic3151). *Arctic*. **23** (1). The Arctic Institute of North America. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.14430/arctic3151](https://doi.org/10.14430%2Farctic3151). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1923-1245](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1923-1245).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-3) [***e***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-4) [***f***](#cite_ref-Schacht_9-5) Schacht, Ryan; Kramer, Karen (2019-07-19). ["Are We Monogamous? A Review of the Evolution of Pair-Bonding in Humans and Its Contemporary Variation Cross-Culturally"](https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffevo.2019.00230). *Front. Ecol. Evol*. **7** 230. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2019FrEEv...7..230S](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019FrEEv...7..230S). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.3389/fevo.2019.00230](https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffevo.2019.00230).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Starkweather2012_10-0)** Starkweather, Katherine; Hames, Raymond (2012). ["A Survey of Non‑Classical Polyandry"](http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?context=anthropologyfacpub&article=1049#page=2). *Human Nature*. **23** (2): 149–72. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1007/s12110-012-9144-x](https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs12110-012-9144-x). [eISSN](/source/EISSN_(identifier)) [1936-4776](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1936-4776). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1045-6767](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1045-6767). [OCLC](/source/OCLC_(identifier)) [879353439](https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/879353439). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [22688804](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22688804). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [2008559](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2008559). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20150925140949/http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?context=anthropologyfacpub&article=1049) from the original on 25 September 2015.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-3) [***e***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-4) [***f***](#cite_ref-pmid12962309_11-5) Dupanloup, Isabelle; Pereira, Luisa; Bertorelle, Giorgio; Calafell, Francesc; Prata, Maria; Amorim, Antonio; Barbujani, Guido; et al. (2003). "A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity". *J Mol Evol*. **57** (1): 85–97. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2003JMolE..57...85D](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003JMolE..57...85D). [CiteSeerX](/source/CiteSeerX_(identifier)) [10.1.1.454.1662](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.454.1662). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1007/s00239-003-2458-x](https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00239-003-2458-x). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [12962309](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12962309). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [2673314](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2673314).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-12)** ["Kaszubski square in Gdynia"](https://web.archive.org/web/20110916205746/http://krodo.pl/atrakcja/szczegoly/2263/Plac_Kaszubski_W_Gdyni) (in Polish). Archived from [the original](http://krodo.pl/atrakcja/szczegoly/2263/Plac_Kaszubski_W_Gdyni) on 2011-09-16. Retrieved 2011-11-02.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Atlas_13-0)** [*Ethnographic Atlas Codebook*](http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/worldcul/Codebook4EthnoAtlas.pdf) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20121118232413/http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/worldcul/Codebook4EthnoAtlas.pdf) 2012-11-18 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine) derived from George P. Murdock's *Ethnographic Atlas* recording the marital composition of 1231 societies from 1960 to 1980

1. **[^](#cite_ref-14)** Zeitzen, Miriam Koktvedgaard (2008). *Polygamy: A Cross-Cultural Analysis*. Oxford: Berg. p. 5.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-15)** Fox, Robin (1997). *Reproduction & Succession: Studies in Anthropology, Law and Society*. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. p. 34.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Divale,_2000_16-0)** Divale, W. (2000). [Pre-Coded Variables for the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, Volume I and II](http://worldcultures.org/SCCS1.pdf) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20081217131745/http://worldcultures.org/SCCS1.pdf) 2008-12-17 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Jamaica, NY: York College, CUNY. Distributed by World Cultures. See Variable 170 and Variable 171.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Murdock,_White,1969_17-0)** Murdock, G.P.; White, D.R. (1969). ["Standard cross-cultural sample"](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3772907). *Ethnology*. **8** (4): 329–369. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2307/3772907](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3772907). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [3772907](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3772907).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-O'Conner,_2001_18-0)** O'Connor, M.L. (2001). "Men who have many sexual partners before marriage are more likely to engage in extramarital intercourse". *International Family Planning Perspectives*. **27** (1): 48–9. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2307/2673807](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2673807). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [2673807](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2673807).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Isiugo-Abanihe,1994_19-0)** Isiugo-Abanihe, U.C. (1994). "Extramarital relations and perceptions of HIV/AIDS in Nigeria". *Health Transition Review*. **4** (2): 111–125. [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [10150513](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10150513).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Ladebo,_Tanimowo,_2002_20-0)** Ladebo, O.J.; Tanimowo, A.G. (2002). ["Extension personnel's sexual behaviour and attitudes toward HIV/AIDS in South-Western Nigeria"](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3583130). *African Journal of Reproductive Health*. **6** (2): 51–9. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2307/3583130](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3583130). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [3583130](https://www.jstor.org/stable/3583130). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [12476716](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476716).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-NationalAIDSCouncil,_2002_21-0)** National AIDS Council, Ministry of Health and Child Welfare, The MEASURE Project, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC/Zimbabwe). AIDS in Africa During the Nineties: Zimbabwe. A review and analysis of survey and research results. Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2002.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Extramarital_sex:_Prevalence_and_co_22-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Extramarital_sex:_Prevalence_and_co_22-1) Wiederman, M. W. (1997). "Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey". *Journal of Sex Research*. **34** (2): 167–174. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1080/00224499709551881](https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00224499709551881).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-23)** Lohr, S. L. (2019). *Sampling: Design and Analysis*. Chapman and Hall/CRC.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Hunt,1974_24-0)** Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual behavior in the 1970s. Chicago: Playboy Press.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Blumstein,_Schwartz,1983_25-0)** Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American Couples: Money, Work, Sex. New York, NY: William Morrow and Company.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Janus,_Janus,1993_26-0)** Janus, S.S. & Janus, C.L. (1993). [The Janus Report on Sexual Behavior](http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-97237-000) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174428/https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-97237-000) 2020-10-02 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Clements,1994_27-0)** Clements, M. (7 August 1994). "Sex in America today: A new national survey reveals how our attitudes are changing". Parade Magazine. pp. 4–6.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Laumann,_Gagnon,_Michael,_Michaels,1994_28-0)** Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T, & Michaels, S. (1994). [The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States](https://books.google.com/books?id=3RbyuQAYsdMC) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20190522194826/https://books.google.com/books?id=3RbyuQAYsdMC&printsec=frontcover) 2019-05-22 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Wiederman,1997_29-0)** Wiederman, M. W. (1997). "Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey". *Journal of Sex Research*. **34** (2): 167–174. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1080/00224499709551881](https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00224499709551881).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-gay_30-0)** ["Many gay couples negotiate open relationships"](https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Many-gay-couples-negotiate-open-relationships-3241624.php). *sfgate.com*. 16 July 2010. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20100720210237/http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-07-16/entertainment/21985570_1_hiv-prevention-gay-couples-gay-men) from the original on 20 July 2010. Retrieved 26 April 2018.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-31)** ["HRC | Equally Speaking"](http://www.hrc.org/issues/marriage/9679.htm). *Human Rights Campaign*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20100314031632/http://www.hrc.org/issues/marriage/9679.htm) from the original on 2010-03-14. Retrieved 2010-10-03.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Macintyre,_Sooman,1991_32-0)** Macintyre, S.; Sooman, A. (1991). "Non-paternity and prenatal genetic screening". *Lancet*. **338** (8771): 869–871. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/0140-6736(91)91513-T](https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0140-6736%2891%2991513-T). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [1681226](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1681226). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [41787746](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:41787746).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-33)** Simmons, L.W.; Firman, R.E.C.; Rhodes, G.; Peters, M. (2004). "Human sperm competition: testis size, sperm production and rates of extrapair copulations". *Animal Behaviour*. **68** (2): 297–302. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2004AnBeh..68..297S](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AnBeh..68..297S). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.11.013](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.anbehav.2003.11.013). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [52483925](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:52483925).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Bellis,_Hughes,_Hughes,_Ashton,_2005_34-0)** Bellis, M.A.; Hughes, K.; Hughes, S.; Ashton, J.R. (2005). ["Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733152). *Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health*. **59** (9): 749–754. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1136/jech.2005.036517](https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fjech.2005.036517). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1733152](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733152). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [16100312](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16100312).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-35)** Anderson, Kermyt G. (2006). ["How Well Does Paternity Confidence Match Actual Paternity? Evidence from Worldwide Nonpaternity Rates"](https://web.archive.org/web/20060830231352/http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/A/Kermyt.G.Anderson-1/papers/worldwidepc.pdf) (PDF). *Current Anthropology*. **48** (3): 511–8. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2006CurrA..47..513A](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006CurrA..47..513A). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1086/504167](https://doi.org/10.1086%2F504167). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [56318457](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:56318457). Archived from [the original](http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/A/Kermyt.G.Anderson-1/papers/worldwidepc.pdf) (PDF) on 2006-08-30.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-2009gilding_36-0)** Gilding, Michael (2005). ["Rampant misattributed paternity: the creation of an urban myth"](http://arrow.monash.edu.au/hdl/1959.1/480786). *People and Place*. **13** (12): 1–11. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174433/https://bridges.monash.edu/articles/journal_contribution/Rampant_misattributed_paternity_the_creation_of_an_urban_myth/4975400) from the original on 2020-10-02.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-2009bgilding_37-0)** Gilding, M. (2009). "Paternity Uncertainty and Evolutionary Psychology: How a Seemingly Capricious Occurrence Fails to Follow Laws of Greater Generality". *Sociology*. **43**: 140–691. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1177/0038038508099102](https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0038038508099102). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [145367552](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:145367552).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-1973philipp_38-0)** Philipp EE (1973) "Discussion: moral, social and ethical issues". In: Wolstenholme GEW, Fitzsimons DW, eds. *Law and ethics of AID and embryo transfer*. Ciba Foundation symposium. Vol 17. London: Associated Scientific 63–66

