by Chris Bodenner
Dan says that Ross is misrepresenting his views:
Monogamy isn't natural, as Ross concedes, and monogamy has its advantages, as I've long conceded. (And it's a point I'm quoted conceding in the NYT magazine piece we're arguing about.) Monogamy is both plausible (monogamy happens) and practical (it's serves us well on the disease and paternity fronts). But as divorce court reporters and Us Magazine staffers document week after depressing week, many people fall short in their efforts to honor the monogamous ideal. Because monogamy is hard, because it's a struggle, because it's not natural.
And I think we could save many marriages—particularly monogamous marriages that have been touched by infidelity—if we encouraged people to hold these two not-so-contradictory thoughts in their heads at once: the importance of monogamy (for many) and the difficulties of monogamy (for most). If someone makes a monogamous commitment and fucks up, I believe the wronged party is likelier to forgive the betrayal if the wronged party understands that monogamy is hard, that screwing someone else doesn't mean a person is no longer in love with his or her spouse, and if the cheated were encouraged to give cheaters some credit for time served.
In another post, Dan pushes the debate a step further by presenting a real-life, heartbreaking scenario of a husband and wife who could be headed for non-consensual adultery in order to save their marriage.
The Dish 