Geoffrey MillerVerified account

"without having good role models, social norms, sexual scripts, or social support … Poly also lacks the legal status of being a protected minority, … open relationships incentivize people to stay healthy, fit, creative, and funny, because they’re always in the mating market."

"the only societies that have ever succeeded in becoming large-scale technological civilizations were the ones that adopted monogamous marriage as the gold standard for long-term pair bonds and family formation."

He says not need monogamy now re paternal certainty, STD cuts, & male sex inequality. "Many polyamorous people get married and raise kids. They can take advantage of all the commitment devices that help maintain long-term pair bonds, without buying into the sexual exclusivity."

That's the key point that seems implausible to me. Sex tends to create emotional bonds, crowding out other bonds. Poly folks might be selected for weaker such effects, but the sign of such effects seem pretty universal to me.

This all depends on whether you think emotional bonds are zero sum. I mention the problem in discussing time & resource trade-offs. IMHO if we can love more than one kid, have more than one friend, etc., we might be able to sustain more than one relationship...

As I said, I think sex-induced bonds crowd each other out. That's not quite the same as zero sum, but has the relevant effects here. Even if we can sustain more than one sex relation, they will each be weaker than they otherwise would be if exclusive.