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-2005bellis_39-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-2005bellis_39-1) Bellis MA, Hughes K, Hughes S, Ashton JR (September 2005). ["Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733152). *J Epidemiol Community Health*. **59** (9): 749–54. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1136/jech.2005.036517](https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fjech.2005.036517). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1733152](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733152). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [16100312](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16100312).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-40)** Sykes, B; Irven, C (2000). ["Surnames and the Y chromosome"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207). *Am J Hum Genet*. **66** (4): 1417–1419. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1086/302850](https://doi.org/10.1086%2F302850). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1288207](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [10739766](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10739766).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-2009king_41-0)** King, Turi E.; Jobling, Mark A. (2009), "Founders, Drift, and Infidelity: The Relationship between Y Chromosome Diversity and Patrilineal Surnames", *Molecular Biology and Evolution*, **26** (5): 1093–102, [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/molbev/msp022](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmsp022), [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [2668828](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668828), [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [19204044](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19204044)

1. **[^](#cite_ref-ForsterEtAl_42-0)** Forster, P; Hohoff, C; Dunkelmann, B; Schürenkamp, M; Pfeiffer, H; Neuhuber, F; Brinkmann, B (2015). ["Elevated germline mutation rate in teenage fathers"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345458). *Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*. **282** (1803) 20142898. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rspb.2014.2898](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.2014.2898). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [4345458](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345458). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25694621](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25694621).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-43)** Suna L, Wildera K, McPeeka MS (2002). "Enhanced Pedigree Error Detection". *Human Heredity*. **54** (2): 99–110. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1159/000067666](https://doi.org/10.1159%2F000067666). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [12566741](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12566741). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [26992288](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:26992288).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-44)** O'Connell JR, Weeks DE (July 1998). ["PedCheck: a program for identification of genotype incompatibilities in linkage analysis"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1377228). *Am J Hum Genet*. **63** (1): 259–266. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1998AmJHG..63..259O](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AmJHG..63..259O). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1086/301904](https://doi.org/10.1086%2F301904). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1377228](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1377228). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [9634505](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9634505).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-45)** Lathrop GM, Hooper AB, Huntsman JW, Ward RH (March 1983). ["Evaluating pedigree data. I. The estimation of pedigree error in the presence of marker mistyping"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1685535). *Am J Hum Genet*. **35** (2): 241–262. [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1685535](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1685535). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [6573130](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6573130).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Murdock,1981_46-0)** Murdock GP (1981) Atlas of world cultures. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Lovejoy,1981_47-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Lovejoy,1981_47-1) Lovejoy CO (1981). "The Origin of Man". *Science*. **211** (4480): 341–350. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1981Sci...211..341L](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981Sci...211..341L). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1126/science.211.4480.341](https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.211.4480.341). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [17748254](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17748254).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Marlowe,_2000_48-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Marlowe,_2000_48-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Marlowe,_2000_48-2) Marlowe FW (2000). "Paternal investment and the human mating system". *Behav Processes*. **51** (1–3): 45–61. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2000BehPr..51...45M](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000BehPr..51...45M). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/S0376-6357(00)00118-2](https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0376-6357%2800%2900118-2). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [11074311](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11074311). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [26937001](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:26937001).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Barrett,_Dunbar,_Lycett,_2002_49-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Barrett,_Dunbar,_Lycett,_2002_49-1) Barrett L, Dunbar RIM, Lycett J (2002) Human evolutionary psychology. Palgrave, Basingstoke.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Henrich,_Boyd_&_Richardson,2012_50-0)** Henrich J (2012). ["The puzzle of monogamous marriage"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260845). *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*. **367** (1589): 657–669. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rstb.2011.0290](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2011.0290). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [3260845](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260845). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [22271782](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22271782).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Reno,_Meindle,_McCollum,_Lovejoy,_2003_51-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Reno,_Meindle,_McCollum,_Lovejoy,_2003_51-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Reno,_Meindle,_McCollum,_Lovejoy,_2003_51-2) Reno PL, Meindl RS, McCollum MA, Lovejoy CO (2003). ["Sexual dimorphism in *Australopithecus afarensis* was similar to that of modern humans"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC170931). *Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A*. **100** (16): 9404–9409. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2003PNAS..100.9404R](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PNAS..100.9404R). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1073/pnas.1133180100](https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1133180100). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [170931](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC170931). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [12878734](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12878734).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Gordon,_Green,_Richmond,_2008_52-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Gordon,_Green,_Richmond,_2008_52-1) Gordon AD, Green DJ, Richmond BG (2008). "Strong postcranial size dimorphism in Australopithecus afarensis: Results from two new resampling methods for multivariate data sets with missing data". *Am J Phys Anthropol*. **135** (3): 311–328. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2008AJPA..135..311G](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJPA..135..311G). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1002/ajpa.20745](https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fajpa.20745). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [18044693](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18044693).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Møller,_2003_53-0)** Moller AP (2003) The evolution of monogamy: mating relationships, parental care and sexual selection. Monogamy: Mating Strategies and Partnerships in Birds, Humans and Other Mammals:29–41.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Ash,_Robinson,2010_54-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Ash,_Robinson,2010_54-1) Ash P, Robinson D (2010) [The emergence of humans: an exploration of the evolutionary timeline](https://books.google.com/books?id=JUlSYsyC-NQC) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20190523083245/https://books.google.com/books?id=JUlSYsyC-NQC&printsec=frontcover) 2019-05-23 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, West Sussex, UK;Hoboken, NJ.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-McHenry,1992_55-0)** McHenry HM (1992). "Body size and proportions in early hominids". *Am J Phys Anthropol*. **87** (4): 407–431. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1992AJPA...87..407M](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992AJPA...87..407M). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1002/ajpa.1330870404](https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fajpa.1330870404). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [1580350](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1580350).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Plavcan,_van_Schaik,1997_56-0)** Plavcan JM; Van Schaik, CP (1997). "Interpreting hominid behavior on the basis of sexual dimorphism". *J Hum Evol*. **32** (4): 345–374. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1997JHumE..32..345P](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997JHumE..32..345P). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1006/jhev.1996.0096](https://doi.org/10.1006%2Fjhev.1996.0096). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [9085186](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9085186).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-57)** Neil, Shasha (December 24, 2018). ["7 Oldest African Tribes"](https://www.oldest.org/people/african-tribes/).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-58)** ["The San people"](https://web.archive.org/web/20220401020029/https://www.exploring-africa.com/en/botswana/san-or-bushmen/san-people). *Exploring Africa*. 6 September 2017. Archived from [the original](https://www.exploring-africa.com/en/botswana/san-or-bushmen/san-people) on 1 April 2022. Retrieved 1 March 2023.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-59)** Goody, Jack (1976). *Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 7.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-60)** Goody, Jack (1976). *Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 27–9.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-61)** Goody, Jack (1976). *Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 33–4.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-62)** Roes, Frans L. (1992). ["The Size of Societies, Monogamy, and Belief in High Gods Supporting Human Morality"](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/size-of-societies-stratification-and-belief-in-high-gods-supportive-of-human-morality/0515A283CCF11A9B6393D1872CDFE211). *Tijdschrift voor Sociale Wetenschappen*. **37** (1): 53–58. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20180713200833/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/size-of-societies-stratification-and-belief-in-high-gods-supportive-of-human-morality/0515A283CCF11A9B6393D1872CDFE211) from the original on 2018-07-13. Retrieved 2018-07-13.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-63)** Ember, Carol R. (2011). "What we know and what we don't know about variation in social organization: Melvin Ember's approach to the study of kinship". *Cross-Cultural Research*. **45** (1): 27–30. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1177/1069397110383947](https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1069397110383947). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [143952998](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143952998).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1992_64-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1992_64-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1992_64-2) Betzig L. (1992). ["Roman Monogamy"](https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/29876/1/0000226.pdf) (PDF). *Ethol Sociobiol*. **13** (5–6): 351–383. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/0162-3095(92)90009-S](https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0162-3095%2892%2990009-S). [hdl](/source/Hdl_(identifier)):[2027.42/29876](https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42%2F29876). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174431/https://bitstream/handle/2027.42/29876/0000226.pdf;jsessionid=FDBE943DC0317FFDDD1812621065F3A3?sequence=1) from the original on 2020-10-02. Retrieved 2019-09-02.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1995_65-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1995_65-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1995_65-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-Betzig,1995_65-3) Betzig L. (1995). "Medieval Monogamy". *Journal of Family History*. **20** (2): 181–216. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1177/036319909602000204](https://doi.org/10.1177%2F036319909602000204). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [220072319](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:220072319).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Gibson,_Lawson,2011_66-0)** Gibson MA, Lawson DW (2011). "Modernization" increases parental investment and sibling resource competition: evidence from a rural development initiative in Ethiopia". *Evolution and Human Behavior*. **32** (2): 97–105. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.10.002](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.evolhumbehav.2010.10.002).