On Monogamy

Dear Michelle,

As you approach adulthood, you will find yourself considering marriage, if even in a long-term planning attitude. In respect to this, I believe that it is important that you understand that humans aren't actually naturally monogomous. A lot of people will argue that this isn't true, but they are arguing from an unreasoned viewpoint.

This isn't to say that humans don't have the ability to be monogomous. It's simply the case that it's not the default. Studies have shown that after a few years in a relationship, humans have a tendency to want to find a new partner. Very often, even while in a relationship, people will find they have a desire to have romantic and/or sexual encounters with other people.

Part of the problem is the "wife/concubine" dilemma. In essence, there are two things that a person needs from a mate: security and genetic material. For men, security means a partner who will be a good mother, a stable companion who will help care for his offspring. For women, security is a provider, someone who will stay with her through pregnancy and child-rearing to care for her and her children. Genetic material, on the other hand, is expressed as physical attractiveness. Men want a woman with good child-bearing potential (wide hips, large breasts, healthy-looking skin and body, &c.), and women want a strong man who will produce children that can survive hardship to reach adulthood.

The problem here is that security and genetic material rarely come in the same package. Thus, people often employ a dual strategy. They marry for security but mate for genetic material. Men will marry the woman who will be a good mother, but they have nothing to lose by casting a few extra seeds around to see if they take. Women will marry the man who can provide for them, but sometimes have a tendency to find a different male to actually sire the children.

Some people follow more of one strategy than the other, but the capacity is always there. In particular, women often prefer the "wife" strategy, because they have a greater need for a supporter during childrearing, while men tend towards the "concubine" strategy, since they have less to lose if they lack a permanent mate. And again, some people do successfully lead monogomous lives. But it's not the natural and inherent state for humans. This information will be essential to you when you start engaging in romantic or sexual partnerships, and if anyone tries to argue that monogomy is the only acceptable, viable, or inherently natural option, just remember that they aren't speaking from a reasonable viewpoint.

On Religion

Dear Michelle,

As you grow, you will find that a great many of the controversies and disagreements that people have arise as a result of religious beliefs. For example, the issue of abortion is often fought across religious boundaries. Religion is, in itself, not a bad thing, but the uses to which it is often put can be atrocious indeed.

One important thing to consider when discussing religion is the tendency (especially among Americans) to equate religion with Christianity, when there are other religions in existence. It's not as simple as atheists vs. Christians; not only does this discount agnostics, Muslims, and Jews, but Hindus, Shintoists, Buddhists (never mind that Buddhism is, technically, more a philosophy than a religion), pagans such as Wiccans, and countless other theologies. 

But the thing that astounds me about religious people is that most of them are not willing to let other faiths practise their chosen customs. Just as one example: in America right now, one of the most controversial topics is gay marriage. The vast majority of people who oppose gay marriage do so on religious grounds. They insist that the Bible forbids homosexuality, and thus the secular law should also forbid homosexuality. The fallacy being committed in this argument, however, is that the Bible does not apply to all people (nor should it). The laws laid out in the Bible cannot be said to apply to atheists or pagans, and yet Christians insist that it should.

Christian doctrine states that the faithful are to minister to the non-believers in order to save their souls, but that doctrine has been twisted to the point where the believers are not willing to allow others a choice in the matter. Like the 16th and 17th century missionaries performing coerced mass baptisms on Native Americans, most modern Christians are determined to prevent anyone from committing a sin, even if other people don't believe in the Christian religion. And in my opinion, that action is nothing short of taking away another person's civil liberties.

Again, religion is a good thing, bringing comfort and peace to people who need it. Which religion is the right one? I don't know. Are any of them right? I don't know that either. I know what I believe, and I will help you to explore all the possibilities so that you may discover what it is that you believe, if anything. But you must always remember that no matter what you believe, you must never force another person to believe the same thing, nor even to act as if they believe the same thing. Because what most people tend to forget about religion is that it is a deeply personal thing, and you should never let anyone tell you what to believe, how to worship, or how to live.

On Love

Dear Michelle,

Aside from sex, there are few things as compelling as the idea of love. Almost everyone wants it, and they will do almost anything to get it. The problem is that few people understand what love really is. As a result of millennia of poetry and fairy tales, and nearly a century of cinema, people have come to the conclusion that love is a very powerful and overwhelming emotion. But that's not at all what love is like.

Love is actually a very subtle emotion. If you're feeling an unceasing desire to be with someone, that's probably not love. It might be lust, and it might even be amorola. Amorola is a word that I created to refer to the initial period of romantic infatuation felt between two people in a relationship. Psychological studies have determined that humans go through a distinct phase at the beginning of their relationship in which they feel overwhelmed with a desire to be with one another. During this period, they tend to aggrandise their partners' strengths and ignore their weaknesses, in a sort of rose-coloured-glasses effect. It's the time in which they enjoy the stupidly-happy-silly-giggly time of their  togetherness. But there was no name for this phenomenon, so I devised one.

After amorola, there is a period of "settling in," during which the partners magnify their faults, both their own and their partners'. This has been described as the trial-by-fire stage, in which the partners determine if they are suited for a long-term relationship. In both of these phases, it is possible that the two individuals are in love, but as I said, love is a subtle emotion, so it's often hard to tell through the fog of the amorola or the settling-in firestorm.

The important thing to remember is this: when you watch a romantic movie in which the main characters end up together at the end, they aren't necessarily experiencing love. They are in the initial thrush of amorola. So just remember that when you become overpowered by an attraction to someone, it doesn't mean that you are in love with that person. It usually takes about two years for amorola to fade, so the best advice is to wait at least that long before making any serious decisions, such as marriage. That person may be the one for you, but you won't know until the amorola is gone.

On Sex

Dear Michelle,

You will find that there are few, if any, topics of greater import, controversy, scandal, and emotional involvement than sex. People have a wide range of views on the sex act, with some believing that it is inherently evil and sinful, with others placing no more importance upon it than drinking water.

One thing that you have to understand is that sex (regardless of whether it's homosexual or heterosexual), in itself, is neither good nor evil, but can be used for either. Rape, for example, is a horrible and atrocious use of an act that has potential for great joy. At the other end of the spectrum, it can be used as an affirmation of love between two people who are deeply committed to one another. Likewise, sex is a very primal and feral instinct, bred into us since we came into existance, but like all human activities, can be elevated to something much more sublime.

The important thing to remember is this: many people will tell you what sex means, and how and when and with whom you are supposed to have sex, but in the end, it will always be your decision. Many religious people firmly believe that sex should only be used for the specific purpose of having children. Others see sex as a recreation, to be done as often and with as many different partners as possible. I personally see it as somewhere in between, as a powerful and enjoyable pursuit that has the possibility for greater meaning of love and partnership. But in the end, it's your decision.

Some people think that you should be a virgin when you are married, and have sex only with your spouse. Others believe that you should get some practise and ensure that you are sexually compatible with you partner before making a lifelong commitment to remain monogomous to that person. Still others think that sexual promiscuity is compatible with emotional commitment, and engage in sex with a variety of partners despite being married. And there are others who think that there is no room for emotional bonds, and use sex as a purely physical source of pleasure. In fact, there are even some asexual people who feel little or no sexual desire for anyone.

All of these are valid viewpoints, and I will not tell you which is right for you. That is your decision to make. And whichever decision you make is right for you, and I will always love you and support you no matter what decision you make, so long as you are careful and safe in your decision.