Is monogamy unnatural? I mean eventually in adult life, not the chaos of adolescence. Could this question be posed in an entirely different light: What were the Gospel writers getting at? …when Christ said “Fear not, for I have overcome the World!”
she told me it seems only -natural-
(and god I love her thoughts)
that we human animals are not longterm monogamous
serially monogamous at best
that we are not built for one romantic entanglement
that adhering to one is not in fact -natural-
I stored these remarks in my “later” buffer
for surely there’s sense in what she believes
and harmony with truth in what she observes
and how many do we know or come across
who actually live by this ideal successfully
something does not quite fit in this puzzle
and I say it without any advocacy
or favorance towards one lover or towards the many
for it’s true that the many have formed me
and informed me
instructed, and cultivated being, as she would tell
something does not quite fit in this puzzle
I pointed out those seeming harmonious couples
a half century of shared memories, or more
but she attributed these to outer circumstance
and that could be
but do we not at some point make our circumstance
something does not quite fit in this puzzle
in the analysis that lifelong romance is unnatural
for what is Nature, and what are we?
Nature is naught but the great external
the lawfulness of everything outer
how clouds become rain on warm summer days
or birds drop seeds becoming next year’s flower
how the spinning of planets determine the hour
and apples fall in September off their trees
how a shoreline erodes what once was pristine
and chemicals produce bangs if rightly mixed
or how muscle atrophies faster if never well used
and teeth come anew at age seven
but what then are we?
nothing if not seriously internal
the barrier of human mystery resides within
yes still we live in Nature’s Earth
but are we not in it yet not quite of it?
visitors by some inscrutable design
outer objects are frustrated by lightspeed’s limit
but we can traverse infinities with mere thought
and put ethical questions to the simplest matter
pondering not just what is but what ought
can we thus truly say that the right deed of humans
is to tune in to what most seems natural?
we are a force surpassing Nature
colored by the World but not constrained by it
we can wish by ideals or romance or Love’s sake
and then fashion our Will against tendency
Isn’t this what lifelong partners have possibly done
rather than floated down a stream of random force
I say not — to be clear — what thing is the better
but ours is the power to sculpt what’s natural.
_______RS
► Handy INDEX — scan through all available ||SWR|| articles
||skirmishes|| ||with|| ||reality|| 
I love your poem. This part especially speaks to me and also the last stanza. In my mind/heart/soul we are clearly one of the mysteries of this world and have the power to shape it.
but what are we?
nothing if not seriously “internal”
the barrier of human mystery resides within
yes still we live in Nature’s Earth
but are we not in it yet not of it?
visitors by some inscrutable design
🙏 I am glad you love it, Deborah. Glad it speaks to you… Thanks!
A very beautifully written and wonderful poem examining metaphysical questions, love and the meaning of life.
Thanks very much for your appreciation, CHristopher! (I think last time I forgot your name and used Drac.)
You’re very welcome.
And Drac is okay.
A lot of bloggers at the very first blogging site I was at – Journalspace – used to call me Drac.
And the thought just hit me now that I’ve been blogging for 21 years now through 4 different blogging sites over that period of time.
Wow, 21 years. A true veteran. I didn’t realize there were even options back then. In those days I’d be using scraps of paper at most and vaguely commiting things to memory. Maybe we should upgrade you to a hiphop nickname? How about C-Drac! 🙂
C-Drac would be a very good hip-hop name indeed. 🙂
I couldn’t agree more, RS. My wife and I have been living that “internal” life for 40 years, and we’d choose it again in a heartbeat. https://mitchteemley.com/2024/01/11/monogamy-is-not-natural-2/
And I have to agree with Dracul too: your piece is beautifully written.
merci, Mitch, merci. And I hope that you go from 40 to 50.
Thanks!
Attachment to a soulmate is about as perfect a permanent connection that many of us would prefer, I believe. But, there are those who don’t have the ability to “attach” and shouldnt be judged by anyone.
Thanks for your thoughts. That is true, and obvious I think, that judging should not be part of the equation in either direction. But I want to re-emphasize here, lest there be confusion, that the point of the little piece is not to argue for one choice over the other, but to discuss what the role of “natural” is around this question.
I actually believe in soulmates ,which make that one person your best friend and your souls understand each other
I more or less believe in the concept of soulmates also. In my view however, I have met more than one of them during my life. So, the soulmate idea does not really say anything about monogamy to me, or whether it is “natural”. 🙂