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-67)** Wojtyla, Karol (1981). ["Marriage. Monogamy and the indissolubility of Marriage"](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john). [*Love and Responsibility*](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john/page/211). San Francisco: Ignatius Press. pp. [211–213](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john/page/211). [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-89870-445-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-89870-445-7).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-68)** Weissmann, Jordan (2018-05-04). ["An Interview with Robin Hanson, the Sex Redistribution Professor"](https://slate.com/business/2018/05/robin-hanson-the-sex-redistribution-professor-interviewed.html). *Slate*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20180506174745/https://slate.com/business/2018/05/robin-hanson-the-sex-redistribution-professor-interviewed.html) from the original on 2018-05-06. Retrieved 2018-05-06.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-69)** Douthat, Ross (2018-05-02). ["Opinion | the Redistribution of Sex"](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/02/opinion/incels-sex-robots-redistribution.html). *The New York Times*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20200201222133/https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/02/opinion/incels-sex-robots-redistribution.html) from the original on 2020-02-01. Retrieved 2018-05-06.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-70)** Kollontai, Aleksandra (2019-12-31). "Make way for Winged Eros: A Letter to Working youth Love as a Socio-psychological Factor". [*From Symbolism to Socialist Realism*](http://www.4edu.info/images/b/b6/Kollontai_Winged_Eros.pdf) (PDF). Academic Studies Press. pp. 160–172. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1515/9781618111449-019](https://doi.org/10.1515%2F9781618111449-019). [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-61811-144-9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-61811-144-9). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [213927887](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:213927887). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20200101170629/http://www.4edu.info/images/b/b6/Kollontai_Winged_Eros.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2020-01-01. Retrieved 2018-11-14.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-71)** Ellis, Havelock (1921). *Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume VI, Sex in Relation to Society*. Philadelphia : F.A. Davis Co. pp. 426–427.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-72)** Zimmer, Carl (2013-08-02). ["Monogamy and Human Evolution"](https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/science/monogamys-boost-to-human-evolution.html). *The New York Times*. New York. Retrieved 2023-06-28.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Goody_73-0)** Goody, Jack (1976). *Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-pmid15317874_74-0)** Wilder, Jason; Mobasher, Zahra; Hammer, Michael (2004). ["Genetic evidence for unequal effective population sizes of human females and males"](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmsh214). *Mol Biol Evol*. **21** (11): 2047–57. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/molbev/msh214](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmsh214). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [15317874](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15317874).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-75)** Fletcher, Garth; Simpson, Jeffry; Campbell, Lorne; [Overall, Nickola](/source/Nickola_Overall) (2015-01-01). "Pair-Bonding, Romantic Love, and Evolution: The Curious Case of "Homo sapiens"". *Perspectives on Psychological Science*. **10** (1): 20–36. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1177/1745691614561683](https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691614561683). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [44281912](https://www.jstor.org/stable/44281912). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25910380](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25910380). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [16530399](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:16530399).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Love_and_Limerence_76-0)** [Tennov, Dorothy](/source/Dorothy_Tennov) (1999). [*Love and Limerence: the Experience of Being in Love*](https://books.google.com/books?id=uPsDAAAACAAJ). Scarborough House. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-8128-6286-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-8128-6286-7). Retrieved 12 March 2011.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-77)** Leggett, John C.; Malm, Suzanne (March 1995). [*The Eighteen Stages of Love: Its Natural History, Fragrance, Celebration and Chase*](https://books.google.com/books?id=2g0RPVk7i1QC&pg=PA27). Rowman & Littlefield. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-882289-33-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-882289-33-2). Retrieved 12 March 2011.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-pmid31539367_78-0)** Musharoff, Shaila; Shringarpure, Suyash; Bustamante, Carlos D.; Ramachandran, Sohini (2019-09-20). ["The inference of sex-biased human demography from whole-genome data"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6774570). *PLOS Genetics*. **15** (9) e1008293. Public Library of Science (PLoS). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1371/journal.pgen.1008293](https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1008293). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1553-7404](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1553-7404). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [6774570](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6774570). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [31539367](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31539367).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-79)** Booth, Hannah (2017-04-01). ["The kingdom of women: the society where a man is never the boss"](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/apr/01/the-kingdom-of-women-the-tibetan-tribe-where-a-man-is-never-the-boss). *The Guardian*. Retrieved 2023-06-28.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-pmid20453016_80-0)** Keinan A, Reich D (2010). ["Can a sex-biased human demography account for the reduced effective population size of chromosome X in non-Africans?"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2944028). *Mol Biol Evol*. **27** (10): 2312–21. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/molbev/msq117](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmsq117). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [2944028](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2944028). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [20453016](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20453016).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-81)** ["Human Monogamy Has Deep Roots"](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-monogamy-has-deep-roots/). *[Scientific American](/source/Scientific_American)*. March 2016.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-pmid19403194_82-0)** Brown, Gillian R.; Laland, Kevin N.; Mulder, Monique Borgerhoff (2009). ["Bateman's principles and human sex roles"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3096780). *Trends Ecol Evol*. **24** (6): 297–304. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2009TEcoE..24..297B](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009TEcoE..24..297B). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.tree.2009.02.005). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [3096780](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3096780). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [19403194](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19403194).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-83)** Frost, Peter (2008). ["Sexual selection and human geographic variation"](https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0099346). *Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology*. **2** (4). American Psychological Association (APA): 169–191. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1037/h0099346](https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0099346). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1933-5377](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1933-5377).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-84)** Low, Bobbi S. (2015-01-04). *[Why Sex Matters](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Why_Sex_Matters&action=edit&redlink=1)*. Princeton University Press. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-691-16388-8](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-691-16388-8).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-85)** Scheidel, Walter (2008). "Monogamy and Polygyny in Greece, Rome, and World History". *SSRN Electronic Journal*. Elsevier BV. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2139/ssrn.1214729](https://doi.org/10.2139%2Fssrn.1214729). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1556-5068](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1556-5068).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-86)** Labuda, Damian; Lefebvre, Jean-François; Nadeau, Philippe; Roy-Gagnon, Marie-Hélène (2010). ["Female-to-Male Breeding Ratio in Modern Humans—an Analysis Based on Historical Recombinations"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2833377). *The American Journal of Human Genetics*. **86** (3). Elsevier BV: 353–363. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.01.029](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ajhg.2010.01.029). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [0002-9297](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0002-9297). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [2833377](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2833377). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [20188344](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20188344).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-pmid25254093_87-0)** Lippold, Sebastian; Xu, Hongyang; Ko, Albert; Li, Mingkun; Renaud, Gabriel; Butthof, Anne; Schröder, Roland; Stoneking, Mark (2014-09-24). ["Human paternal and maternal demographic histories: insights from high-resolution Y chromosome and mtDNA sequences"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174254). *Investigative Genetics*. **5** (1). Springer Science and Business Media LLC: 13. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1186/2041-2223-5-13](https://doi.org/10.1186%2F2041-2223-5-13). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [2041-2223](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/2041-2223). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [4174254](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174254). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25254093](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25254093).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-88)** Sample, Ian (2014-09-24). ["More women than men have added their DNA to the human gene pool"](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/sep/24/women-men-dna-human-gene-pool). *the Guardian*. Retrieved 2023-06-30.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-89)** Karmin, Monika; et al. (2015-03-13). ["A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4381518). *Genome Research*. **25** (4). Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory: 459–466. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1101/gr.186684.114](https://doi.org/10.1101%2Fgr.186684.114). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [1088-9051](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1088-9051). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [4381518](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4381518). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25770088](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25770088).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-90)** O, Cathleen (2015-03-24). ["Neolithic culture may have kept most men from mating"](https://arstechnica.com/science/2015/03/neolithic-culture-may-have-kept-most-men-from-mating/). *Ars Technica*. Retrieved 2023-06-30.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-91)** Diep, Francie (2017-06-14). ["8,000 YEARS AGO, 17 WOMEN REPRODUCED FOR EVERY ONE MAN"](https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success). *Pacific Standard*. Retrieved 2023-06-30.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-92)** Zeng, Tian Chen; Aw, Alan J.; Feldman, Marcus W. (2018-05-25). ["Cultural hitchhiking and competition between patrilineal kin groups explain the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5970157). *Nature Communications*. **9** (1): 2077. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2018NatCo...9.2077Z](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatCo...9.2077Z). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1038/s41467-018-04375-6](https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41467-018-04375-6). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [2041-1723](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/2041-1723). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [5970157](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5970157). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [29802241](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29802241).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-93)** Guyon, Léa; Guez, Jérémy; Toupance, Bruno; Heyer, Evelyne; Chaix, Raphaëlle (2024-04-24). ["Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11043392). *Nature Communications*. **15** (1): 3243. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2024NatCo..15.3243G](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024NatCo..15.3243G). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1038/s41467-024-47618-5](https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41467-024-47618-5). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [2041-1723](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/2041-1723). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [11043392](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11043392). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [38658560](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38658560).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-94)** Betzig, Laura (1993). "Sex, succession, and stratification in the first six civilizations: How powerful men reproduced, passed power on to their sons, and used power to defend their wealth, women, and children". In Lee, Ellis (ed.). *Social Stratification and socioeconomic inequality Vol. 1*. Westport CT: Praeger. pp. 37–74.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-95)** *The Ethnographic Atlas*, George P. Murdock

