Articles on The Daily Mail are a lot like potato chips in a packet: you know that they are really bad for you, but once you start, you can’t quite resist indulging in one after another after another. This is partly why I don’t seem to get a whole lot done these days, even with respect to blogging. But, I did run across one rather interesting article on everyone’s favourite not-quite-tabloid the other day concerning some very candid sex diaries maintained by women about their efforts between the sheets.

I have no particular desire to go into the more prurient details provided in that article. Read it at your own leisure. I will, however, make note of a few pertinent details that we can all learn from.

First, the types of women involved are quite varied. They are, in order:

1. A 48-year-old married mother of four;
2. A 30-something (i.e. Shrillennial) in an “open relationship”;
3. Another 30-something (again, Shrillennial) lesbian who is “married” to her “wife”;
4. A woman in her 70s, divorced or widowed (it is never made clear), who wants to be a “cougar”; and
5. A woman in her 20s who is single and not really looking for anything serious

Again, without getting into the specific details, which of these five women do you suppose saw the most action?

It was, of course, the married woman in her late forties.

Second, which of those five women had the greatest amount of emotional as well as physical satisfaction?

It was, again, the married mother.

If you take the time to read through the article, then you will find that the woman in the “open relationship” with her boyfriend actually has a very hard time keeping her emotions in check. This is not in the least bit surprising if you know anything about female psychology. Women crave intimacy, stability, and security – but the degenerate Western culture that they are surrounded by tells them that there is nothing wrong with acting like men and having sex with as many men as they want.

The reality is that men are hard-wired to seek novelty and to “spread our seed”, as it were, far and wide. For each of the two sexes, actual sex is not merely a physical act but a communion of souls. Because men are individually not particularly valuable in sexual and genetic terms, we transfer a relatively small part of our soul to any individual woman – but a woman, whose genetic inheritance is very valuable, transfers a much larger part of her to every man that she has sex with.

When that piece of a woman’s soul is lost or spent freely, the impact on her psyche is very real and quite devastating.

You can see this very clearly in the deep insecurity expressed by the second woman. She wants it both ways (pun intended). On the one hand, she wants the stability and security afforded by having, at the very least, a long-term boyfriend. On the other hand, she wants to indulge in that very feminine desire to try new things – anyone who has ever been in a serious long-term relationship knows how women respond when you dangle something new and shiny in front of them, and then tell them that they can’t have it.

But the reality is that you can’t have it both ways. That road leads to psychological torment.

Third, the article confirms a rather interesting finding about same-sex female couples.

Robin Baker’s book Sperm Wars is controversial for a number of reasons, but as far as I am aware, the controversy does not extend to the points that Dr. Baker made about same-sex couples. He basically stated that homosexual male couples essentially act like hypersexual men – it is very rare and quite unusual to find a truly monogamous homosexual male couple, because both men involved usually are off finding as many partners as possible for sex. And homosexual female couples essentially act like undersexed women – which is to say, they behave much more like very close female friends than lovers.

If you look at the way that the lesbian mother in that article talks about her experiences with her “wife”, then you will see this point driven home very clearly.

Fourth, you can see very clearly just how utterly unhappy are the women who do not have a steady, stable, consistent man in their lives.

The lesbian has her “wife”, but fears that she will never know real intimacy again.

The Shrillennial in an open relationship has her boyfriend, but tortures herself psychologically and emotionally because of the fact that her man is stepping out on her – supposedly with her explicit consent, and yet deep down she knows quite well that this is a deeply unnatural state of things.

The woman in her seventies claims to be satisfied with her life “99% of the time”, yet still finds herself indulging in all sorts of electronic silliness with multiple paramours to fill a very clear void in her life.

And the woman in her twenties claims not to be looking for something serious, spends a lot of time on dating apps, and then complains about how the men that she meets of around her own age are simply not emotionally mature enough to interest her – while being completely oblivious to the fact that she is looking around in a pool of men that is literally self-selected for narcissism, vapidity, immaturity, and instant gratification.

All of these women are unhappy in their own way. They are living their lives according to the script given to them by a modern society that claims that women can have sex with whomever they want, free of guilt and consequences. Yet even as they live that life, they find themselves empty and aching for something that they cannot quite bring themselves to define.

Meanwhile, the 48-year-old mother of four with a hardworking husband has by far the greatest physical, emotional, and psychological satisfaction.

Why is that?

Is it possible that monogamy is actually worth the hard work and sacrifice needed to make it work?

Maybe, just maybe, we’ve been lied to and ripped off for our entire lives by a society that reduces sex to a mere physical act?

And perhaps – bear with me here – putting in the hard yards to create a committed and stable relationship between two compatible people is worth the effort over time?

I am not for one moment claiming that monogamy is for everyone. It patently is not. Many men and not a few women will never achieve the level of intellectual honesty and emotional maturity required to make a monogamous relationship work.

Some men have made an entire lifestyle and business out of being non-monogamous. They believe that it is possible and even easy to create a lifestyle where one man can have sex with one main woman, and have one or two “side women” that he is totally honest about with his “wife”. They believe that it is entirely possible to enjoy this lifestyle of guilt-free sex where their “wives” have every right to sleep with other men as well. They think that this life is honest, above-board, and in line with the facts of human biology.

If you keep up with reading Blackdragon’s work, for instance, you will have seen a recent post of his in which he states that his “wife”, Pink Firefly, is a “practicing Christian”, and that while he himself is an agnostic, he bears a fair amount of respect for Christianity.

Once you’ve cleaned up your cornflakes (or, in my case, scrambled eggs – #Keto4Life, etc.) after spitting them all over your reading device, try to wrap your head around that idea.

The very definition of a Christian marriage is one of committed monogamy in which two souls grow closer together over time into a union so close that it is literally impossible to separate out the two. Not for nothing did Christ Jesus, Lord and King, reject entirely the old Jewish teachings concerning marriage. He made marriage a far tighter and more difficult covenant – and He did this for reasons that are spiritual, moral, and biological in nature.

One cannot, by definition, be a good Christian if one is married, by any legal or spiritual definition, and also sleeping around with other people. That is the very definition of an adulterous marriage, and it does not matter if both parties are fully aware of the adultery and fine with it.

The way in which the non-monogamy crowd twists the definition of monogamy reminds me of that old saw about how President Lincoln once asked how many legs a dog has if you call its tail a leg. Redefining or renaming something does not change its actual properties. So it is with marriage.

Returning to the primary point here: the reality is that non-monogamy makes women, in particular, less happy, less free, and less satisfied. The absence of good men in their lives is emotionally crippling for them. The testimony of those 5 women bears this out very clearly. The women involved are deeply saddened by their predicament and that sadness stands out in stark relief within their writing.

Now, I am not here to preach to any of you that you absolutely must give up your dissolute ways, get married, settle down, have kids, and enjoy the flesh and soul of your wife forever more – not least because doing so would make me a massive hypocrite, as I am a very poor excuse for a Christian. I merely tell you that this is my intention for my own life, and that I would prefer to do so sooner and not later – because all of the evidence I see before me tells me that marriage to a good woman makes both the man and the woman happier, more fulfilled, and more emotionally stable.

At the very least, the evidence before us tells us that heterosexual monogamy not only works, but is necessary, at some minimum level, to make a woman happy.

The absence of monogamy makes a woman crazy with jealousy and insecurity. And the absence of the masculine in their lives leads to pretty much the same end.

The sooner we acknowledge these basic truths, and then act on them in ways that are consistent with those truths, the better off we will all be.