Skip to main content

Non-Monogamy Isn’t “Progressive”—It’s a Return to the Past

· 5 min read

In recent years, non-monogamous relationships—whether in the form of polyamory, open marriages, or ethical non-monogamy—have gained popularity, particularly among younger, urban, and progressive circles. These arrangements are often framed as modern, enlightened alternatives to the “restrictive” monogamy of the past.

But here’s the truth: non-monogamy is not new—and framing it as "progressive" ignores both thousands of years of history and the social consequences that led most civilizations to adopt monogamy in the first place.

Polyamory Is Ancient, Not Modern​

Non-monogamy in various forms—polygyny, concubinage, open relationships—has existed throughout history.

  • Ancient Mesopotamia, Greece, and Rome all permitted or even normalized various forms of multiple-partner arrangements. Elite men often had wives and concubines.
  • The Hebrew Bible documents figures like Abraham, Jacob, and Solomon with multiple wives and concubines (e.g., 1 Kings 11:3).
  • In Imperial China, emperors kept vast harems, with some having thousands of concubines.

Polyamory, then, is not a break from the past—it is a return to it.

"Of the 1,231 societies coded in the Ethnographic Atlas, 84.6% practiced polygyny."
— George Peter Murdock, Ethnographic Atlas (1967)

Why Did Civilizations Shift to Monogamy?​

The widespread adoption of monogamy, especially in the West, was not accidental—it was a conscious social development in response to the downsides of non-monogamy.

1. To Reduce Male-Male Competition and Violence​

When a few high-status men monopolize women, low-status men are left without partners. This creates instability, crime, and unrest.

"Normative monogamy reduces crime rates, including rape, murder, assault, robbery, and fraud."
— Henrich, Boyd, & Richerson (2012), "The puzzle of monogamous marriage," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B

2. To Ensure Paternity and Property Inheritance​

In agricultural societies where property and land were passed down, knowing who your children were became critical. Monogamy provided clarity and legal simplicity.

3. To Encourage Paternal Investment​

Human children require long-term care. Monogamous pair bonds increased the likelihood that fathers would invest in their children’s well-being, which supported societal stability.

The Female Side: Hypergamy as a Form of Non-Monogamy​

While much of the conversation about non-monogamy focuses on men with multiple partners, there’s a modern counterpart on the female side: hypergamy—the tendency of women to seek relationships with men of higher status.

In today's dating landscape, many women are choosing a few “top-tier” men, creating a soft form of polyandry, where a small group of high-status men rotate through multiple short-term relationships, while many average men are left out.

“Societies with pronounced female hypergamy tend to experience reduced marital stability and increased reproductive inequality.”
— Baumeister & Vohs, 2004, “Sexual Economics” Theory

The Social Cost of Hypergamy​

1. Mating Imbalance​

As more women chase the same few “alpha” men, most men are excluded from meaningful relationships, creating frustration, loneliness, and rising resentment.

“When the average woman wants the top man, and average men are rejected, society becomes demoralized.”
— Richard Reeves, "Of Boys and Men" (2022)

2. Long-Term Relationship Instability​

Hypergamy often leads to serial relationships instead of long-term commitment. It prioritizes short-term attraction or status over family stability.

3. The Hypergamy Trap​

As women gain more education, income, and status, they often find fewer men they consider suitable—because they still seek someone “higher” in some way.

Ironically, this empowerment can narrow their dating pool, resulting in dissatisfaction, delay in family formation, or long-term singleness.

Modern Polyamory and Hypergamy: Freedom with a Price​

While both polyamory and hypergamy are often framed as liberation—sexual or romantic—the truth is more complex. When these behaviors scale across society:

  • They create inequality in the dating market
  • Undermine stable family structures
  • Reduce social cohesion and trust
  • Exacerbate loneliness and gender resentment

“Those in consensually non-monogamous relationships report lower relationship satisfaction on average compared to monogamous partners.”
— Rubel & Bogaert (2015), "Consensual Nonmonogamy and Relationship Quality"

Conclusion: Monogamy Was a Social Innovation, Not a Constraint​

Calling non-monogamy “progressive” is historically inaccurate. It may feel modern in its branding, but its roots are ancient, and its challenges are well-documented. Monogamy wasn’t imposed out of oppression—it was adopted as a stabilizing system for a reason.

Likewise, framing hypergamy as romantic “freedom” ignores its structural consequences. When practiced widely, it leads to imbalance, disconnection, and social fragmentation—the very things strong relationships and stable societies try to prevent.

True progress means learning from history—not repeating its mistakes with new branding.

References​