1. **[^](#cite_ref-96)** Cf. R. de Vaux, *Ancient Israel. Its Life and Institutions*, London 1980 (5th impr.), p. 24 [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-232-51219-1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-232-51219-1)

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-MES_97-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-MES_97-1) M. Stol: *Private Life in Ancient Mesopotamia*, in: *Civilizations of the Ancient Near East*. J. M. Sasson (ed.), J. Baines, G. Beckman, K. S. Rubinson (assist. ed.). Vol. 1. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan, 1995, pp. 488–493. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-684-19720-0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-684-19720-0); Cf. Martha T. Roth, *[Age at Marriage and the Household: A Study of the Neo-Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian Forms](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/comparative-studies-in-society-and-history/article/age-at-marriage-and-the-household-a-study-of-neobabylonian-and-neoassyrian-forms/2F3521F910D7A19788DD66FB428620FF) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20180713202817/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/comparative-studies-in-society-and-history/article/age-at-marriage-and-the-household-a-study-of-neobabylonian-and-neoassyrian-forms/2F3521F910D7A19788DD66FB428620FF) 2018-07-13 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)*, "Comparative Studies in Society and History" 29 (1987), and *Babylonian Marriage Agreements 7th–3rd Centuries BC* (1989).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-EGY_98-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-EGY_98-1) G. Pinch: "Egyptian society seems to have been based on the "conjugal household". The basic family unit consisted of a man and a woman living together and any children they might have". *Private Life in Ancient Egypt* in: *Civilizations of the Ancient Near East*, pp. 370–71

1. **[^](#cite_ref-99)** Pinch Geraldine, *Private Life in Ancient Egypt* in: *Civilizations of the Ancient Near East*. pp. 371–375.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-EJUDMO_100-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-EJUDMO_100-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-EJUDMO_100-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-EJUDMO_100-3) "Monogamy". *Encyclopaedia Judaica*. Vol. 12. pp. 258–260.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-EJUDMA_101-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-EJUDMA_101-1) "Marriage". *Encyclopaedia Judaica*. Vol. 11. pp. 1026–27.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-coogan_102-0)** Coogan, Michael (October 2010). [*God and Sex. What the Bible Really Says*](https://archive.org/details/godsexwhatbi00coog) (1st ed.). New York, Boston: Twelve. Hachette Book Group. p. [78](https://archive.org/details/godsexwhatbi00coog/page/78). [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-446-54525-9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-446-54525-9). Retrieved May 5, 2011. god and sex.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-103)** de Vaux R. O.P. "Marriage - 1. Polygamy and monogamy". *Ancient Israel. Its Life and Institutions*. pp. 24–26.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-104)** Scheidel, W. (2009). ["A peculiar institution? Greco-Roman monogamy in global context"](https://web.stanford.edu/~scheidel/Scheidel_HISFAM.pdf) (PDF). *History of the Family*. **14** (3): 289. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.hisfam.2009.06.001](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.hisfam.2009.06.001). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [52211464](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:52211464). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20190522064105/https://web.stanford.edu/~scheidel/Scheidel_HISFAM.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2019-05-22. Retrieved 2018-07-13.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Scheidel_June_2008_105-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Scheidel_June_2008_105-1) Walter Scheidel, [Monogamy and polygyny in Greece, Rome, and world history](http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/060807.pdf) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20131019155732/http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/scheidel/060807.pdf) 2013-10-19 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine), Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics, June 2008

1. **[^](#cite_ref-106)** Scheidel W. 2009. A peculiar institution? Greco-Roman monogamy in global context. History Family14, 280–291 (doi:10.1016/j.hisfam.2009.06.001)10.1016/j.hisfam.2009.06.001

