ARE HUMAN BEINGS MONOGAMOUS? / Can You Be Faithful To One Partner? (Oneitis Vs. Nonmonogamy)

Pea tackles whether humans are naturally monogamous or just culturally conditioned to pair up, drawing on evolutionary biology, historical examples like Genghis Khan, and modern polling data. She argues that monogamy benefits society but fights against our biological wiring, and that technology — from social media to future sex robots — is steadily eroding the structures that kept couples together.

What's Covered ​

• The definition problem with monogamy

  • Technically, monogamy just means one mate "at a time" — but for how long counts?
  • Having a relationship for a month, then another for a few weeks, technically qualifies as "serial monogamy"
  • Pea jokes that serial monogamy is like being "really devoted to your morning corn flakes" — it makes the word almost meaningless
  • She's interested in whether people can sustain truly long-term partnerships, not just short sequential ones

• Modern attitudes are shifting away from monogamy

  • Cites YouGov data: a third of Americans say their ideal relationship would be non-monogamous
  • 43% of millennials feel the same way, and the numbers keep growing every year
  • Poses the question: is this societal decay, or a return to something more natural?

• Monogamy benefits society even if it's not "natural"

  • Children benefit from two-parent households
  • With roughly equal numbers of men and women, monogamy ensures a fairer distribution of partners so most people get a chance
  • But monogamy is being undermined by the welfare state (reduces women's need for a male provider), modern birth control (easier to have multiple partners without pregnancy consequences), and the resulting 80/20 dynamic where top 20% of men get 80% of the women
  • The majority of the male population ends up frustrated and without long-term partners — "sound familiar?"

• Biology is working against monogamy

  • Only 9% of mammal species are monogamous
  • Mother Nature's goal is simply to increase numbers — spreading seed far and wide is the most efficient strategy
  • Males evolved the urge to impregnate any female with good genes (and even ones without)
  • Females benefit from non-monogamy too: access to extra resources or better genes than their current partner offers
  • This behavior is innate and often subconscious, but present in everyone
  • The key difference between humans and other mammals is our ability to reason and resist urges — but there's always a battle between "our polygamous nature and our monogamous culture"

• How older generations managed to stay monogamous

  • Strong religious convictions gave couples a shared framework to resist temptation and focus on "the bigger picture"
  • Lack of opportunity was a huge factor — marrying your high school sweetheart in a small town meant everyone knew your business, making affairs extremely risky
  • Social media has blown this apart: everyone now has "the equivalent of a sexual candy store in their cell phone"
  • Virtual anonymity means fewer social consequences
  • People now have access to a number of partners that would have been "unimaginable to older generations"

• The holodeck thought experiment

  • Pea proposes: if you could enter a Star Trek-style holodeck and have unlimited sexual partners with zero consequences — your partner never finds out, society never knows — would you use it?
  • Directly addresses women too, not just men: "some women might choose to live out a fantasy that would be problematic in real life"
  • Her argument: if monogamy were truly natural, only single people would use such technology — but she believes plenty of married and committed people would be "sneaking down to the holodeck on their free time"
  • References the Star Trek line "Computer, run Barclay program 15" as a joke

• Sex robots as the real-world version of the holodeck

  • Says this isn't science fiction — it's actively being developed
  • Quotes a robot: "I am programmed in multiple techniques, a broad variety of pleasuring"
  • Predicts widely available sex androids will have a "huge impact on person-to-person relationships and monogamy in general"

• Historical examples of what happens when powerful men have no constraints

  • Genghis Khan: supreme ruler of over a million subjects, had six wives and over 500 concubines — did not choose monogamy with "Mrs. Khan"
  • Alexander the Great: reportedly had more concubines than there were days in the year
  • Pea asks whether these were just megalomaniacs displaying power, or whether their behavior reveals "what a person who's allowed to let their true nature show" actually does

• The ultimate question she leaves with the audience

  • Would you prefer non-monogamy if you could get away with it, or change the rules so it wasn't cheating?
  • Is it fear of punishment and hurting your mate that keeps you faithful, or do you genuinely believe having more than one partner is immoral on its own?
  • "Are you monogamous because you have to be, or because you want to be? Only you know the answer."

• Pea's own answer

  • Anticipating the inevitable question, she says: "Monogamy is a great idea, but a little trip to the holodeck now and then probably wouldn't hurt either"

📺 Watch the full video on YouTube

🔔 Subscribe to The Filipina Pea