Ms. Nina Nagi's mind-titillating thesis on monogamy (Monogamy in Modern Times, Dawn 20.7.90) and its indictment by Mr. Ahmed Arif (Dawn, Letters, 9.8.90) are both very interesting readings. Besides congratulating both authors on initiating such intelligent dialogue, I am writing this letter to provide a scientific (biologic) perspective to the arguments presented on the "need to find all men in one man and all women in one woman." Arif questions whether the "needs" are "inherent in human beings" and accepts the societal paradigm where the need for monogamy are instilled in by patriarchal society. From a biologic view point all actions whether emotional of physical, are dictated by the survival instinct. Survival of individuals in a structured society is merely a part of the milieu exterior needed for the perpetuation of the species; monogamy leads to such perpetuation and therefore genetic modifications which alter mental processes leading to appreciation of monogamy have been inculcated over eons.

Nagi's assertion that women have been exploited in the name of monogamy is a curious one coming from a woman. Perhaps monogamy is an archaic concept but heterogamy must be allowed for both sexes to be equitable, a concept whose time has not yet arrived. Perhaps, in the future. The exploitation of women is no different than a stronger species exploiting weaker species; as women become stronger, not necessarily physically, their exploitation will be reduced. Within a sex, stronger men exploit weaker men and the same holds true of women; the line of distinction between men exploiting women is perhaps more amorphous today than it was even a few decades ago.

Finally, I would like to add to the dispute whether jealousy is "a despotic projection of the insecurities and habitual dependence of an incomplete self." Undoubtedly, it is a part and parcel of the human desire to own rather than share. It also has a sublime sexual connotation which we would rather shun than adduce. There is a remarkable contrast between the ill-educated and well-educated societies regarding the intensity of response to jealousy including the consequences of sharing of mates. The 21st century's end of jealousy prophesied by Arif seems plausible but not likely because the endorphins associated with a jealous response may take many more centuries to subside; in the meantime, we must resort to less civil means of settling the accounts of jealousy evocation. This is what makes human beings so interesting.

[25 August 1990 The Daily Dawn]