1. **[^](#cite_ref-107)** John Paul II. *Man and Woman He created Them. A Theology of the Body 1,2-4*. pp. 132–133.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-108)** MacDonald K. [The establishment and maintenance of socially imposed monogamy in Western Europe](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/establishment-and-maintenance-of-socially-imposed-monogamy-in-western-europe/319BDB6481D8B26308470EF31B79FC13) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174437/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/establishment-and-maintenance-of-socially-imposed-monogamy-in-western-europe/319BDB6481D8B26308470EF31B79FC13) 2020-10-02 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Politics Life Sci. 1995. 14, 3–23

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Henrich2012_109-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Henrich2012_109-1) Henrich J, Boyd R, Richerson PJ (2012). ["The puzzle of monogamous marriage"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260845). *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*. **367** (1589): 657–69. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rstb.2011.0290](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2011.0290). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [3260845](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260845). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [22271782](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22271782).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-110)** ["Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women"](https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20140103192421/http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/) from the original on 2014-01-03.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-111)** Engels, Friedrich. ["The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State"](http://www.readingfromtheleft.com/PDF/EngelsOrigin.pdf) (PDF). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20170829070149/http://www.readingfromtheleft.com/PDF/EngelsOrigin.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2017-08-29. Retrieved 2018-09-13.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Cheng,1991_112-0)** Cheng, C. (1991). [A speculative analysis of socio-economic influences on the fertility transition in China](http://www.unescapsdd.org/files/documents/PUB_APPJ-Vol-6-No-3.pdf) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160316144637/http://www.unescapsdd.org/files/documents/PUB_APPJ-Vol-6-No-3.pdf) 2016-03-16 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine). Asia-Pacific Population Journal, 6, 3-24.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-AmnestyInternational,_2006_113-0)** Amnesty International, 2006. The Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa: Strengthening the promotion and protection of women's human rights in Africa. Retrieved May 29, 2006 from ["The Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa: Strengthening the promotion and protection of women's human rights in Africa"](https://www.amnesty.org/documents/ior63/005/2004/en). 4 June 2004. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174445/https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ior63/005/2004/en/) from the original on 2020-10-02. Retrieved 2016-03-06..

1. **[^](#cite_ref-UniversityMinnesota,_2006_114-0)** University of Minnesota Human Rights Library, 2006. Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa. Retrieved May 29, 2006 from ["University of Minnesota Human Rights Library"](http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/africa/protocol-women2003.html). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160409050848/http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/africa/protocol-women2003.html) from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved 2016-03-06..

1. **[^](#cite_ref-115)** - Ågren, G.; Zhou, Q.; Zhong, W. (1989). "Ecology and social behaviour of Mongolian gerbils *Meriones unguiculatus*, at Xilfudjeudeyjxidiuhot, Inner Mongolia, China". *Animal Behaviour*. **37**: 11–27. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/0003-3472(89)90002-X](https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0003-3472%2889%2990002-X). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [53152632](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:53152632). - Barash, D.P. (1981). "Mate guarding and gallivanting by male hoary marmots (*Marmota caligata*)". *Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology*. **9** (3): 187–193. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1981BEcoS...9..187B](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981BEcoS...9..187B). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1007/BF00302936](https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF00302936). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [36862635](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:36862635). - Foltz, D.W. (1981). "Genetic evidence for long-term monogamy in a small rodent, Peromyscus polionotus". *American Naturalist*. **117** (5): 665–675. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1981ANat..117..665F](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ANat..117..665F). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1086/283751](https://doi.org/10.1086%2F283751). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [84172119](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:84172119). - Gursky, S.L. (2000). "Sociality in the spectral tarsier, *Tarsius spectrum*". *American Journal of Primatology*. **51** (1): 89–101. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1002/(SICI)1098-2345(200005)51:1<89::AID-AJP7>3.0.CO;2-7](https://doi.org/10.1002%2F%28SICI%291098-2345%28200005%2951%3A1%3C89%3A%3AAID-AJP7%3E3.0.CO%3B2-7). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [10811442](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10811442). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [46636797](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:46636797). - Hasselquist, D. S.; Sherman, P.W. (2001). ["Social mating systems and extrapair fertilizations in passerine birds"](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fbeheco%2F12.4.457). *Behavioral Ecology*. **12** (4): 457–66. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/beheco/12.4.457](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fbeheco%2F12.4.457). - Hubrecht, R.C. (1985). "Home range size and use and territorial behavior in the common marmoset, *Callithrix jacchus jacchus*, at the Tapacura Field Station, Recife, Brazil". *International Journal of Primatology*. **6** (5): 533–550. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1007/BF02735575](https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF02735575). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [36907987](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:36907987).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-116)** *Mason, W.A. (1966). ["Social organization of the South American monkey, *Callicebus moloch*: a preliminary report"](https://archive.org/stream/cbarchive_49279_socialorganizationofthesoutham9999/socialorganizationofthesoutham9999#page/n1/mode/2up). *Tulane Studies in Zoology*. **13**: 23–8. - McKinney, F.; Derrickson, S.R.; Mineau, P. (1983). "Forced copulation in waterfowl". *Behaviour*. **86** (3): 250–294. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1983Behav..86..250M](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983Behav..86..250M). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1163/156853983X00390](https://doi.org/10.1163%2F156853983X00390). - Reichard, U. (1995). "Extra-pair Copulations in a Monogamous Gibbon (*Hylobates lar*)". *Ethology*. **100** (2): 99–112. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1995Ethol.100...99R](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995Ethol.100...99R). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1111/j.1439-0310.1995.tb00319.x](https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1439-0310.1995.tb00319.x). - Richardson, P.R.K. (1987). ["Aardwolf mating system: overt cuckoldry in an apparently monogamous mammal"](https://journals.co.za/content/sajsci/83/7/AJA00382353_5361?crawler=true&mimetype=application/pdf). *South African Journal of Science*. **83**: 405–412. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20201002174507/https://journals.co.za/docserver/fulltext/sajsci/83/7/6441.pdf?expires=1601661607&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=F1D1BEA757FA69CB78AA0685BF37279C) (PDF) from the original on 2020-10-02. Retrieved 2020-10-02. - Welsh, D.; Sedinger, J.S. (1990). "Extra-Pair copulations in Black Brant". *The Condor*. **92** (1): 242–4. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1990Condo..92..242W](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990Condo..92..242W). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2307/1368407](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F1368407). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [1368407](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1368407). - Westneat, D.F.; Stewart, I.R.K. (2003). "Extra-pair paternity in birds: causes, correlates, and conflict". *Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics*. **34**: 365–396. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132439](https://doi.org/10.1146%2Fannurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132439).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-117)** *Birkhead, T.R.; Møller, A.P. (1995). "Extra-pair copulations and extra-pair paternity in birds". *Animal Behaviour*. **49** (3): 843–8. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[1995AnBeh..49..843B](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995AnBeh..49..843B). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/0003-3472(95)80217-7](https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0003-3472%2895%2980217-7). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [53156057](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:53156057). - Birkhead, T.R.; Møller, A.P. (1996). ["Monogamy and sperm competition in birds"](https://books.google.com/books?id=tlHVc42WnOsC). In Black, J.M. (ed.). *Partnerships in Birds: The Study of Monogamy*. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 323–343. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-19-159054-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-19-159054-2). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20200806032455/https://books.google.com/books?id=tlHVc42WnOsC) from the original on 2020-08-06. Retrieved 2017-03-10. - Owens, I.P.F.; Hartley, I.R. (1998). ["Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism?"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1688905). *Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences*. **265** (1394): 397–407. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rspb.1998.0308](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.1998.0308). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1688905](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1688905). - Solomon, N.G.; Keane, B.; Knoch, L.R.; Hogan, P.J. (2004). "Multiple paternity in socially monogamous prairie voles (*Microtus ochrogaster*)". *Canadian Journal of Zoology*. **82** (10): 1667–71. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2004CaJZ...82.1667S](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004CaJZ...82.1667S). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1139/z04-142](https://doi.org/10.1139%2Fz04-142).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Reichard2003_118-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Reichard2003_118-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Reichard2003_118-2) [***d***](#cite_ref-Reichard2003_118-3) [***e***](#cite_ref-Reichard2003_118-4) Reichard, U.H. (2003). "Monogamy: Past and present". In Reichard, U.H.; Boesch, C. (eds.). *Monogamy: Mating strategies and partnerships in birds, humans, and other mammals*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–25. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-521-52577-0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-521-52577-0).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-119)** Ridley, Matt (1994). *The Red Queen: sex and the evolution of human nature*. New York: Macmillan Pub. Co. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-02-603340-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-02-603340-2). [OCLC](/source/OCLC_(identifier)) [28337617](https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/28337617).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Wright,1994_120-0)** Wright R (1994) The moral animal: the new science of evolutionary psychology. Pantheon Books, New York.[*[page needed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources)*]

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Mulder,_Mulder,_2009_121-0)** Mulder M, Mulder B (2009). ["Serial Monogamy as Polygyny or Polyandry?"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486523). *Human Nature*. **20** (2): 130–150. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1007/s12110-009-9060-x](https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs12110-009-9060-x). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [5486523](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486523). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [25526955](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25526955).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Jokela,_Rotkrich,_Rickard,_Pettay,_Lummaa,2010_122-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Jokela,_Rotkrich,_Rickard,_Pettay,_Lummaa,2010_122-1) [***c***](#cite_ref-Jokela,_Rotkrich,_Rickard,_Pettay,_Lummaa,2010_122-2) Jokela M, Rotkirch A, Rickard I, Pettay J, Lummaa V (2010). ["Serial monogamy increases reproductive success in men but not in women"](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fbeheco%2Farq078). *Behav Ecol*. **21** (5): 906–912. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/beheco/arq078](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fbeheco%2Farq078).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-123)** de la Croix, David; Mariani, Fabio (2015-01-01). ["From Polygyny to Serial Monogamy: A Unified Theory of Marriage Institutions"](https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v82y2015i2p565-607.html). *Review of Economic Studies*. **82** (2): 565–607. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1093/restud/rdv001](https://doi.org/10.1093%2Frestud%2Frdv001). [hdl](/source/Hdl_(identifier)):[2078.1/110739](https://hdl.handle.net/2078.1%2F110739). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [8044548](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8044548). [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160203103110/https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v82y2015i2p565-607.html) from the original on 2016-02-03.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-124)** McVeigh, Tracy (11 February 2012). ["Love hurts more than ever before (blame the internet and capitalism)"](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/feb/12/love-marriage-romance-valentine). *[The Guardian](/source/The_Guardian)*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20170102233928/https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/feb/12/love-marriage-romance-valentine) from the original on 2 January 2017.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Starks,_Blackie,_2000_125-0)** Starks P, Blackie C (2000). ["The relationship between serial monogamy and rape in the United States (1960–1995)"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1690656). *Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*. **267** (1449): 1259–1263. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rspb.2000.1136](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.2000.1136). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1690656](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1690656). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [10902693](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10902693).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Kunz,_Kunz,1994_126-0)** Kunz J, Kunz PR (1994). "Social setting and remarriage: ages of husband and wife". *Psychological Reports*. **75**: 719–722.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-127)** It is said to have been "rife" in ancient Rome *[Alternative Forms of Marriage Serial Monogamy](http://www.trivia-library.com/b/alternative-forms-of-marriage-serial-monogamy.htm) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20080706013632/http://www.trivia-library.com/b/alternative-forms-of-marriage-serial-monogamy.htm) 2008-07-06 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)* at Trivia-Library.com.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-128)** In Canada, 46% of divorcées will remarry according to *[Till death do us part? The risk of first and second marriage dissolution](http://www.slaw.ca/2006/06/28/serial-monogamy-not/) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20081107021623/http://www.slaw.ca/2006/06/28/serial-monogamy-not/) 2008-11-07 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)* by Warren Clark and Susan Crompton.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-129)** Griswold, Robert L. (1983). *Family and Divorce in California, 1850–1890: Victorian illusions and everyday realities*. Albany NY: State University of New York Press. pp. 7–8. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-87395-634-5](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-87395-634-5).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-130)** [Goldman, Noreen](/source/Noreen_Goldman) (1984). ["Changes in Widowhood and Divorce and Expected Durations of Marriage"](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2061160). *Demography*. **21** (3): 297–307. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.2307/2061160](https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2061160). [JSTOR](/source/JSTOR_(identifier)) [2061160](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2061160). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [6479390](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6479390). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [30103970](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:30103970).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-131)** Timothy J. Owston, [*Divorce.*](http://freespace.virgin.net/owston.tj/divorce.htm) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20081219193154/http://freespace.virgin.net/owston.tj/divorce.htm) 2008-12-19 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine) 2nd edition, April 2006

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Zeitzen_132-0)** Zeitzen, Miriam Koktvedgaard (2008). *Polygamy: A Cross-Cultural Analysis*. Oxford: Berg. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-84520-220-0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-84520-220-0).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-133)** FALEN, DOUGLAS J. (2009-10-23). "Polygamy: a cross-cultural analysis by Zeitzen, Miriam Koktvedgaard". *Social Anthropology*. **17** (4): 510–511. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1111/j.1469-8676.2009.00088_20.x](https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1469-8676.2009.00088_20.x). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [0964-0282](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0964-0282).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-134)** For a popular press angle, see e.g. Rosie Wilby, *Is Monogamy Dead?: Rethinking Relationships in the 21st Century* (Cardiff: Accent Press, 2017), 107. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [9781786154521](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9781786154521). For deeper, scholarly analysis, see e.g. David Silverman, "The Construction of 'Delicate' Objects in Counselling", in ed. Margaret Wetherell et al., *Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader* (London: Sage, 2001), 123–27. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [9780761971566](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780761971566)

1. **[^](#cite_ref-135)** Simpson, Bob (1998). *Changing Families: An Ethnographic Approach to Divorce and Separation*. Oxford: Berg.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Reichard2002_136-0)** Reichard, U.H. (2002). ["Monogamy—A variable relationship"](https://web.archive.org/web/20110514183645/http://www.mpg.de/1028786/W001_Biology-Medicine_062_067.pdf) (PDF). *Max Planck Research*. **3**: 62–7. Archived from [the original](http://www.mpg.de/1028786/W001_Biology-Medicine_062_067.pdf) (PDF) on 14 May 2011. Retrieved 24 April 2013.

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-Barash2001_137-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-Barash2001_137-1) Barash, D.P. & Lipton, J.E. (2001). The Myth of Monogamy. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Angier1990_138-0)** Angier, Natalie (1990-08-21). "[Mating for Life? It's Not for the Birds of the Bees](https://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/21/science/mating-for-life-it-s-not-for-the-birds-of-the-bees.html) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20170314144709/http://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/21/science/mating-for-life-it-s-not-for-the-birds-of-the-bees.html) 2017-03-14 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)" ("of" rather than "or" is how it shows in the article !). The New York Times.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-Morell1998_139-0)** Morell, V. (1998). "EVOLUTION OF SEX:A New Look at Monogamy". *Science*. **281** (5385): 1982–1983. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1126/science.281.5385.1982](https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.281.5385.1982). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [9767050](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9767050). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [31391458](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:31391458).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-140)** Elizabeth A. Whiteman; Isabelle M.Côté (August 2003). "Social monogamy in the Cleaning goby Elacatinus evelynae: ecological constraints or net benefit?". *Animal Behaviour*. **66** (2): 281–291. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2003AnBeh..66..281W](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AnBeh..66..281W). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1006/anbe.2003.2200](https://doi.org/10.1006%2Fanbe.2003.2200). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [53176199](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:53176199).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-141)** Beltran S, Boissier J (September 2008). "Schistosome monogamy: who, how, and why?". *Trends Parasitol*. **24** (9): 386–91. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1016/j.pt.2008.05.009](https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.pt.2008.05.009). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [18674968](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18674968).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-142)** Lim, Miranda M.; Wang, Zuoxin; Olazábal, Daniel E.; Ren, Xianghui; Terwilliger, Ernest F.; Young, Larry J. (2004). "Enhanced partner preference in a promiscuous species by manipulating the expression of a single gene". *[Nature](/source/Nature_(journal))*. **429** (6993): 754–7. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2004Natur.429..754L](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Natur.429..754L). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1038/nature02539](https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature02539). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [15201909](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15201909). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [4340500](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:4340500). Referenced in Graham, Sarah (2004-06-17). ["Gene Linked to Lasting Love in Voles"](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=gene-linked-to-lasting-lo). *[Scientific American](/source/Scientific_American)*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20121018190124/http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=gene-linked-to-lasting-lo) from the original on 2012-10-18. Retrieved 2020-06-08.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-143)** Hammock, E. A. D.; Young, LJ (2005). "Microsatellite Instability Generates Diversity in Brain and Sociobehavioral Traits". *Science*. **308** (5728): 1630–4. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2005Sci...308.1630H](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005Sci...308.1630H). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1126/science.1111427](https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.1111427). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [15947188](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15947188). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [18899853](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:18899853). Summarized in Wade, Nicholas (2005-06-10). ["DNA of Voles May Hint at Why Some Fathers Shirk Duties"](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/10/science/10behave.html). *[The New York Times](/source/The_New_York_Times)*. [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20141108070833/http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/10/science/10behave.html) from the original on 2014-11-08. Retrieved November 17, 2017.

1. **[^](#cite_ref-144)** Fink, S. (2006). ["Mammalian monogamy is not controlled by a single gene"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1544156). *[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences](/source/Proceedings_of_the_National_Academy_of_Sciences)*. **103** (29): 10956–10960. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2006PNAS..10310956F](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PNAS..10310956F). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1073/pnas.0602380103](https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.0602380103). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1544156](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1544156). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [16832060](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16832060).

1. **[^](#cite_ref-145)** Carter, C. Sue; Perkeybile, Allison M. (2018). ["The Monogamy Paradox: What Do Love and Sex Have to Do With It?"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6910656). *Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution*. **6** 202. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2018FrEEv...6..202C](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018FrEEv...6..202C). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.3389/fevo.2018.00202](https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffevo.2018.00202). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [2296-701X](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/2296-701X). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [6910656](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6910656). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [31840025](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31840025).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-:0_146-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-:0_146-1) Hammock, Elizabeth A.D; Young, Larry J (2006-12-29). ["Oxytocin, vasopressin and pair bonding: implications for autism"](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764849). *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*. **361** (1476): 2187–2198. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1098/rstb.2006.1939](https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2006.1939). [ISSN](/source/ISSN_(identifier)) [0962-8436](https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0962-8436). [PMC](/source/PMC_(identifier)) [1764849](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764849). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [17118932](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17118932).

1. ^ [***a***](#cite_ref-:1_147-0) [***b***](#cite_ref-:1_147-1) Tolekova, Anna; Hadzhibozheva, Petya; Georgiev, Tsvetelin; Mihailova, Stanislava; Ilieva, Galina; Gulubova, Maya; Leventieva-Necheva, Eleonora; Milenov, Kiril; Kalfin, Reni (2012-09-19). [*The Effects of Some Neuropeptides on Motor Activity of Smooth Muscle Organs in Abdominal and Pelvic Cavities*](https://www.intechopen.com/state.item.id). IntechOpen. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-953-51-0740-8](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-953-51-0740-8).[*[permanent dead link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Link_rot)*]

## Bibliography

- de Vaux R. O.P. (1973). "Marriage - 1. Polygamy and monogamy". *Ancient Israel. Its Life and Institutions*. London: Darton, Longman & Todd. pp. 24–26. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-232-51219-9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-232-51219-9).

- John Paul II (2006). *Man and Woman He created Them. A Theology of the Body 1,2-4*. M. Waldstein (trans.). Boston: Paoline Books & Media. pp. 132–133. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-8198-7421-4](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-8198-7421-4).

- "Marriage". *Encyclopaedia Judaica*. Vol. 11. Jerusalem-New York: Encyclopaedia Judaica Jerusalem — The MacMillan Company. 1971. pp. 1026–1051.

- "Monogamy". *Encyclopaedia Judaica*. Vol. 12. Jerusalem-New York: Encyclopaedia Judaica Jerusalem — The MacMillan Company. 1971. pp. 258–260.

- Pinch Geraldine, *Private Life in Ancient Egypt* in: J. M. Sasson; J. Baines; G. Beckman; K. S. Rubinson (assist.), eds. (1995). *Civilizations of the Ancient Near East*. Vol. 1. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. pp. 363–381. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-684-19720-3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-684-19720-3).

- Stol Marten: *Private Life in Ancient Mesopotamia*, in: J. M. Sasson; J. Baines; G. Beckman; K. S. Rubinson (assist.), eds. (1995). *Civilizations of the Ancient Near East*. Vol. 1. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. pp. 486–501. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-684-19720-3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-684-19720-3)..

- [Wojtyła, Karol](/source/Pope_John_Paul_II) (1981). ["Marriage. Monogamy and the indissolubility of Marriage"](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john). [*Love and Responsibility*](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john/page/211). San Francisco: Ignatius Press. pp. [211–216](https://archive.org/details/loveresponsibili00john/page/211). [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-89870-445-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-89870-445-7).

## Further reading

- Barash, David P., and Lipton, Judith Eve. *The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People*. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co./Henry Hold and Co., 2001. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-8050-7136-9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-8050-7136-9).

- Kleiman DG (March 1977). "Monogamy in mammals". *Q Rev Biol*. **52** (1): 39–69. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1086/409721](https://doi.org/10.1086%2F409721). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [857268](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/857268). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [25675086](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:25675086).

- Lim, Miranda M.; et al. (June 2004). "Enhanced Partner Preference in a Promiscuous Species by Manipulating the Expression of a Single Gene". *Nature*. **429** (6993): 754–7. [Bibcode](/source/Bibcode_(identifier)):[2004Natur.429..754L](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Natur.429..754L). [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1038/nature02539](https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature02539). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [15201909](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15201909). [S2CID](/source/S2CID_(identifier)) [4340500](https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:4340500).

- Reichard, Ulrich H., and Christophe Boesch (eds.). *Monogamy: Mating Strategies and Partnerships in Birds, Humans and Other Mammals*. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-521-81973-3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-521-81973-3), [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [0-521-52577-2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-521-52577-2).

- Burnham, Terry; Phelan, Jay (2000). [*Mean Genes: from Sex to Money to Food, Taming Our Primal Instincts*](https://archive.org/details/meangenesfromsex00burn) (First ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge, MA: Perseus Pub. [ISBN](/source/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-0-14-200007-6](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-14-200007-6).

- Lathrop GM, Huntsman JW, Hooper AB, Ward RH (1983). "Evaluating pedigree data. II. Identifying the cause of error in families with inconsistencies". *Hum. Hered*. **33** (6): 377–89. [doi](/source/Doi_(identifier)):[10.1159/000153406](https://doi.org/10.1159%2F000153406). [PMID](/source/PMID_(identifier)) [6585347](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6585347).

- Roth, Martha T. *[Age at Marriage and the Household: A Study of the Neo-Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian Forms](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/comparative-studies-in-society-and-history/article/age-at-marriage-and-the-household-a-study-of-neobabylonian-and-neoassyrian-forms/2F3521F910D7A19788DD66FB428620FF) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20180713202817/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/comparative-studies-in-society-and-history/article/age-at-marriage-and-the-household-a-study-of-neobabylonian-and-neoassyrian-forms/2F3521F910D7A19788DD66FB428620FF) 2018-07-13 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)*, "Comparative Studies in Society and History" 29 (1987), and *Babylonian Marriage Agreements 7th–3rd Centuries BC* (1989)

- Gabbatiss, Josh. *[Why pairing up for life is hardly ever a good idea](https://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160213-why-pairing-up-for-life-is-hardly-ever-a-good-idea) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160322020333/http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160213-why-pairing-up-for-life-is-hardly-ever-a-good-idea) 2016-03-22 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)* (February 2016), *[BBC Earth](/source/BBC_Earth)*

## External links

Look up ***[serial monogamy](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/serial_monogamy)*** in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikiquote has quotations related to ***[monogamy](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/monogamy)***.

- [The Myth of Monogamy](http://www.libchrist.com/sexed/mythmonogamy.html)

- [UK website on childsupport and paternity with many links to studies of paternity, nonpaternity and pedigree error rates](http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/analysis_and_opinion/choices_and_behaviours/misattributed_paternity.htm#philipp1973) [Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20160530002005/http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/analysis_and_opinion/choices_and_behaviours/misattributed_paternity.htm#philipp1973) 2016-05-30 at the [Wayback Machine](/source/Wayback_Machine)

- [Web MD page on Monogamy](https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-monogamy)

v t e Human sexuality Index Outline Physiology and biology Adolescent sexuality Child sexuality Human female sexuality Human male sexuality Intersex Sex differences Differentiation Physiology Mechanics of sexuality Sexual response cycle Anatomy Anus Breasts Clitoris Erogenous zones Genitourinary system Nipples Penis Rectum Reproductive system Male Female Throat Vagina Events Clitoral erection Insemination Libido Nocturnal emission Orgasm Female and male ejaculation Pelvic thrust Penile erection Pre-ejaculate Pregnancy Sexual arousal Sexual stimulation Semen Vaginal lubrication Health Birth control Sexual dysfunction Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder Erectile dysfunction Hypersexuality Hyposexuality Disorders of sex development Obesity and sexuality Safe sex Sexual addiction Sexuality and disability Sexually transmitted infection Research Biological Birth order Handedness Neuroscientific Prenatal hormones Demographical Environmental Reproductive medicine Andrology Gynaecology Urology Sex education Sex therapy (PLISSIT model) Sexual medicine Sexecology Specific research Kinsey scale Klein Sexual Orientation Grid Split attraction model Masters and Johnson Society Identity and diversity Asexuality Gray asexuality Demisexuality Bisexuality Pansexuality Heterosexuality Homosexuality Men who have sex with men Women who have sex with women LGBTQ Sexual orientation Relationship phenomena Casual relationship Casual sex Celibacy Love shyness Celibacy syndrome Herbivore men Committed relationship Conventional sex Fictosexuality Flirting Free love Foreplay Friends with benefits relationships Group sex Marriage One-night stand Promiscuity Female Romance Romantic orientation Aromanticism Polyamory Sex life Sexual abstinence Sexual orientation Sexual partner Sexual repression Single person Swinging Sexual dynamics Hypergamy Physical attractiveness Sexual activity Sexual attraction Sexual capital Sexual communication Sexual consent Sexual desire Sexual ethics Sexual frustration Sociosexuality See also Abortion-rights movement Age of consent Decriminalization of sex work LGBTQ rights by country or territory Public sex Reproductive rights Right to privacy Sex and drugs Sex worker movements Sex workers' rights Sex-positive movement Sex-positive feminism Sexual and reproductive health and rights Sexual jealousy Sexual norm Sexual revolution Sexual script theory Sexual surrogate Stanley v. Georgia Human sexuality portal

v t e Gender and sexual identities Sex as a biological variable Sex–gender distinction Sexuality and gender identity–based cultures Gender identities Genders Man Woman Non-binary Agender Third gender Gender fluidity Androgyne Gender and sex Male Female Intersex Sex assignment Cisgender Transgender Trans man Trans woman Social aspects Anti-gender movement Gender binary Gender neutrality Gender nonconformity Gender roles Gender self-identification Postgenderism Social construction of gender Related terms Androgynos Apwint Bakla Binabinaaine Boi Bugis genders Bissu Calabai Calalai Chibados Cross-dresser Enaree Eunuch Galli Faʻafafine Faʻatama Fakafifine Femboy Femminiello Gender bender Güevedoce Hijra Kathoey Köçek Koekchuch Lhamana Māhū Masculine of center Mudoko dako Mukhannath Mustarjil Muxe Nádleehi Palopa Sipiniq Sworn virgin Travesti Transsexual Akava'ine Rae-rae Fakaleitī Mak nyah Tumtum Two-spirit Vakasalewalewa Winkte X-gender Sexual orientation identities Sexual orientations Asexual Gray Aegosexual Demisexual Monosexual Heterosexual Homosexual Plurisexual Bisexual Pansexual Polysexual Social aspects Analloeroticism Antisexuality Asociality Attraction to transgender people Heterosociality Homoaffectivity Homosociality Romantic orientation Aromanticism Sociosexuality Alternative labels Allosexual Androphilia and gynephilia Banjee Bi-curious Down-low Gay Gay men Heteroflexible Khanith Lesbian/Sapphic Non-heterosexual Queer Questioning Same gender loving Takatāpui See also Aphobia Acephobia Arophobia Discrimination against non-binary people Discrimination against transgender people Transmisandry Transmisogyny Ex-gay Ex-ex-gay LGBTQ Health Mental health Suicide Legal recognition of non-binary gender Legal status of transgender people Right to personal identity Split attraction model Transgender archaeology Transgender inequality

v t e Sexual ethics Human sexuality Adolescent sexuality Rainbow party Adultery Education Fetishism Incest law Infidelity Miscegenation Obesity and sexuality Objectification Orientation Pornography gay law lesbian women's Pregnancy Abortion Prostitution law Reproductive rights Sex-positive feminism Sex-positive movement Sex workers' rights Survival sex Child sexuality Child marriage Child pornography law Child prostitution Child sex tourism Sexual abuse Child-on-child sexual abuse Child sexual abuse law Cybersex trafficking Harassment Rape law Sex trafficking Sexual slavery Age of consent (reform) Africa Asia Europe North America United States Mexico Oceania South America Topical outline

v t e Types of marriages Legal scenarios Civil Covenant Customary Nikah 'urfi Plaçage Fleet Monogamy Serial monogamy Marriage Remarriage Same-sex Temporary Hollywood Nikah mut'ah Wedlease Voidable Putative Void Religious Jewish Christian Catholic Josephite Eastern Orthodox Mormon Sealing Polygamy Mixed-orientation Quaker Clerical marriage Islamic Marriage in Islam Misyar Nikah mut'ah Nikah 'urfi Levirate Yibbum Natural Scientology Self-uniting Widow conservation Hindu Vivaaha Brahma Daiva Prajapatya Gandharva Asura Rakshasa Paishacha Ayyavazhi Vedic Yogic Manus Age Marriageable age Child Teen Arranged Sister exchange Flash Forced Abduction Raptio Heqin Miai Shotgun Tongyangxi Ceremonial Betrothal Handfasting Mystery of Crowning Wedding Las Vegas Proxy Circumstantial basis Death Posthumous France Germany Chinese ghost marriage Widow inheritance Ghost marriage in South Sudan Levirate Yibbum Financial Boston Flash Hypergamy Naked Peer Tongyangxi Trial Convenience Lavender Sham Green card Marriage allowance Predatory Other Exchange Watta satta Heqin Love Sologamy Mixed-orientation Sororate De facto Common-law Plaçage Endogamy Consanguine Avunculate Cousin Middle Eastern Same-surname Homogamy Royal intermarriage Exogamy Human–animal Hypergamy Inter-caste Interethnic International Interracial Interfaith Morganatic Non-monogamous Concubinage Group Open Plural Bigamy Polygamy Polyandry Polygyny Sexless Mariage blanc Other Dishu system Mail-order bride Marriage in pre-Islamic Arabia Walking Category

Authority control databases National United States Czech Republic Israel Other Yale LUX

---
Adapted from the Wikipedia article [Monogamy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy) by Wikipedia contributors ([contributor history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy?action=history)). Available under [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Changes may have been made.